Genital integrity

Ribbon For Genital Integrity: The pink and blue ribbon symbol of the Genital Integrity movement (Image courtesy of NoHarmm.Org and used with permission).

Genital integrity is a name for the principle that all human beings, whether male, female or intersexed, have the right to bodily integrity. It opposes involuntary and medically unnecessary genital modification and mutilation, including male or female circumcision, or sexual reassignment-surgery on intersexual children. Genital integrity respects the right of consenting adults to give informed consent to procedures involving their own bodies.

Contents

1 Overview

2 History

3 Legislation

4 Activism in the United States

5 See also

6 External links

6.1 Genital Integrity organisations
6.2 Criticism of Genital Integrity / anti-circumcision organisations

Overview

This viewpoint clashes with that of circumcision advocacy. Some in the genital integrity movement merely oppose such circumcisions as harmful or unnecessary, while others want childhood circumcision to be abolished. The political and legal movement promoting the adoption of genital integrity as a fundamental human right is sometimes known as intactivism.

Current laws in many western world countries, and laws in several U.S. states, prohibit the genital modification and mutilation of female minors, with some exceptions based on medical need. Proponents of genital integrity assert that laws against genital modification and mutilation of minors should apply equally to males, females, and also to involuntary sex reassignment.

Thus, Genital integrity is anti-circumcision to involuntary circumcisions, particularly of minors. A minority of genital integrity supporters are pro-circumcision with regard to voluntary adult circumcisions. Genital integrity does not imply bias against persons having any particular genital status and accepts the right of adults to make informed choices about their bodies.

The Genital Integrity Ribbon was created by the "National Organization to Halt the Abuse and Routine Mutilation of Males" (NOHARMM). The pink ribbon symbolizes girls and blue symbolizes boys. The ribbon as a whole can symbolize intersexed people.

History

From the late Nineteenth Century to the Second World War, male circumcision caught on in many English-speaking countries. The publication of Douglas Gairdner's paper (http://www.cirp.org/library/general/gairdner/) in the British Medical Journal on December 24, 1949 marked the beginning of a decline in the popularity of circumcision in these societies. John M. Foley, a West Virginia physician, published an article (http://www.cirp.org/news/1966.07_Foley/) that attacked circumcision as a mutilation and a fraud in 1966.

The 1970-1971 period saw several important events. In Australia, IOW Leitch published a study of circumcision (http://www.cirp.org/library/general/leitch1/). The following year a resolution (http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/apa1971/) of the Australian Pædiatric Association that boys should not be routinely circumcised appeared. In America, E. Noel Preston published a review (http://www.cirp.org/library/general/preston/) of male neonatal circumcision. The following year the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) reported that neonatal circumcision has no valid medical indication (http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/aap/#a1971).

The Canadian Paediatric Society (CPS) issued a statement (http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/cps1975/) in 1975 that said, "there is no medical indication for circumcision during the neonatal period." In that same year, the ad hoc committee of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) published a statement (http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/aap/#a1975) affirming that, "there are no valid indications for circumcision in the newborn period." The AAP has since changed this stance, now reporting that there are "potential benefits and risks", and parents should make an informed decision.[1] (http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/103/3/686)

One prominent U.S. organization is NOCIRC (http://www.nocirc.org), founded by Marilyn Milos, R.N., in 1986. The organization's stated objective is to secure the birthright of male, female, and intersex children and babies to keep their sex organs intact.

In 1989, the AAP issued an update to its 1975 statement [2] (http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/aap1999/). The committee was chaired by Schoen. Citing "new research on circumcision status and urinary tract infection (UTI) and sexually transmitted disease (STD)/acquired immunodeficiency syndrome", the AAP stated that male circumcision of newborns "has potential health benefits and advantages as well as disadvantages and risks."

The Canadian Paediatric Society, the Australasian Association of Paediatric Surgeons, and the Australian College of Paediatrics issued new statements in early 1996. The British Medical Association issued a statement (http://www.cirp.org/library/statements/bma/), which recognised conscientious objector status, regarding the ethics and lawfulness of the circumcision of male children in 1996. These statements are sometimes interpreted as not supporting the practice of circumcision, and as supportive of genital integrity. The Canadian statement (http://www.cps.ca/english/statements/FN/fn96-01.htm) accepted the position of Professor Polandposition (http://www.cirp.org/library/general/poland/). Fewer newborn boys are circumcised in Canada since the publication of the CPS statement.[3] (http://www.courtchallenge.com/refs/yr99p-e.html)

The advent of the Internet and the World Wide Web has helped the genital integrity movement spread its message. Those opposed to circumcision began creating websites in the mid-1990s, and this process has continued. This period also saw the formation of genital integrity organizations in Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and South Africa.

Although no membership figures are available, genital integrity organizations entered the 21st century and report continued growth in strength. The impact worldwide is unknown. In some countries, the number of children who have been circumcised has decreased, while in others the number has grown. No reliable data are available to indicate the global trends.

A number of genital integrity organizations exist around the world, and protest rallies have been held in the USA and other areas. Eight international symposia on Genital Integrity have been held around the world. The 8th was held in Padua, Italy, in September, 2004.

Legislation

In 1996, the US congress passed the Female Genital Mutilation Act which prohibited genital modification and mutilation of normally-developed female minors. Similar laws have been passed in Britain and Australia. In Africa, where female genital mutilation is most common, there is a widespread movement to abolish the practice.

Activism in the United States

Genital Integrity Awareness Week (GIAW) includes an annual demonstration and march in Washington, DC against infant circumcision. The organizers refer to themselves as "intactivists", a blend or portmanteau word, created by combining the words "intact" and "activists". Intactivists are activists for human genitals remaining intact. The slogans "Do Not Snip The Tip!", "The Foreskin Is Not A Birth-Defect!", "Once She Goes Intact, She Will Never Go Back!", and the generic slogan to people fighting child-abuse "No Excuse For Child-Abuse!" are prominent during some events.

The National Organization of Circumcision Resource Information Centers (NOCIRC), the International Coalition for Genital Integrity, and Stop Infant Circumcision Society launched the First Genital Integrity Awareness Week in Washington, D.C. during the first week of April, Child Abuse Prevention Month. The 12th Annual Demonstration/March Against Infant Circumcision is during March 29 - April 3, 2005. In 2004, the organization MGMbill.org [4] (http://www.mgmbill.org) sent a proposed bill to the US Congress to extend the prohibition on genital modification and mutilation of minors to include male and intersex children. The proposed bill has not been endorsed by any member of Congress.

External links

Intactivist resources (http://circumstitions.com/links.html)
History of Circumcision (http://www.historyofcircumcision.net/)
Historical Medical Quotes on Circumcision (http://www.circumcisionquotes.com/)
Catholic Encyclopedia article on circumcision (http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03777a.htm)
Medical Fraud and the Criminal Assault of Boys (http://med-fraud.org/index.html)