Actually “hermaphroditism” IS found in modern medical literature - almost always as a term layman use for a condition more specifically named, and with the caution that many people find it uncomfortable or offensive. This spring I did see a published article/picture of a child with “true hermaphroditism”, pointing out that it is an EXTREMELY rare condition and that other forms of ambigous genitalia or sexual status were more common. (The child in question was an infant, thus with no secondary sexual characteristics. Also undisputably had a vagina, penis, and at least on testicle. Apparently on closer examination also had an ovary. Genes were XX/XY mosaic. Poor dear also had a sort of piebald skin effect going, too - apparently the XX and XY cells coded for significantly different skin colors as well)
Rather like the terms “midget” and “dwarf”, which have distinct meanings in medicine but have become so stigmatized in ordinary spech they’re being driven from the medical literature as well, or hedged about so as to not cause offense. Already has happened to “moron”, "imbecile’, and “idiot” which, again, once had very distinct definitions but have been supplanted by terms like “mentally retarded” and “developmentally delayed”.
Personally, I like “ambiguous” when talking about those of …welll… ambiguous sexual characteristics. It does describe the situation, after all, and its the ambiguity that causes the social problems. Although it doesn’t apply to folks with the extreme form of AIS. With the AIS “XY female” situation the external genitalia are UNambiguously female.
By the way - I don’t believe Jamie Lee has AIS because she’s not feminine enough in appearance. I’ve seen pictures of those girls and if anything they look more feminine than average women do.
I personally don’t like the term “hermaphrodite” because it is, to the common ear, not particularly descriptive. I agree with KellyM and Otto that some other term should be found which is more acceptable, more descriptive, and more sensitive for use in casual conversation. And I agree with the general consensus that JLC’s genetic structure and sexual development is of nobody’s business but her own.
However… the term does appear in my ICD-9 book (2003 edition) classifying diseases, disorders, dysfunctions, conditions, and symptoms:
The bolded definition is also to be found here, Dept. of Medical Oncology, University of Newcastle upon Tyne. The term is used, evidently. But like the mod said, whether it should be used is another argument.
First of all, who cares? Beyond, perhaps, her immediate family… who might be excused for taking an interest in the question. Except that from what I just read, it isn’t likely to impact their lives in any real way even if true, so why should they?
Since you offer no proof, you yourself admit that there is no evidence, and I see no reason why you should feel the need to bring this up here, I can only think that you are in fact exhibiting jerklike behavior.
It’s dogged several female stars who are childless and seem a little too “strong” to be “truly feminine”. It’s either “secretly lesbian” or “secretly intersexed/AIS”. Nicole Kidman is another example of an actress who’s had such things whispered about her. But Jamie Lee Curtis seems to be the most common target by far, and I’m not sure why. Part of it may be her name – some have even suggested that her androgynous name is because her sex was ambiguous at birth, although I believe the real story is that her parents picked it out before she was born because it would be good for a boy or a girl.
Ahem. Y’all might really want to check out a series of books that I, personally, find highly entertaining and informative.
From Adams, Cecil, “The Straight Dope Tells All,” 1998, Ballantine Publishing Group, pp 171-172. Responding to chitchat back and forth from posters on the SDMB re the sexuality of one Jamie Lee Curtis:
CecilAdams:
Therein says the Master. Let us speak no more of the matter.