What is Intactivism?

Genital Integrity, the Anti-Circumcision Movement and Bioethics

2 Comments
Join the Conversation
Intactivist Cheryl Chase - Robin Mathias
Intactivist Cheryl Chase - Robin Mathias
Intactivists oppose routine infant circumcision (RIC), gender reassignment surgery for intersexed babies, and female genital mutilation.

The intactivism movement is a political movement centred around protecting the genital integrity of all people. By “genital integrity,” intactivists mean the right to have intact genitals and informed consent for any genital-altering procedure, with certain exceptions for cases of immediate medical need.

Intactivist Views on Intersexuality

Babies born intersexed – that is, with genitals that are physiologically somewhere between male and female – have in the past typically been assigned a gender and surgically altered to appear, and hopefully function, to match that gender. Unfortunately even a gender identity based on biological markers can prove to be wrong, and a number of intersexed children end up identifying with the “wrong” gender. The surgery they underwent as children may then prevent reassignment, as the healthy sexual tissue they possessed was removed. In other cases, intersexed adults are happy to leave their genitals intact, as they are functional and healthy, just non-standard.

Intactivists recommend leaving the genital tissue of intersexed babies alone, so that they later have the choice to have surgery or not.

Intactivism and Male Circumcision

Intactivists are perhaps most famous for their condemnation of routine infant circumcision (RIC). Intactivists often refer to the procedure as MGM, male genital mutilation, in order to highlight the parallels between male circumcision and female circumcision, known as FGM.

While intactivists do not object to circumcision in the case of clear medical need, such as gangrene of the foreskin, they argue that routine circumcision in the USA is socially motivated and not medically justified. Perhaps more importantly, they find the ethics of performing non-consenting surgery on a minor abhorrent. The pain of circumcision, risk of complications, sexual effects and psychological effects of circumcision are cited as reasons to leave babies' genitals intact.

Intactivism and Female Circumcision

The attitudes of intactivists to FGM are less well-publicised, simply because most people in the developed world share their views. In countries where FGM is legally and socially sanctioned, intactivists are again considered extreme or peculiar in their views. FGM shares ethical problems with MGM, and can have far more severe sexual and physical consequences.

Intactivism and Voluntary Genital Surgery

Intactivists do not object to consenting adults undergoing elective genital surgery, although they may question cultural or social influences on the decision (for instance, a man seeking circumcision because his girlfriend found intact penises “gross”). Labiaplasty, sex-change operations, circumcision and other forms of genital modification all come under this category as long as the surgery is entered into freely.

Intactivism and Episiotomies

An episiotomy is a cut given to a woman's genitals during childbirth to prevent tearing and/or provide extra “room” for the baby to emerge. Some intactivists believe that routine episiotomy can have adverse sexual consequences while providing no medical benefit. The issues surrounding intactvism and episiotomy differ slightly from issues surrounding RIC, as the procedure is performed on a (usually) consenting adult; intactivists therefore focus on informed consent and cases of abuse, such as a doctor cutting a non-consenting woman.

Intactivism and Castration

As castration is no longer practiced, intactivist views on the subject are less prominent than on more current topics. Most people today consider non-voluntary castration barbaric, whether they define themselves as intactivists or not.

Intactivist Organisations and Resources

Circumstitions is a New Zealand-based intactivist site. Remarkably complete, it offers numerous medical and polemic resources as well as advocacy wear and intactivism-related news updates. Other intactivist websites include Sexually Mutilated Child, Foreskin Restoration.net and NOCIRC.

Whose Body, Whose Rights? is a 56-minute intactivist video which won the Creative Excellence Award at the 1996 US International Film and Video Festival. Another famous intactivist resource is the Penn and Teller show's circumcision episode from 1995.

Sarah Tennant, Sarah Tennant

Sarah Tennant - Sarah Tennant is a onetime English major who lives in New Zealand with her husband and two small children. Her interests range from ...

rss
Advertisement
Leave a comment

NOTE: Because you are not a Suite101 member, your comment will be moderated before it is viewable.
Submit
What is 7+7?

Comments

May 4, 2010 6:37 PM
Guest :
good article, I am a huge intactivist and you described it without making us seem crazy as so many think. I personally believe Routine infant Circ is a violation of human rights, no medical organization in the world recommends it. It is painful, and causes long term damage, while maybe not quite as severe as female circ, it is still very harmful. I have a beautiful perfect intact son, my husband was circ'd as an infant. We both believe our son was born perfect and could not imagine altering him for nothing but cosmetic reasons.. I mean a penis is ugly, cut or not.. but it is normal if left the way it is made.
Jun 6, 2010 1:45 PM
Judith Lee :
The ones who are crazy are the ones pushing to have routine circs done! We're the ones trying to protect those that can't speak for themselves.
2 Comments
Advertisement
Advertisement