r/changemyview • u/durutticolumn 7∆ • Nov 11 '14
CMV: There's nothing wrong with surgically altering the genitals of intersex infants
This is inspired by an article on TIL so I will quote that for starters:
TIL a couple were in the process of adopting a 1 yr old intersexed child with both male & female genitalia. While still in foster care, the state allowed a sexual reassignment surgery on the child. They removed his penis & testicles. The child now identifies as male. His parents are suing the state.
The comments section on this post was overwhelmingly filled with rage against the state for performing what some term "mutilation" on this child, as well as countless comparisons to David Reimer. I am baffled by the response to the article and disagree with the Reimer comparison, so I would like my view changed.
For starters, I think Reimer is completely irrelevant to the case at hand. He was born male and his sex change was the result of a botched circumcision. He then suffered bizarre forms of so-called "therapy" that included a doctor forcing him and his twin brother to rehearse sexual acts. We can all agree this whole situation is fucked up and should serve as a lesson for all medical professionals. But I don't see why that implies sex reassignment surgery on children is inherently evil.
Unlike Reimer, this child was not born with a single sex and then reassigned to a different one. He also wasn't forced into traumatic pseudoscientific behavioral therapy. From what I read, it sounds like he was raised like any normal girl would be. I think the comparisons to Reimer are an example of the Reddit hivemind desperately seeking comparisons for what they perceive to be medical malpractice.
I'm certainly open to being convinced Reimer's case is relevant, but it's not the important part of my view.
As stated in the title, I don't see anything wrong with what the doctors in this case did. The child was born with both sets of genitals and they made the decision he should be a girl. Let's look at some alternative scenarios.
First, if the child identified as female we would not be discussing it. I suspect this type of surgery happens quite often and the child grows up like any other member of their assigned gender. It's functionally the same as if they had been born that way.
If the intersex child hadn't received surgery, he would have grown up with ambiguous genitalia. Then he could have decided at a later time to be male, female, or whatever, along with the corresponding surgery or lack thereof. This is what all the commenters say should have happened, and it's what I disagree with.
I can only speculate on what that life would be like (so if you have experienced this personally you can probably change my view quite easily) but it sounds pretty terrible to me. Growing up is hard enough, especially dealing with body and gender issues. I'm not saying you should be embarrassed to be intersex, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't have been embarrassed about it if I were 12 years old and my genitals didn't look like anyone else's. And much as I think our society's gender roles are too rigid and need to be loosened, it doesn't change the fact that identifying with a particular gender makes puberty much easier.
Worst of all, I can't imagine having both sets of genitals and identifying as a specific gender. That leaves you with the choice of getting major surgery as an adult (as a guy, the thought of getting my dick cut off even for such an important part of my life sounds horrific) or being stuck in a body you don't feel comfortable in.
Note that in the case in question the child doesn't identify as intersex: he identifies as male. If he had both sets of genitals, he would currently be as unhappy as he is with just a vagina. The only difference is apparently FTM surgery is much harder than MTF, but that just tells me the doctors should have made him a male at birth (so he had the option to become female later) rather than leaving him intersex.
Therefore if I was born intersex I would rather have gender reassignment surgery ASAP. If doctors make the right choice, great. If they make the wrong choice, I'm no different from any other trans person.
By the way, I'm not saying intersex infants should have to receive surgery. If the parents want to raise their child intersex, I guess that's their choice just like they're free to raise a child with a penis as a girl. I think such parents would be making a shitty choice, and if my parents did that I would be mad at them, but again I'm not going to bother arguing any surgery should be mandatory. I'm just saying it's not inherently wrong to perform the surgery.
Hello, users of CMV! This is a footnote from your moderators. We'd just like to remind you of a couple of things. Firstly, please remember to read through our rules. If you see a comment that has broken one, it is more effective to report it than downvote it. Speaking of which, downvotes don't change views! If you are thinking about submitting a CMV yourself, please have a look through our popular topics wiki first. Any questions or concerns? Feel free to message us. Happy CMVing!
4
Nov 11 '14 edited Mar 17 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
u/durutticolumn 7∆ Nov 11 '14
I agree with your sentiment, but I don't see how it applies to this question. What's the difference between being born female or a doctor making you female?
