In the three articles, the authors has hinted many similarities in intersex surgeries and female genital cutting. Furthermore, the authors implied that the intersex surgeries are medically unnecessary, but needed to be acceptable into “societal expectation by prevent psychological trauma, embarrassment, and emotional discomfort” from both patient and their parents (Ehrenreich, 2005, p. 13). On the other hands, anti-FGC activists, and Western feminism has attacked the “African genital cutting as primitive, irrational, harmful, and deserving of condemnation.
” This type of practice is equally problematic to intersex surgery which occurs in own country (Ehrenreich, 2005, p. 13). Regarding to both cases, the articles suggested that performing intersex surgery procedures in the West, much likely to female genital cutting in African, have cultural artifacts. Thus, people might conclude that Americans foster a double standard based on cultural misconceptions and prejudices. According to Ehrenreich (2005), she has argued that intersex surgery in the West, like female circumcision in Africa, is a cultural practice that ordains patriarchal gender norms (p.22).
If the anti-FGC activists could argue there are significant different between intersex surgery and female circumcision practices, then they have forgotten both practices have come from the same procedure: cutting, repairing or correcting the individual’s genital part to look “normal” as they used to see in their own society norm concept. For example, “thousands of intersex genital surgeries are performed on children and infants” (Ehrenreich, 2005, p.13) compare with many African young children have undergone female circumcision in Africa, people might see that both practice performances are the same, however, both has different outcomes.
Most people in the West have believed in gender norm (Ehrenreich, 2005, p. 21). A strong evidence to support that statement came from two postulates from Money’s belief: “Individuals are psychosexually neutral at birth; healthy psychosexual development is dependent upon the appearance of the genitals (Diamond & Sigmundson, 1997, p.1). ”
Money disserted that an infant retained a psychosexual neutral at birth, allowing a child to transform into either gender as long as one has a specific gender identity (male or female) (Diamond & Sigmundson, 1997). This dissertation was an assumption that the psychosexual development of a child depend on “normal” looking genitalia. In Africa, their belief in female circumcision was normal, something have to be done, based on society expectation from normal women (Ehrenreich, 2005).
The intersex surgery has the ability to alter the appearance of genitalia, which have encourage by West society in notion of what counts as “standard” male or female appearance (Ehrenreich, 2005). For an example, in John/Joan case, when John got assignment of a female sex soon after birth, the doctors encouraged his parents to raise Joan as female role, and asked to keep secret from this transforming (Diamond & Sigmundson, 1997).
The expectation of doctors affirmed that John will eventually become a girl by the outside factor. Their intention is to prevent John and his parents from shame, humiliate, and confusion (Diamond & Sigmundson, 1997). From here, one could realize there is obviously traditional involve in this type of early surgery, limited information given to the patient lead to, wittingly or not, permanent gender identity at young age (Ehrenreich, 2005).
According to Ehrenreich (2005), intersex surgery, like female genital cutting, did not provide “medically necessary treatment,” but rather enforce a cultural system of gender norms-“norm that, ironically, harm men and women” (Ehrenreich, 2005, p. 19). As many anti-FGC activists pointed out, the female circumcision convicted that the “surgery often produces emotional as well as physical harm,” then the intersex cutting also produce “severe physiological complications and have a devastating psychological impact” (Ehrenreich, 2005).
Many intersex children have to undergo many painful operations. Moreover, they constantly exposed their genital part to doctors to get an affirmation that the doctors were success in their work, and the genital part was healing (which never been wronged before). These experiences surely brought them a major effect on physical, psychological, and emotional as well. Like John has stated he felt discomfort, embarrassed, and had suicidal thought throughout the ordeal (Diamond & Sigmundson, 1997).
More interesting, according to Ehrenreich (2005), female circumcision was long used in the Western societies, like FGC, its use was based on “patriarchal assumption about women” (p. 17). Hence, base on those assumptions, many believed that Western are “simply more advanced than non-Western nations, having abandoned practices that those nations still employ” ((Ehrenreich, 2005, p. 18). The Westerners believed they are more rational, civilized, and scientific that they have another practice involved in bodily disfigurement to which “women consent in order to conform their bodies to patriarchal gender norms include breast augmentation surgery, liposuction, and even genital reconstruction”.
