Personally, I did not realize how
common genital anomalies are, one in every 2,000
births, before reading the novel, Bodies in Doubt: An American History of
Intersex (Reis, 164). In the final
pages of chapter 5, Reis explains how intersex activists are challenging “so-called
normalizing” genital surgery with the hope to “improve the medical and social
attitudes toward people with intersex, focusing on ending the optimum gender of
rearing model” (151). This model is
established in the 1950’s where doctors would perform genital surgery on babies
to correct their abnormal genitalia based on whichever sex would be easier to
create. Because the surgery is done at a
young age, the parents are given the responsibility to tell the child about the
surgery. Due to the parents' anxiety,
the child can be unaware of their intersex only to find out late in life (Reis
146). Because these surgeries leave
people without a voice, I think this new visibility of intersex activists is
good after many years of concealment, but I want to see how well their voices
are being heard in the recent legal recognition of a third gender in Germany.
First, here is some background on
Germany’s new law. As of 2013, Germany has become
the first European county to legally recognize an ‘indeterminate’ gender
joining New Zealand, India, Nepal and others in having a third gender. This new law means that parents who have babies
who are born with ambiguous genitalia or a mixture of chromosomes do not have
to choice between the binary system of male or female. The change of the law is a response to numerous
cases that talked about the negative consequences to surgery. In addition to
birth certificates, the interior ministry has stated that gender neutral individuals who apply for German
passports will have the option between M, male, F, female, and X, intersex.
Something to keep in mind about the
new third gender is that it is acting within an already defined political structure
within Germany and globally. This raises some questions. With the new legal variations, how will gender
neutral individuals be recognized by other countries who do not distinguish a
third gender as in the United States? If
a person from Germany moves to the United States and identifies as 'indeterminate
gender', will the person be force to choose between legally being a man or a woman? In addition to failing to address the international problems of 'indeterminate' gender, the German government has, yet, to address the concerns of marriage and
civil partnerships. How will this third
gender fit into political institutions such as marriage?
Although I do not have the answer
to these questions, the establishment of the third gender could be a sign of
the German government listening to the demands of people who are intersex,
right? Well, not exactly. According to Reis, intersex activists are
interested in “appropriate patient-centered medical care, support group for
parents, and transparency and disclosure by physicians” (152). The
law does not address any of these concerns. The third gender creates a new category to
place a person who does not conform to the binary system of male and female which, in fact, limits the fluidity
of sex. According to a BBC article, the
new law is meant to remove the pressure “to make quick decisions
on sex assignment surgery for newborns” from the parents (“Germany”). Although the law may relieve the pressure on
parents, the third gender still places responsibility in the hands of the
parents which parallels the responsibilities of parents in the 1950’s.
Another question is what are the responses
from intersex activists about Germany’s third gender? Well, a major concern for
intersex activist is that the German law does not go far enough in regards to
newborn genital surgery. According to Zwischengeschlecht.org, a human rights activist
group for survivors of Intersex Genital Mutilation, the group establishes three
facts regarding the failure of the new law.
1.
The first fact is that the
law creates a ‘not’ option where children are placed in the new category by
failing to meet the standards of male or female. Similar to this idea,
some parents do not want to see their child as a third gender, “something in
between male and female” (Reis 155). This parental resistance can still lead to
newborn genital surgery.
2.
The second fact is that intersex
activists have criticized and opposed the law claiming that groups have,actually, “spoken out
against such demands” (“Zwishengeschlecht”).
3.
The third fact is that doctors can still receive
licenses to practice genital surgeries which are “often simply cosmetic” (Reis 151).
These examples show that despite people of intersex having
“a voice that is largely absent from early historical records,” the larger
political forces have failed to hear their real demands to end intersex genital
mutilations. As explained by Reis, the voices of people with intersex have
often been limited throughout history as seen with the use of newborn genital
surgery.
Overall, the third
gender law has strengths and weaknesses as highlighted by Silvan Agius of
IGLA-Europe who states, "While on the one hand it has provided a lot of
visibility about intersex issues... it does not address the surgeries and the
medicalisation of intersex people and that's not good - that has to change.”
Although the third gender increases the visibility of intersex, what
does this visibility mean? The demands
of intersex activists have not, yet been met. In fact, the third gender was not
something the group wanted, yet it is now a law.
I want to leave you with a final
question to think about. Does this third gender, actually, create a new way to
exclude and limit the voice of intersex activists?
For more information click here:
Reis, Elizabeth. Bodies
in Doubt: An American History of Intersex. Baltimore: The John Hopkins
University Press: 2009. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment