Zynette's Critical Resource Essay

FGM and IGM: One in the Same

Taking the Hippocratic Oath is a step that is necessary in order to become a doctor. However, there is an increased amount of backlash against pediatric urologists who are performing “corrective” surgeries on intersex infants. In her article regarding intersex rights, Alice Dreger states “I am not convinced that the term ‘intersex genital mutilation’ is ultimately helpful … I do not find it unreasonable for adults to consent to have these surgeries, if they are fully informed of the risks.” Although Dreger makes a good case for her argument on most points, I will argue that her dismissiveness of the term mutilation to describe corrective procedures for intersex babies contradicts her overall argument. I will focus on three points that Dreger recognizes—that these procedures have been condemned by the United Nations Committee Against Torture, that most of these procedures are performed on infants rather than on consenting adults, and that there are close similarities between FGM and IGM.

Intersex rights activist groups have been imperative in garnering the issue attention to IGM from the United Nations Committee Against Torture. Dreger acknowledges this and states “[The UN Committee Against Torture] is now investigating intersex surgeries at pediatric hospitals worldwide after being encouraged by intersex rights activists to condemn what many of them call ‘intersex genital multilation’ (IGM).” The manner in which Dreger speaks of the intersex rights activits groups choosing to label the phenomenon as IGM provides that she does not see it as a valid use of language to exist on its own, but that it must be quoted as something that exists in the terminology of the activists who are pushing for intersex rights. Without her acceptance of calling IGM exactly what it is, she is not fully acknowledging the entirety of what these procedures put intersex individuals through. She understands and supports the argument that having this surgery done as an infant does follow the individual throughout their life, but to take the term mutilation away from it leaves the individuals with less ways to describe what happened to them.

The majority of people who go through elective genital surgeries have the decision made for them by their parents and doctors when they are infants. Dregen points out that “...even if a child does grow up comfortable with the gender assignment given to her, she might not have wanted sexual tissue taken away from her unnecessarily. Yet the urologists’ statement also presumes that typical-looking and typical-functioning genitals are necessary ‘to achieve future satisfactory sexual function’.” It is inconsistent of Dregen to affirm that she does not find the term mutilation to be helpful because adults can give full consent when they are aware of the risks, but then bases the majority of her article on the procedure being performed on infants. By basing her disapproval of the word mutilation in IGM on adults but formulating all of her other arguments on children and infants is self-contradictory.

The term IGM took inspiration from the term for female genital mutilation (FGM). The procedures done in both cases are nearly identical, and are both done by surgically altering a (typically) young child to fit social expectations. Dregen even addresses this when she says “...anti-FGM laws sometimes describe exactly what happens during certain intersex surgeries. Worldwide, many laws that could protect intersex children are not enforced in their cases.” When she is admitting that FGM and IGM procedures are alike in themselves, but then in the same aricle says that mutilation is not a helpful word to describe what happens to intersex babies, she is insinuating that these surgeries are not the same, even though they are.

The United Nations Committee Against Torture, the individuals who go through IGM, activist groups all over the world, and even the author herself have made positive messages about how intersex individuals deserve the same respect for their bodies that anybody else would receive when deciding what to do with their bodies. But Dregen’s refusal to recognize IGM as a form of mutilation just like she acknowledge FGM to be takes away from her message and contradicts her at some points. This is important because intersex infants are not given the same legal protections like victims of FGM are, because of the switching language of one being considered mutilation, while the other is not given that same recognition as such. Genital mutilation is mutilation, no matter who it is being performed against.

Sources

Dreger, Alice. “People Born Intersex Have a Right to Genital Integrity – Alice Dreger: Aeon Essays.” Aeon, Aeon, 6 Apr. 2017, aeon.co/essays/people-born-intersex-have-a-right-to-genital-integrity.

Word Count: 736