(Ehrenreich, 2005, p. 18). In condemning African genital cutting as “backward, ignorant, and superstitious”; the North American were proud of themselves as professional medical practitioners, who performed the scientific cosmetic surgery (type of bodily disfigurement on human body) on people within their society, particularly amongst young children.
According to Kuhnle & Krahl (2002), their observation on intersex patients from different cultural backgrounds made it obvious for people to see that; even different nationalities (Malaysian, Chinese, and Indian) have lived under a same country, such as Malaysia, but each of the nationality have many different beliefs in religion and traditional.
Some examples have given out such as Indian women has financial burden to the family since a “significant dowry is expected” when she get married; the Chinese believe in a man-superiority, and last but not least Malaysian has a culture that female has an opportunity to inherit and control all of the fortunes if her husband passed away (Kuhnle & Krahl, 2002, p. 10).
Nevertheless their educations are improved by their country rapid economic growth and development; however, there are still different cultures between them that they cannot see by themselves (Kuhnle & Krahl, 2002, p. 10). This is a rigid evidence to show people that it is difficult for the consultant to convince the Chinese and Indian families to assign their intersex child to the female gender, since the male role is superiority in their countries.
Moreover, this observation could show the anti-FGC activists that intersex children are born in all societies, and each society has to have ways to deal with them (Kuhnle & Krahl, 2002, p. 12). According to Ehrenreich (2005), if one has criticized that FGC is a cultural practice, and it is outweighed by its violation of universal human rights; then the Western has think of themselves as an “exceptionalism”, which might make one thinks that the Western has assumed their nation is different and better than other nation.
In labeling female circumcision as a harmful cultural practice that should be eliminated while simultaneously failing to criticize intersex cutting; then in fact, it turned out the anti-FGC discourse tried to convince their nation that the female circumcision was “inaccurate” and “unscientific,” and their intersex cutting practice is accurate, scientific and rational based on their objective medical knowledge. Obviously, there are many flaws and contradiction in the anti-FGC discourse.
Some of strong evidences the anti-FGC activist gave out to convict FGC such as their procedures are often enforce restrained during cutting and “perform by individuals with little or no modern medical training, under non-sterile conditions, and without the benefit of anesthesia” (Ehrenreich, 2005, p. 16). The Western see this as a barbaric culture and should be criticized. Therefore, should people see the intersex surgery in the West, with professional training, a sterile condition, and a benefit from anesthesia to the intersex patient, is the outcome of satisfactory, contended, scientific, and rational choice?
Absolutely not, because since the type of procedure from both practices have performed equally in a same way: cutting. Regardless of what anti-FGC activist brought up in their discourse, some of medical professionals in the West “do not deny that intersex treatment is socially, rather than biologically compelled” (Ehrenreich, 2005, p. 21). This might make people to realize that immediate normalization to an infant’s body is a thought to be essential- to prevent stigmatization, humiliation, and confusion of the patient and his/her parents.
Thus, this reveals the Western is cultural artifacts in the same way that beliefs about FGC are culturally based (Ehrenreich, 2005). If so, then the intersex surgery procedure also cannot be right based on the doctor’s concern about the different look of individual’s external genitalia to compare with the norm genital looking in their own society. According to Kuhnle & Krahl (2002), every country has its own culture, but none of them will accept their cultural background should guide their medical decision (p. 6).
This is also applies to a rational and civilized medical knowledge to people in the West. While condemn the FGC as patriarchal, primitive, based on patriarchal gender norms and ritualistic beliefs, the North Americans have failure to condemn their own intersex surgery (Ehrenreich, 2005, p. 14). No matter where the genital cutting performed, they all should be recognized in the universal, especially people from the West. There is far more to learn from working to understand that the intersex surgery and female genital cutting are interrelated.