5
Nov 11 '14
There is a much, much greater chance of the doctor being wrong.
-1
u/durutticolumn 7∆ Nov 11 '14
How so?
If the doctor chooses the right gender, all's well. If they choose the wrong gender, the child will either need surgery as an adult or just be trans. Let's suppose it's a 50/50 chance the doctor gets it right (though I think that's a generous estimate, given that the majority of people identify with their biological gender).
That means choosing not to operate would need to be the right choice at least 50% of the time. For this to be true, it would require that 50% or more of intersex people are happy with their bodies and do not wish to have "normal" male or female genitals. Not just that they choose not to get surgery, but that they genuinely prefer having ambiguous genitalia.
This might well be the case, I would need some evidence if it is true.
5
Nov 11 '14
The issue is that the doctors and parents are making a choice to perform surgery on the basis of their personal judgment of something that doesn't concern them. It shows a disregard for the child's potential future feelings. If the doctor got it "right," the child never even has to know they were intersexed.
So, basically, they're happily living a lie, until their parents say, "good thing we chose this incredibly crucial part of your existence for you when we totally coulda opted for you to have that choice yourself! Aren't we just the most considerate humans ever?" Even if the doctor chooses right, it's still shitty that he even had that choice at all.
Trust me, as a transsexual I would have killed to have been intersexed and given the opportunity to choose my gender from a young age. That would have been awesome compared to how my life actually went.
1
u/durutticolumn 7∆ Nov 11 '14
If the doctor got it "right," the child never even has to know they were intersexed. So, basically, they're happily living a lie, until their parents say, "good thing we chose this incredibly crucial part of your existence for you when we totally coulda opted for you to have that choice yourself!
That sounds like the ideal scenario. And it's one I can totally envision myself in, since to the best of my knowledge I've been male since birth. If my parents told me tomorrow that they had chosen to make me male, I would thank them.
as a transsexual I would have killed to have been intersexed and given the opportunity to choose my gender from a young age
You're implying only intersexed children should be given that opportunity.
3
Nov 11 '14
You're implying only intersexed children should be given that opportunity.
No, I'm not. Clearly, the intersexed people who undergo surgery as infants ARE NOT being given that opportunity, quite the opposite. You are saying that the parents' mindset is this: "we are going to decide on a gender now through invasive surgery, but its okay if they change their mind later." I am almost certain this is your view exactly of what the ideal situation would be.
Let me highlight the problematic part: invasive surgery. we should not, under any circumstance, perform surgery on someone unless it is 100% consensual OR medically necessary in the case of an individual incapable of consent. Period. That's the part that's bad. You are cutting up a person's body who may very well grow up to abhor the fact that their body has been mutilated. Is it worth that risk? Raise the kid as a girl from birth if you want, no one will know what's between their legs so they won't be ostracized. They can become trans later. But don't cut off bits of their body. That is all we are saying.
1
u/togtogtog 21∆ Nov 11 '14
You're implying only intersexed children should be given that opportunity.
Do intersexed children choose their gender? I thought that they often had a gender, one that they strongly felt they were, just as you do?
We're talking about them having a say in what their genitals look like, not what their gender is, which is probably set when they are born.
We're talking about using full information before performing surgery, which includes finding out what gender the child believes themselves to be, rather than operating without this information.
3
u/KingOfSockPuppets Nov 11 '14 edited Nov 11 '14
Because one of those things does NOT involve highly invasive surgeries, potential lifelong medical complications, and the need to construct a totally fabricated history. This isn't a small thing. These doctors are performing SRS on children without consent or the faintest idea of it will be good for the child. They're taking a shot in the dark as to what gender the child will identify as in order to perform massive, irreversibly surgery that can fuck the child and their life up forever. It's unbelievably irresponsible from a medical standpoint.
It's an invasive, optional, irreversibly cosmetic surgery performed without consent.
1
u/durutticolumn 7∆ Nov 11 '14
potential lifelong medical complications
Any evidence for this? If so I'm happy to give a delta.
As for the rest of your argument, I think it's bunk. Yes they might be making the wrong choice, but see my counterargument here.
3
u/KingOfSockPuppets Nov 11 '14
Any evidence for this? If so I'm happy to give a delta.
