Doctors Remove the Gonads of All Intersex Females with A.I.S…. Because…

Doctors Remove the Gonads of AIS Females Because...

Download this as a poster

Editorial Comment:

From the American National Cancer Institute:

The National Cancer Institute, a component of the National Institutes of Health, estimates that, based on current rates, 12.7 percent of women born today will be diagnosed with breast cancer at some time in their lives.

In AIS women the risk of gonadal cancer is less than 9%… see Karkazis, Fixing Sex, p308, note 15.

Why are women not subjected to routine breast removal given the higher cancer risk? The obvious answer is that it is as socially unacceptable for a woman not to have breasts as it is for a woman to have testicles.

Breasts are retained or substituted with artificial prostheses if they are removed. Testicles are removed as soon as medicine becomes aware a woman has them. Cancer is the scare used to convince the woman she should agree to be castrated.



Well… 9% + 12% = 21% chance of developing either breast or testicular cancer. Why not reduce the risk by removing a useless organ? I doubt it has much to do with conforming to society. It makes medical sense.


Who says testes or breasts are useless? Testes produce testosterone that is then converted to estrogen by aromatization. CAIS women’s bodies do not respond to testosterone but women with PAIS do so, partially, and both respond to estrogen. By removing their natural source of estrogen one is condemning them to relying on taking estrogen for the rest of their lives as hormones are needed to maintain good health.

HRT is expensive in many countries, not affordable by everyone, and the most effective and safest forms are not available in every country either – for example injectable estrogen and micronized progesterone must be imported into Australia by those for whom these have proven the safest and most effective forms, especially when HRT must be used for the rest of one’s lifetime. Removing organs must be done with a great deal of care and consideration for the consequences.


Kari makes the same assumption most doctors do, that if there is no obvious need for an organ then it should be removed. Readers might like to peruse the latest research on the appendix, an organ that from time immemorial has been supposed to be useless.

Other bits of the human body that seem to be treated in a similar way are tonsils, foreskins and in some countries the clitoris – where women’s pleasure during intercourse is deemed either irrelevant or evil.

None of these treatments are based in good science. Most are based on outdated ideas that have never been reviewed, or social prejudice. There is no science that supports the castration of women with testicles, simply the supposition that they perform no function and thus that women shouldn’t have ’em.

Comments are closed.