Intersex Human Rights Australia, Sydney, Australia.
Sydney Health Ethics, University of Sydney, Level 1, Medical Foundation Building, K25, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia.
J Bioeth Inq. 2018 Dec;15(4):487-495. doi: 10.1007/s11673-018-9855-8. Epub 2018 May 7.
Once described as hermaphrodites and later as intersex people, individuals born with intersex variations are routinely subject to so-called "normalizing" medical interventions, often in childhood. Opposition to such practices has been met by attempts to discredit critics and reasserted clinical authority over the bodies of women and men with "disorders of sex development." However, claims of clinical consensus have been selectively constructed and applied and lack evidence. Limited transparency and lack of access to justice have helped to perpetuate forced interventions. At the same time, associated with the diffusion of distinct concepts of sex and gender, intersex has been constructed as a third legal sex classification, accompanied by pious hopes and unwarranted expectations of consequences. The existence of intersex has also been instrumentalized for the benefit of other, intersecting, populations. The creation of gender categories associated with intersex bodies has created profound risks: a paradoxically narrowed and normative gender binary, maintenance of medical authority over the bodies of "disordered" females and males, and claims that transgressions of social roles ascribed to a third gender are deceptive. Claims that medicalization saves intersex people from "othering," or that legal othering saves intersex people from medicalization, are contradictory and empty rhetoric. In practice, intersex bodies remain "normalized" or eliminated by medicine, while society and the law "others" intersex identities. That is, medicine constructs intersex bodies as either female or male, while law and society construct intersex identities as neither female nor male. Australian attempts at reforms to recognize the rights of intersex people have either failed to adequately comprehend the population affected or lacked implementation. An emerging human rights consensus demands an end to social prejudice, stigma, and forced medical interventions, focusing on the right to bodily integrity and principles of self-determination.
曾经被描述为雌雄同体,后来又被描述为中间性别者,那些天生具有中间性别特征的个体通常会接受所谓的“正常化”医疗干预,这种干预通常发生在儿童时期。反对这些做法的人遭到了诋毁,临床权威重新确立,对患有“性发育障碍”的女性和男性的身体进行了干预。然而,所谓的临床共识是有选择性地构建和应用的,缺乏证据。透明度有限以及缺乏诉诸司法的机会,助长了强制干预的持续存在。与此同时,与性别和性别的不同概念的传播相关联,中间性别被构建为第三个性别分类,伴随着虔诚的希望和毫无根据的期望。中间性的存在也被用来为其他交叉群体谋取利益。与中间性别身体相关联的性别分类的创造带来了深远的风险:性别二元性变得狭隘而规范,对“紊乱”的女性和男性身体的医学权威得以维持,以及对违反归因于第三性别的社会角色的主张被视为欺骗。将医学化说成是拯救中间性者免于“他者化”,或者将法律上的他者化说成是拯救中间性者免于医学化的主张是矛盾和空洞的言论。实际上,中间性别者的身体仍然被医学“正常化”或消除,而社会和法律则将中间性者的身份“他者化”。也就是说,医学将中间性别者的身体构建为女性或男性,而法律和社会将中间性别者的身份构建为既非女性也非男性。澳大利亚试图改革以承认中间性别者的权利,但要么未能充分理解受影响的人群,要么缺乏执行。一种新兴的人权共识要求消除社会偏见、耻辱和强制医疗干预,关注身体完整性权利和自决原则。