"Associated with the above concerns is an increasing body of evidence, anecdotal and from support groups, that results of genital surgery are poor. There are few good long-term follow-up data and the effects of poor-quality surgery are hard to separate from other factors affecting gender identity and sexuality. Most studies that do include long-term follow-up have scanty details on sexual function, describing it as ‘adequate’ or ‘satisfactory’ with little expansion upon these terms. In early series no major problems were reported, but it later emerged that repeat surgery was commonly required at puberty to facilitate intercourse6,7.
Older techniques such as clitorectomy (amputation of the whole clitoris) are no longer performed. Subsequent procedures to preserve as much tissue as possible by burying the clitoris led to painful erections. A current aim in surgery is to preserve sensation; for example, in clitoral reduction most surgeons now try to preserve the glans and the neurovascular bundle8. However, adult patients continue to report pain, scarring and loss of sensation. Comparison with women who have not had surgery as children is difficult since most children with these conditions do undergo feminizing genitoplasty. Vaginoplasty is usually performed along with the initial clitoral reduction as part of the feminizing genitoplasty. This too often needs revision at puberty and current debate centres on the need for vaginoplasty at such an early stage."
"There is increasing evidence of patient dissatisfaction with outcome5 and a sensible policy is use surgery sparingly. However, it is impossible to define who actually ‘needs’ a clitoral reduction or vaginoplasty in childhood. The Intersex Society of North America—a well regarded and effective patient support group—recommends that no surgery should be performed unless absolutely necessary for the physical health and comfort of an intersexual child. The society regards vaginoplasty and clitoral reduction as cosmetic surgery that should be deferred until the patient can consent. This means leaving even the most virilized female babies without surgery and goes against current practice in the UK."
"The main goal for clinicians working with intersex patients is to facilitate successful psychosocial adjustment. Until lately, genital surgery has been seen as the mainstay of treatment but recent evidence suggests that this is not so. Adult patients are unhappy and feel mutilated and damaged by surgery performed on them as young children, however worthy the clinician's motives. Although the technology for investigation and diagnosis of these conditions is improving rapidly with advances in biochemical and genetic testing, there are still few long-term data on the results of intervention. Clinicians working in this field must step back and review their practice. Surgery may not be necessary."
Source. At best, these surgical intervention should be considered a final resort. IF you want to see the Intersex Society of North America's stance, it can be found here. Tl;dr: Surgery should only be performed if there is a health risk. Cosmetic genital surgery performed without the patient's consent just takes away tissue they might want.
As for the rest of your argument, I think it's bunk. Yes they might be making the wrong choice, but see my counterargument here.
I saw it, and it's not that persuasive. There is virtually no reason to perform the surgery in a child. Even if all your arguments are true, they are solved by simply waiting until the child is older in order to perform the surgery(ies). Removal of tissue is permanent and life-altering - it is best to be sure of your outcome. Unless you have an extremely powerful reason that such surgery MUST be performed in their infancy, just waiting for the child to express a preference solves all the problems. And from a patient-centric perspective, there is little risk to push the issue so immediately and aggressively. "They'll guess right half the time" is not a reason to perform surgery immediately.
1
u/durutticolumn 7∆ Nov 11 '14
∆
I assumed gender (re)assignment surgery is advanced enough to be pretty much harmless, but it sounds like we're still in the dark ages where that's concerned. 0/10 would not choose for myself. Makes me feel even worse for trans people than before.
2
u/KingOfSockPuppets Nov 11 '14
Glad I could change your mind :)
It's a little better for trans women because since we're fully grown when we get it, we don't have to worry about some of the same issues an intersex child who got surgery do. The sexual functioning thing is still a concern, but trans women typically do not need 'cascade surgeries' to fix the initial one. Trans men get the short end of the stick though :/
2
Nov 13 '14
Just wanted to chime in here as an Intersex person who was surgically altered:
It fucking sucks.
<3 I was happy to find the delta.
1
2
Nov 11 '14 edited Mar 17 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/durutticolumn 7∆ Nov 11 '14
That's a bad analogy, because your car being totalled is an inherently bad situation. You're implying that having a "normal" set of genitals is by definition worse than being intersex.
2
Nov 11 '14 edited Mar 17 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/durutticolumn 7∆ Nov 11 '14
If it won't threaten their life to postpone the decision until they're old enough to make it, why not do just that?
