IGM Link Round Up

[theotherbaldwin]

Recently, there has been a lot of discussion in regards to a study released via the The Journal of Urology: Nerve Sparing Ventral Clitoroplasty: Analysis of Clitoral Sensitivity and Viability which was a Cornell University study by Yang, Felsen, and Poppas.

There was an explosion of discussion that began at the Bioethics Forum in the post "Bad

Comments

Yeah, that name makes it too easy.

[mneko]

In all seriousness though, couldn't the same be said for circumcision in boys? I never got to make the call... the blanket was just sliced off my pig the day I left the womb. People say "Ooh, but it's CLEANER!," ignoring the fact that we have running water in this country and sufficient intelligence to clean oneself worldwide.

It all boils down to religious dogma that has somehow attached itself to the medical community. There are some countries where it's not uncommon for women to have their clitori removed entirely, and it's usually religiously motivated. It's funny how religions love to talk about the importance of "natural" behavior, yet are all too willing to fight against nature when it suits them.

Re: Yeah, that name makes it too easy.

[theotherbaldwin]

No, this is nothing like circumcising a boy. And while FGM is horrible too, this study is an intersex issue.

It's funny how religions love to talk about the importance of "natural" behavior, yet are all too willing to fight against nature when it suits them

Yeah, some religious conservatives and conservative moments have action really hypocritical when it comes to just respecting the bodily autonomy of others and it's really sad.

You sure it's not?

[mneko]

There was a story about a newborn whose penis had been burned off during a circumcision procedure. His parents raised him to be a girl, a life which made him utterly miserable. He had his penis reconstructed as an adult but the long-term depression resulting from gender confusion and rejection from his classmates in school ultimately led to his suicide. So yes, I do think they're related.

Even in the cases where circumcision and intersex issues don't cross paths, what gives parents the right to change the anatomy of their boys? Boys almost certainly feel pain when their foreskins are removed from the most sensitive part of their bodies. Boys are robbed of sensation after this procedure. I don't think it's right to dismiss genital mutilation just because the victims are male, or just because it's a common practice.

Re: You sure it's not?

[theotherbaldwin]

I can understand wanting to have the same basis for comparison. Comparing two things can lead to greater understanding. But in the case of male circumcision, us dudes aren't cut in order to give us a gender identity. As a cis dude, my gendered identity isn't dependent on a questionable medical procedure (that also involved testing these IG kids with vibrators) that hacks apart my genitals before I've even decided what gender I'm comfortable as.

The risk of steering discussion of this away from the intersex victims and towards a discussion of male circumcision is that it dilutes the discussion and takes the focus off of the actual victims-- intersex kids-- and refocuses it onto us dudes.

There are plenty of discussions where the discussion of circumcision is completely germane to the topic. Discussion of intersex genital mutilation in this case isn't it.