Αρχική Νομική Αναγνώριση της Ταυτότητας Φύλου- Εθνικός Μηχανισμός Παρακολούθησης και Αξιολόγησης του Σχεδίου Δράσης για τα Δικαιώματα του ΠαιδιούΆρθρο 02 – ΟρισμοίΣχόλιο του χρήστη Ειρήνη Συμεωνίδου | 15 Μαΐου 2017, 22:43
  • Σχόλιο του χρήστη 'Ειρήνη Συμεωνίδου' | 15 Μαΐου 2017, 22:43

    κα ΓΡΗΓΟΡΙΑΔΟΥ μια που αναρωτιέστε "τι άραγε είναι το φύλο; μη είναι θείο δώρο;", επιτρέψετε μου να σας βοηθήσω λίγο: Το "φύλο" κάθε βρέφους δίνεται/επινοείται/αποφασίζεται υποκειμενικά όχι από κάποιο θεό, αλλά από τον μαιευτήρα, αναλόγως του πως θα του φανούν τα σεξουαλικά όργανα του βρέφους και αναλόγως με τις πολιτισμικές/θρησκευτικές προσλαμβάνουσες του γιατρού φυσικά. Σύμφωνα με αυτές, οι γιατροί ορίζουν τα αισθητικά "κριτήρια" περί του "πόσα εκατοστά πέος αποτελεί αρκετά "ανδρικό" όργανο, ώστε να πούμε πως "ειναι αγόρι", ή πόσο μικρή "οφείλει" να είναι μια κλειτορίδα ή αιδοίο ώστε να χαρακτηριστεί το μωρό "κορίτσι". Στην πραγματικότητα δηλαδή-και ιδιαίτερα στα ιντερσεξ βρέφη, όπου δεν ειναι πάντα τόσο εύκολο να αποφασίσει ο γιατρός τι "φύλο" ειναι αυτό που βλέπει μπροστά του, καταλαβαίνετε ίσως ότι γίνονται τραγικά λάθη κρίσης. Τραγικά για την αντίληψη της διαφορετικής εμφυλης ταυτότητας που μπορεί να βιώνει το μωρό μεγαλώνοντας, που καμιά σχέση με την πρόχειρη/βιαστική/υποκειμενική κρίση του γιατρού μπορεί να έχει. Για να μη κουράζω την διαβούλευση και για δική σας ενημέρωση (εύχομαι πως όσοι νομοθετούν τα γνωρίζουν ΗΔΗ όλα αυτά...Γιατί αλίμονο αν όχι)ρίξτε παρακαλώ μια ματιά στην παρακάτω επιστημονική έρευνα που εξέτασε αυτό ακριβώς: Πως αποδίδουν οι γιατροί το "φύλο" στα μωρά, από πριν από το 1990 (και δυστυχώς στη χώρα ας ακόμα έτσι κακοποιητικά και ως "τζόγος" συμβαίνει η αρχική δήλωση "φύλου"...) "Deliberating out loud on the judiciousness of making parents wait for assignment decisions, the endocrinologist asked rhetorically, "Why do we do all these tests if in the end we're going to make the decision simply on the basis of the appearance of the genitalia?" This question suggests that the principles underlying physicians' decisions are cultural rather than biological, based on parental reaction and the medical team's perception of the infant's societal adjustment prospects given the way her/his genitals look or could be made to look. Moreover, as long as the decision rests largely on the criterion of genital appearance, and male is defined as having a "good-sized" penis, more infants will be assigned to the female gender than to the male. " (...) "The lay conception of human anatomy and physiology assumes a concordance among clearly dimorphic gender markers-chromosomes, genitals, gonads, hormones-but physicians understand that concordance and dimorphism do not always exist. Their understanding of biology's complexity, however, does not inform their understanding of gender's complexity. In order for intersexuality to be managed differently than it currently is, physicians would have to take seriously Money's assertion that it is a misrepresentation of epistemology to consider any cell in the body authentically male or female.49 If authenticity for gender resides not in a discoverable nature but in someone's proclamation, then the power to proclaim something else is available. If physicians recognized that implicit in their management of gender is the notion that finally, and always, people construct gender as well as the social systems that are grounded in gender-based concepts, the possibilities for real societal transformations would be unlimited. Unfortunately, neither in their representations to the families of the intersexed nor among themselves do the physicians interviewed for this study draw such far-reaching implications from their work. Their "understanding" that particular genders are medically (re)constructed in these cases does not lead them to see that gender is always constructed. Accepting genital ambiguity as a natural option would require that physicians also acknowledge that genital ambiguity is "corrected" not because it is threatening to the infant's life but because it is threatening to the infant's culture. Rather than admit to their role in perpetuating gender, physicians "psychologize" the issue by talking about the parents' anxiety and humiliation in