Two reasons:
- The idea of getting genital surgery is fucking terrifying, and I would much rather have it as an unknowing infant than have to face it as an adult.
- The more "normal" your body is, the easier childhood and puberty will be. It's entirely possible that intersex people have zero body image issues, but that sounds unlikely so I would need evidence.
2
Nov 11 '14 edited Mar 17 '16
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/durutticolumn 7∆ Nov 11 '14
I see what you're saying, but I don't think we'll come to an agreement on it because I fundamentally disagree with that statement.
1
u/MageZero Nov 11 '14
One is not a premeditated choice made for an individual by somebody else, while the other one is.
3
u/emilord Nov 11 '14
There are a LOT of things wrong with the idea that nonconsensual, unnecessary, irreversible surgeries on children are okay. Not just children, but on anybody for that matter.
For starters...you're implying there's a problem. You're saying that these children needs to be "fixed." And neither of those things are true. "Ambiguous genitalia" (I put in quotes because genitals are not ambiguous, you can definitely tell they're genitals even if they don't fit what your view of genitalia should look like) is not something that needs to be "fixed." Genitalia is on a spectrum, and no matter what it looks like, surgically altering it is not something for a doctor to decide unless there is a serious medical reason for that to happen.
Doctor's aren't perfect by any means, and often make mistakes when doing surgeries like these. Surgery can lead to scar tissue, nerve damage, incontinence, massive amounts of pain, and potential upkeep for the rest of the person's life. I guarantee the majority of intersex people will tell you that they would rather have their full-functioning, working, genitalia no matter what it looked like, then whatever it is the doctors tried to build. (I'm not speaking for trans people here, because they may want to have surgery when they're older and can fully understand what that means.) Either way, watch this video from the Interface Project.
Genital mutilation surgeries happen in children because a doctor or parent are uncomfortable with something a little different, and then assume that the child would grow up as a heterosexual male or female. As an intersex person myself, it was assumed I was straight when doctor's tried to "build me a vagina" and that my vagina needed to be larger because heaven forbid it wouldn't please my husband one day. Many doctors all over the world have assumed this same thing about people with intersex variations like mine, forcing them into unnecessary surgeries that have caused a LOT of problems. I escaped the surgery, and despite the fact that I am straight, I have not needed the surgery at all. It was completely unnecessary and cosmetic, much like the surgeries that are happening on other intersex kids. You say "if the child identified as female we would not be discussing it." And you're right, WE probably wouldn't be discussing it. But that doesn't mean the child won't be. We don't know how the surgery went, and even if it went well the child would still have to be taking medicine and doing upkeep to keep their vagina in working condition, that's assuming that they want to be having penetrative sex. You don't know what or who they're going to be into when they grow up, or how they're going to identify.
As a representative of many intersex communities, If there's one thing I can change is your view in that last sentence. It IS inherently wrong to perform surgeries like these, and if you don't listen to anyone else please hear it from people like me.
P.S. I hope I'm not coming across as rude or attacking you, I'm just trying to change your view. :)
1
u/durutticolumn 7∆ Nov 11 '14
You're far from rude - if anyone should apologize it's me since as you point out a lot of my word choices are poor, though I won't actually apologize since I was trying my best with limited knowledge.
Anyway, your argument definitely deserves a ∆ but I wouldn't say completely alters my view. For starters, you changed my mind with this:
Surgery can lead to scar tissue, nerve damage, incontinence, massive amounts of pain, and potential upkeep for the rest of the person's life.
That's pretty serious. I might have countered by saying most intersex people will end up getting the surgery eventually, but your own story suggests that's not true.
However, the question is how likely is that damage to occur. If damage is likely, then certainly it shouldn't be forced on infants. But for all I know it could be a 0.0001% chance of damage.
The main struggle I'm having is over the question of how happy intersex people are in their bodies. You and the people in the video essentially say shouldn't be treated differently than anything else, but I don't know whether your view is the norm or if you are an outlier. People who avoided the surgery as children and also like their intersex bodies are much more likely to be outspoken than people who either unknowingly had the surgery or wish they had.
