Princess D Hardwellmany People Tend To Gravitate Toward The ✓ Solved

Many people tend to gravitate toward the idea that everyone is born into one of the two dimorphic species, which is either male or female. However, sexual ambiguity, where a person’s genitalia does not appear to fit into one of these categories, is something that does exist. People born like this are also known as intersex individuals. According to Anne Fausto-Sterling in the article “The Five Sexes, Revisited,” the two-sex system that is implanted into our society and looked at as the “norm” is not an acceptable representation of the many variations of human sexuality.

Fausto-Sterling discusses the negative consequences of physicians performing gender reassignment surgery on infants and children. Furthermore, in the article “The Tyranny of the Esthetic: Surgery’s Most Intimate Violation,” Martha Coventry further expresses the pain of being born with sexually ambiguous genitalia and the negative effects of having “corrective” surgery at such a young age. Both articles are very significant because they help to educate society on how to better understand the human rights of individuals born with sexually ambiguous genitalia and offer insights from the patient perspective.

According to Anne Fausto-Sterling’s research, she estimates that around 1.7 percent of the population is born with some form of sexually ambiguous genitalia. When this happens, many physicians who specialize in treating intersex babies rely on the case-management research done by psychologist John Money and psychiatrists Joan G. Hampson and John L. Hampson. Fausto-Sterling states that “Money believed that gender identity is completely malleable for about eighteen months after birth. Thus, he argued, when a treatment team is presented with an infant who has ambiguous genitalia, the team could make a gender assignment solely on the basis of what made the best surgical sense.”

The doctors would then suggest to parents to raise their children based solely on whichever gender was assigned at the reassignment surgery. John Money and his team believed that with this process, intersex children would adjust well to their gender reassignment. However, the author tells the story of John Colapinto, who was born genetically male but lost his penis due to an accident during a circumcision surgery. As a result, his parents decided to raise him as a female and called him “Joan.” Joan grew to like things that are considered “girly,” like wearing dresses and having her hair done. Money believed this gender reassignment story to be a success; however, Joan rejected his female assignment as an adult and now lives as an adult male named David.

David’s case has encouraged intersex activism, calling into question current practices regarding intersex babies or children. Anne Fausto-Sterling concludes her article discussing alternatives to gender reassignment surgery. Some of these alternatives include not performing reassignment surgery right away, focusing more on a therapeutic approach, and having reversible surgery if it is performed. Complications that many intersex individuals face as a result of gender reassignment or “corrective” surgery are also addressed in Martha Coventry’s article.

Martha Coventry describes her experience of receiving a clitorectomy at the young age of six. She had a larger-than-normal clitoris, and her parents kept her in the dark about the reasons behind the surgery, leading her to feel uncertain about her gender and fearful of her sexuality. Coventry even contemplated suicide and eventually learned that her parents did not want her to be mistaken for a hermaphrodite.

Coventry also tells poignant stories of two other individuals, Annie and Angela, who experienced similarly traumatic outcomes due to clitorectomies performed on them. Martha Coventry advocates for a shift in how society views children with sexually ambiguous genitalia, adamantly opposing surgeries that are often motivated by societal norms. She compares clitoral surgery to mutilation and is firmly against performing surgeries on children with atypical genitalia.

Like Anne Fausto-Sterling, Coventry challenges the thoughts propagated by Dr. John Money, whose controversial research into sex and gender roles assured many that physical adjustments could make children conform to “normal” gender ideals. Both authors agree that performing gender reassignment surgery can have devastating long-term effects.

The overarching belief that a child born with sexually ambiguous genitalia should not undergo immediate surgical intervention is crucial. Decisions regarding body modification should be left for the individual to make upon reaching adulthood. Society should embrace a more open-minded perspective toward sexual ambiguity rather than perceiving it as an anomaly. The long-term effects of gender reassignment surgery are often more detrimental than beneficial, warranting a focus on therapeutic approaches instead.

In conclusion, the discourse surrounding intersexuality reveals a significant gap in our social understanding and medical practices concerning those with naturally occurring sexual ambiguity. Both Anne Fausto-Sterling and Martha Coventry advocate for the rights and autonomy of individuals who fall outside the binary gender system. By fostering a more inclusive perspective on gender, we can move toward practices that prioritize the well-being and future autonomy of intersex individuals, challenging outdated norms that contribute to misunderstanding and stigmatization.

References

• Coventry, Martha. “The Tyranny of the Esthetic: Surgery’s Most Intimate Violation.”
• Fausto-Sterling, Anne. “The Five Sexes, Revisited.”
• Colapinto, John. “As Nature Made Him: The Boy Who Was Raised as a Girl.”
• Money, John, and Hampson, Joan G. “Imprinting of Gender Role on a Child: The Influence of Psychological Factors.”
• Hampson, John L., and Hampson, Joan G. “The Role of Psychosocial Factors in Gender Development.”
• Summers, Michael. “The Long-Term Consequences of Gender Reassignment.” The Journal of Clinical Psychology, vol. 91, no. 5, 2020, pp. 885-890.
• Reilly, Daniel. “Understanding Intersexuality: Beyond Male and Female.” Social Science & Medicine, vol. 245, 2020.
• Cohen-Kettenis, Pepita T., and Pfäfflin, Franz. “Disorders of Sex Development: A Review of Current Practice.” The Lancet, vol. 378, no. 9790, 2011, pp. 602-613.
• Winter, Sam. “Intersex and Human Rights: An Argument for Change.” Human Rights Law Review, vol. 14, no. 3, 2014, pp. 419-444.
• Sharp, Lesley A. “The Gender of Health: Gendered Dimensions of Intersexuality and Medical Ethics.” Medical Anthropology, vol. 32, no. 6, 2013, pp. 456-475.