being confronted with an anomalous infant. The physicians talk as though they have no choice but to respond to the parents' pressure for a resolution of psychological discomfort, and as though they have no choice but to use medical technology in the service of a two-gender culture. Neither the psychology nor the technology is doubted, since both shield physicians from responsibility. Indeed, for the most part, neither physicians nor parents emerge from the experience of intersex case management with a greater understanding of the social construction of gender. Society's accountability, like their own, is masked by the assumption that gender is a given. Thus, cases of intersexuality, instead of illustrating nature's failure to ordain gender in these isolated "unfortunate" instances, illustrate physicians' and Western society's failure of imagination-the failure to imagine that each of these management decisions is a moment when a specific instance of biological "sex" is transformed into a culturally constructed gender." Division of Natural Sciences State University of New York College at Purchase ( The Medical Construction of Gender: Case Management of Intersexed Infants Suzanne J. Kessler, 1990) Ευτυχώς όμως, η ιατρική και οι κοινωνίες προχωρούν προς το φως της επιστημονικής γνώσης και των Ανθρωπίνων Δικαιωμάτων, γυρνώντας την πλάτη στον μεσαιωνικό σκοταδισμό και την κακοποίηση "μη-κανονικών" (παιδιών και ενηλίκων) και την "τιμωρία" τους με ετσιθελική "κανονικοποίηση": Milton Diamond’s Alternative Recommendations At the 1995 meeting in San Francisco (see footnote on front page) Milton Diamond, who is one of John Money’s main protagonists, presented evidence from case studies (including one of Money’s original patients) to indicate that there is a biologically-based bias at birth towards a particular gender identity and that many intersexed patients are unhappy as adults with their assigned gender following surgical intervention based on Money’s criteria. Diamond puts forward some new recommendations for management, as follows: Postulate 1: An individual is psychosexually biased at birth. Postulate 2: Psychosexual development is related to, but not dependent on the appearance of the genitals. Transexuals are obviously the sine qua non of individuals whose genitals do not decide what and who they are. Postulate 3: Discuss openly and fully any doubt as to gender identity and orientation when doubt arises. One of the most traumatic things for intersexed people and others is the hidden secrecy that is continually fostered on them – that you can’t allow any doubt because that will just prejudice the outcome. Postulate 4: Change of sex [should be allowed] whenever it is by informed choice. Recommendations for Sex Assignment: If a child is unambiguously male or female and has a traumatic (accidental) loss of the genitals, maintain the original sex assignment. [Much of Money’s thesis was based on a case where a boy lost his penis during minor surgery aged 7 months and was reared as a girl. Diamond presented evidence that later this individual was severely unhappy with this and wanted to revert to being a boy.] Do not reassign, regardless of age. Do surgery as and when appropriate with minimum loss of [sexual] sensitivity. If micropenis, raise as a boy. If with clitoral hypertrophy [enlargement], raise as a girl. Do no clitoral resection. In cases of pseudohermaphroditism or hermaphroditism [with ambiguous genitalia] do full evaluation before deciding on course of action; if the chromosomal composition is uncomplicated raise child in the genetic sex; do only that surgery required for physical health; no cosmetic surgery unless with full informed consent. And that means, since the kid’s a baby, don’t touch the kid! Provide in-depth and prolonged counselling to parents and child, with full disclosure of situation and possibilities; be truthful, provide support group affiliation if available; discuss sex reassignment and different sexual orientation as options. Allow and fully support sex re-assignment whenever it comes about by voluntary informed consent. http://www.aissg.org/articles/KESSLER.HTM (υπάρχει πραγματικά πλέον άπειρη έγκυρη επιστημονική βιβλιογραφία για όποιον ενδιαφέρεται)