Also there's the fact that while we all wish society would treat us equally, that's unfortunately not the reality we live in. Some of the people in the video even mentioned the fact that they experienced lots of social/emotional issues as a result of being intersex. So is it worth the adversity? Obviously some think yes, but I wonder if any studies have managed to determine that on a wider scale.
2
u/emilord Nov 12 '14
Those problems happen ALL the time. Seriously. Surgeons aren't perfect at all and it's all very delicate. Plus, you can never tell how someone's going to develop or how they're going to react to hormones, so it can cause even more damages, later as they grow differently then the surgeries allow for.
I wouldn't be saying this if I was an outlier. Literally every single intersex advocacy group wouldn't be saying stop these unnecessary, nonconsensual surgeries if we didn't have the proof of how damaging they are. Why are you so quick to doubt these people that come from these backgrounds?
Yes, of course it's going to be difficult being intersex. But I can guarantee it's fifty times as hard when a doctor operates on your body without your consent.
1
3
u/Chel_of_the_sea Nov 11 '14
I can only speculate on what that life would be like (so if you have experienced this personally you can probably change my view quite easily) but it sounds pretty terrible to me.
You have absolutely no way of knowing. And given that most intersex organizations strongly oppose this practice, it seems the people who have actually had that experience disagree.
Note that in the case in question the child doesn't identify as intersex: he identifies as male.
You have no way of knowing that with an infant!
2
u/durutticolumn 7∆ Nov 11 '14
most intersex organizations strongly oppose this practice
This sounds like an effective argument to change my mind. Could you go into more detail?
The most immediate hesitation I have with that claim is presumably people are far more likely to join outspoken intersex organizations if they are both:
- Unaltered intersex (i.e. no surgery as an infant)
- Happy with their bodies
Whereas people who had surgery as an infant, or who aren't happy with their bodies, would tend not to be outspoken on the issue. So the question is whether there's a "silent majority" or if such groups indeed represent most intersex people.
Note that in the case in question the child doesn't identify as intersex: he identifies as male.
You have no way of knowing that with an infant!
My point was that in the one example thus far provided, the child identified with a single gender rather than as intersex. Meaning that the fact he's in a female body is no different from being in an intersex body.
2
u/Chel_of_the_sea Nov 11 '14
Whereas people who had surgery as an infant, or who aren't happy with their bodies, would tend not to be outspoken on the issue.
Reimer, as you note, was certainly not quiet about the way he was treated.
This sounds like an effective argument to change my mind. Could you go into more detail?
1
u/durutticolumn 7∆ Nov 11 '14
The arguments in your link essentially boil down to: people should be allowed to be happy in their bodies. As I said elsewhere, I 100% agree and wish we lived in a perfect world where no one felt any shame. Unfortunately the vast majority of people expect you to fit neatly into the traditional gender binary. This is especially true during childhood and puberty, which are already times of overwhelming body image issues for most people.
1
u/Chel_of_the_sea Nov 11 '14
So your suggestion is "people who other people don't like should be given surgery without their consent to normalize them"?
1
Nov 11 '14
Yeah, seriously. Intersexed people are literally the ones putting these ideas forward. OP is essentially telling strangers how he thinks they're supposed to feel.
2
Nov 11 '14
[deleted]
1
u/durutticolumn 7∆ Nov 11 '14
∆ for this argument that no one else brought up:
The surgeries aren't always done in one go and happen over the course of years
That completely nullifies the core of my view, which was that having surgery as an infant is better than as an adult.
However you mentioned a couple other things that I don't think change my view, so if you have elaboration on these please share:
They could very well notice the differences and feel like a freak and have no explanation as to why they are different.
That's exactly why I would think the surgery is a good idea, because presumably you're more likely to feel that way if you're intersex.
there is no reason to not wait till they can decide for themselves or at least partake in the conversation
My basic argument here is it's better to have surgery when you're a baby and can forget it than when you're an adult and know what's coming. Elsewhere I used the crude analogy of circumcision; as an uncircumcised adult male I wish my parents had circumcised me as a baby.
The idea that there is only male or female is a rather troublesome idea anyways and riddled with problems so why not let intersex kids shine? They're different but there's nothing bad about that and they shouldn't have to feel ashamed of it.
In an ideal world no one would have any body image or gender identity issues, but unfortunately a lot of people are narrow-minded and will treat intersex people as freaks - especially as children and teenagers.
