The fact that the difference between a clitoris and a penis and therefore at times between a male and a female is measured in inches horrified me. This extremely cosmetic approach to acceptable genitalia goes against my understanding of the body. As Fausto-Sperling explains this kind of thinking prioritizes “[N]ot what the sex organ does for the body to which it is attached… [but] what it does vis-à-vis [in relation to] other bodies (p. 58). Whether or not “men” can penetrate and “women” be penetrated becomes the issue. To me, this represents an extremely narrow view of sex and pleasure. Multiple actions and positions can promote pleasure. If an individual has more unconventional genitalia this does not necessarily limit their ability to experience pleasure. Especially since the clitoris, not the depth of the vagina, is so essential to female orgasm. The fact that this organ was often removed shows the historical, and sometimes still present, disregard our society has/had for female pleasure. I do not cite my experience as exemplary for all, but I had NYS, public high school health/sex education classes in high school. The clitoris’ location, function, and importance were never discussed. I enjoyed Fausto-Sterling’s point that an enlarged clitoris really could be the opposite of problematic since it would be easy to find.
I can go with some of Fausto-Sterling’s thinking. I like the idea of a continuum in terms of gender roles, that there are many types of people that borrow preferences, dress, and behavior from both of the traditional roles. I can appreciate the way that a sex continuum would contribute to this thinking. However, the fact is that there are two extremely large groups of the population that share certain physical characteristics with one another and not with the other group. Males are larger than females. This simple fact alone fundamentally changes the way they experience the world. These differences are noteworthy. I agree that a world with less emphasis on genderly defined sex would be more accepting of those that blur the lines in terms of behavior as well as biology. But, I cannot conceive a world that would “Render the very notion of gender difference irrelevant” (p. 101). I think that there observable, inherent similarities among a large portion of the population (i.e. menstruation) that is then different from another large portion. This is relevant.
I also found Fausto-Sperling's section on the clitoris and the penis quite interesting. While I agree that it is completely unfair to sever a woman's clitoris because it is bigger than the average clitoris is a ridiculous concept. However, this is a decision that ultimately needs to be made at birth. A woman with an enlarged clitoris may be ostracized or made fun of for it. By the time a woman is old enough to make her own decision on the matter the procedure becomes an extremely difficult and painful one. That being said, I do not believe that this is a good enough reason to engage in such a practice that is decided by inches. I am simply playing devils advocate.
ReplyDeleteThis reading also reminded me of a Law and Order episode that I saw once. In this episode a set of twins were born identical. Because one of them had an undersized penis, it was severed at birth. Consequently the child grew up confused and troubled. Once she finds out that she was really born a boy, she kills the doctor who did the procedure. While this is a fictional story, it is a great example of a young boy who had a decision made for him as a result of an objective measurement by a doctor. He was not given the ability to make the decision for himself and it made him extremely unhappy in the long run.
Lead Post- Sexing the Body by Anne Fausto-Sterling
ReplyDeleteChapter 3: Of Gender And Genitals: The Use And Abuse Of The Modern Intersexual
Confronting the Intersex Newborn
Anne Fausto-Sterling introduces the third chapter with an anecdote. She depicts a scenario in which a newborn child’s sex is ambiguous. In this scenario, time is of the essence; no time is wasted by the physicians to consult the new parents or for the parents to consult others in the same predicament. This contemporary practice, modeled in the example above, emerged from “surprisingly flexible theories of gender”; the classic case of nurture over nature is shown. In the 1960’s, John Money and his colleagues conducted studies to state that the “notion of natural inclination” is false. They determined from their evidence that gonads, hormones, and chromosomes do not automatically determine a child’s gender role.
The Parents
Generally, doctors explain to the parents of a mixed-sex child that their infants are not in a category other than male or female. Instead, doctors tell parents that some aspect of their physiology is “unusual” and their child’s condition is extremely rare. Therefore, there is no one else to consult and the decision must be made urgently. However, according to research done by Fausto-Sterling, 1.7% off all births fit into the category of intersexuality. Furthermore, this occurrence “may be on the rise”; the widespread increase of intersexuals correlates to the “presence of environmental pollutants that mimic estrogen.”
“Fixing” Intersexuals: The Parental Fix
In this segment, CAH, a type of intersexuality that can be changed by parental interventions is discussed. Seemingly, one out of eight fetuses treated for CAH will actually be a CAH child. Consequently, treatment can lead to negative effects on both the child and mother. A question that Fausto-Sterling then poses is if unnecessary treatments, due to the possibility of having a CAH fetus, are worth the side effects.
The Surgical Fix
The rule of thumb, in America, is that if a genetic female has reproductive potential, then they should always be raised as a female. On the other hand, genetic males gender assignment is based on their phallus size. Controversially, doctors are not even sure what a normal penis looks like; it is a subjective matter. And phallus size at birth does not necessarily correlate with the size at puberty. In male gender choice, physical health is not necessarily a health issue. Fausto-Sterling writes, “ It is not what the sex organ does for the body to which it is attached that defines the body as male. It is what it does vis-à-vis to other bodies.” The problem is more social than medical.
...
ReplyDeleteThe Uses of Intersexuality
In the 1950’s, Money argued, “The sex assignment and sex rearing predicted a hermaphrodite’s adult gender role and sexual orientation more accurately than did any aspect of h/her biological sex.” To prove this statement true, Money pointed to the case of John. John, who lost his penis, underwent surgery and became Joan. In this case, it seemed that societal forces overpowered genetic makeup; Joan had grown up loving acts considered feminine. However, in 1965 Milton Diamond proposed that sexual behaviors are only based on hormones. He stated that what Money was suggesting was that humans are sex neutral at birth. Diamond used the case of Joan/John to express that sexual orientation is influenced by biology not society; evidently, “in 1980 Joan had her breasts removed, later had a penis reconstructed, and was married and living with a woman and serving as her children’s father.” Joan/ Johns rejection to socialization as a girl helped to prove Diamond’s case, while discrediting Money’s theory.
Differentiating Heterosexuality: A Healthy Intersexual Is A Straight Intersexual
Here, Fausto-Sterling discusses the idea that for the treatment to be seen as a success, the child must be heterosexual. Fausto-Sterling goes on to say that the blurring lines between male and female, for intersexuals, correlates to the blurring lines of heterosexuality and homosexuality.
Chapter 4: Should There Be Only Two Sexes?
In short, Fausto-Sterling discusses the negativities surrounding intersexual surgeries; she is calling for the end of all unnecessary infant surgeries. She writes, “In my utopia, an intersexuals major medical concerns would be the potentially life-threatening conditions…” Fausto-Sterling goes on to extensively examine the lives of intersexuals and provides multiple tables for her readers. Later on in the chapter, she talks about the varying discrimination and violence faced by those whose genitals do not match what society perceives them as. Furthermore, Fausto-Sterling is stating that our gender systems need to be reconstructed and it is time for change! She leaves her reader on an optimistic note by saying, “ The road will be bumpy, but the possibility of a more diverse and equitable future is ours if we choose to make it happen.”