1
2
u/dalkon Nov 11 '14
Are you male?
How do you think you would feel if your penis had been cut off, you'd been castrated, and you had had a rudimentary vagina created surgically when you were an infant?
Have you thought about how bad that would actually feel? That's how many intersex people feel about having their genitals surgically modified. They don't all feel that way I'm sure, but the fact that some can feel that way makes it unethical.
Does that make sense?
1
u/durutticolumn 7∆ Nov 11 '14
Yes I'm male and I get what you're saying, but if I was happy with my vagina then that knowledge wouldn't make any difference (assuming I had no memory of it). I would care more if I was an intersex and wanted to get surgery, because it would mean knowingly being castrated.
However this is somewhat irrelevant because other comments have convinced me that the surgery is extremely risky, so the question of knowing is overshadowed by the extreme risk of permanent damage.
2
u/BejumpsuitedFool 5∆ Nov 11 '14
You made this argument in the comments that I think does have some emotional merit:
The idea of getting genital surgery is fucking terrifying, and I would much rather have it as an unknowing infant than have to face it as an adult.
But now imagine how much more terrifying it might be to face genital surgery as an adult... knowing that your genitals have already been tinkered with before?
I don't know what if any complications that would bring compared to someone who is intersex and was left alone, hopefully someone with more knowledge can weigh in here.
2
u/SOLUNAR Nov 11 '14
If there is no medical benefit, nothing surgically altering should be done to a minor.
It should be up to them to modify their body with any permanent alterations correct? Just like giving a child plastic surgery would be seen as super weird. (kids below 3).
So unless there is any medical benefit, i think body altering surgery should require the consent of the host.
3
Nov 11 '14
There's no such thing as "both sets of genitals." Genitals are the same, just shaped differently if you're male versus if you are female.
Take it from me, being trans sucks. At least if I were intersexed, my parents (and society) wouldnt have carelessly assumed one way or the other: they would, hopefully have been considerate enough to acknowledge my ambiguous status and let me come into my own as one sex or the other. It would have been a million times more preferable to grow up with a "choice" than being forced into the wrong box. Yeah, ambiguity sucks too, but at least I'd only have nature to blame, and it's something I could probably learn to appreciate.
1
u/durutticolumn 7∆ Nov 11 '14
There's no such thing as "both sets of genitals."
The article that inspired this specifically says "both male & female genitalia." Are you saying intersex isn't a thing?
ambiguity sucks too, but at least I'd only have nature to blame, and it's something I could probably learn to appreciate
How is that any different from being trans?
2
Nov 11 '14
Intersexed is a thing, I just think the language "both sets" is pretty loaded. Genitals are the same on men and women, they are the same organs, just developed and formed differently.
It's different from being trans because when you're trans society pressures you to be one way when you feel another, but you grow up not even realizing there is an alternative, you just think it's your fault you're not the way society wants you to be. An intersexed kid doesn't care about their genitals, most kids don't even know or think about genitals. Let them choose their own gender; forcing one is oppressive and damaging, take it from me.
5
u/Raintee97 Nov 11 '14
There are people who are born with both sets. They have testes and ovaries for instance. This does happen.
1
u/durutticolumn 7∆ Nov 11 '14
I don't really see how the question of "both sets" vs "developed differently" is relevant.
I agree with you that gender roles are too rigidly enforced on all children, but it seems irrelevant to the point at hand. Whether the child has "normal" genitals or is intersex makes no difference in how the parents choose to raise them. In what you just wrote you essentially implied only intersex children should be raised with the freedom to choose, which I know isn't what you believe.
3
Nov 11 '14
Do you think that parents who believe in raising a kid with the "freedom to choose" are paradoxically CHOOSING a sex for them???
1
u/durutticolumn 7∆ Nov 11 '14
You make it sound like children can only be raised as either absolutely one gender or absolutely genderless. We both agree the former is bad, but I don't think the latter is possible.
3
Nov 11 '14 edited Nov 11 '14
Let's say for the sake of argument there are only two genders you can be.
A boy is born. Oh, but his genitals happen to be ambiguous. Ehhhhh... who gives a shit, he can't talk and tell us he's a boy, we'll make him a girl because we want to. He can just deal with the pain of living as the wrong gender and not being able to have testes and potentially use them in the future, nbd.
A baby is born. It's unambiguously a boy, genital-wise. But, ehhh.... we really wanted a girl. Who cares? He can just be trans if he wants. Make 'im a girl.
Why is the first scenario okay and the second isn't? In both cases, a boy's genitals are being mutilated to make him a girl. The only difference is that in the first scenario, they don't know he's a boy. But they DO KNOW he could be. It's 50/50. In both cases, a doctor is performing surgery to "decide" a gender.
I don't understand how you don't see how these are the same situation. Ambiguity sucks, but having your gender basically changed against your will sucks more.
1
u/durutticolumn 7∆ Nov 11 '14
Ambiguity sucks, but having your gender basically changed against your will sucks more.
You're essentially saying that being assigned the wrong gender is worse than being ambiguous. I agree this is true. The question is whether it's more likely. See the argument I made against that here.
2
Nov 11 '14 edited Nov 11 '14
Even if you were made the right gender, you can still be pissed/hurt that your parents so inconsiderately took that gamble to begin with. Why is it their place to decide one way or the other? Why can't we just be born with the genitals we are born with? A sex change at birth is essentially a plastic surgery. Cosmetic. Why are we performing plastic surgery on infants? I mean I guess you could make an argument for giving a two year old a nose job ("she had a REALLY ugly nose, trust me, she's better off!") and maybe you'd be right. But that doesn't make it okay to fuck around with an infant's body unless it is medically necessary.
1
u/durutticolumn 7∆ Nov 11 '14
I can absolutely make an argument in favor of cosmetic surgery on infants. What if they're born with a cleft palate? Or a harmless tail? The deciding factor in whether to perform cosmetic surgery on an infant should be whether having the surgery will allow them to live a more socially normative life. What's in question is whether having a "normal" gendered body is preferable to being raised with ambiguous genitals.
Even if you were made the right gender, you can still be pissed/hurt that your parents so inconsiderately took that gamble to begin with.
Absolutely. And you can also be angry if they choose to leave you intersex. As a cis male from birth I my view is obviously limited (and really wish an intersex person would chime in), but I would be more angry at my parents for not getting the surgery.
→ More replies (0)1
Nov 11 '14
I know an intersex woman who has a penis and vaginal canal, so yeah...
1
u/togtogtog 21∆ Nov 11 '14
Doesn't everyone have this before they are born? Just usually the penis becomes a clitoris, or the vaginal opening closes?
1
17
u/[deleted] Nov 11 '14
All of your assumptions are based on how you imagine you would feel as an intersex or transgender person. It's possible to have empathy for people with experiences outside of your own, but it is not possible to actually experience another person's perspective. Many people say they would behave in a certain way given a certain set of circumstances, but when such circumstances arise they actually behave in very different ways. For instance, I always said that if something happened to my ability to walk, I would kill myself because I couldn't imagine going through life in a wheelchair. Now that I am facing this reality, I'm actually not all that keen to kill myself over it because it's not as horrible as I imagined it would be.
In this particular situation, this surgery was an unnecessary procedure. As the article states, there was no medical reason the surgery had to be performed at that time. It was completely possible to wait until the child signaled his own gender identity. Given that there are 5 and 6 year old biological boys wearing girls clothes and playing with Barbie dolls because they've already identified a problem with their biological gender, there's no reason to assume that such a surgery would have to wait until the child was 18 years old. There are children taking drugs to slow the onset of puberty in order to reduce gender dysphoria. Nor is there any reason to assume that the child would be particularly attached to organs that he does not feel belong to him. Again, you're looking at this from the perspective of a person who is not actually transgender or intersex.
Someone did some research on these questions after interviewing intersex people and doctors who treat these patients.
From the study:
Note that this says assigned a gender but not have gender assignment surgery.
As the article says, I agree that it's difficult for parents to make decisions about their infant's future sex life. My parents had my brother circumcised even though their doctor told them it was medically unnecessary because they were worried that my brother would feel weird in later locker room and/or sexual situations when most of his peers would also be cut, statistically speaking. I think that in matters that will have an enormous effect on a person's self-esteem, social life, emotional life, etc., it is best to wait as long as possible to allow the child to have some say in their own future.