I was intending to write a very different piece for my Substack today but my first ever “sensitive content warning” on Twitter has dictated otherwise. Here’s the story.
I checked Twitter this morning and, among other things, saw that Adryana Cortez of Red Pilled America had tweeted about the pain and complications suffered by people who get “gender-affirming” trans surgery. This prompted a memory that led me to reply.
A few years ago I helped facilitate a Model U.N. conference in which high school sophomores, both boys and girls, tackled various global issues of concern. The group I advised and worked with closely was assigned “Women’s Rights” as one of their broad topics. The students themselves chose female genital mutilation (FGM) as one of the specific issues they would research and endeavor to draft resolutions to address.
I was concerned that engaging with the FGM issue might lead to some sophomoric behavior and commentary at some point, but the students conducted themselves in an absolutely professional and exemplary manner. And along the way I learned a few things about the misogynistic barbarity of FGM.
And so I replied to Cortez’s tweet: “I remember when genital mutilation was considered a barbaric practice in unenlightened corners of the world. Now America is in the mutilation game. We need to get back to being a ‘shining city upon a hill.’”
For those who have not been following this topic, hospitals including Boston Children’s Hospital and Vanderbilt University Medical Center were a focus of intense criticism last year when it was revealed they were performing “gender affirming surgeries” on minor children.
To reinforce my point that mutilating sexual organs was recently considered barbaric, I posted a link to a World Health Organization fact sheet on FGM. Among other things, the WHO stated:
FGM is a violation of the human rights of girls and women.
There is evidence suggesting greater involvement of health care providers in the practice. This is known as medicalization.
The World Health Organization (WHO) is opposed to all types of FGM, and is opposed to health care providers performing FGM.
After posting my reply, I checked out some other stuff on Twitter, made a pot of coffee and went about my day.
But a short time later I received a notification from Twitter informing me that one of my tweets had been flagged with a sensitive content warning. Huh? My reply was visible but the WHO fact sheet I linked was now hidden behind a sensitive content warning. Really?
Perhaps the innocent explanation is that genital mutilation is an adult topic and it makes sense to hide discussion of such subjects from a hypothetical youngster who might come across it on Twitter. But, first of all, how many children are using Twitter? And, secondly, my reply itself uses the term “genital mutilation” so why was only the WHO fact sheet hidden behind a warning and not my reply? The fact sheet was more detailed but there were no graphic images or illustrations.
My sense is that genital mutilation is an Achilles heel for the radical left. There is no reconciling the fact that the World Health Organization, an institution adored by progressives, has been staunchly against genital mutilation surgery and has been warning about its inhumanity and dire consequences. These warnings hold true regardless of whether the mutilation is done in the name of custom, religion or “gender affirmation.”
There are some pointed questions that need to be asked about the whole concept of gender affirming medical care and surgery.
Is it really medical care? Well the Oxford dictionary defines medicine as “the science or practice of the diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of disease.” It does not appear to be medicine unless being born a man and thinking you’re a woman is a disease.
Is it really surgery? Back to the Oxford dictionary. Surgery is “the branch of medical practice that treats injuries, diseases, and deformities by the physical removal, repair, or readjustment of organs and tissues, often involving cutting into the body.” It does not appear to be surgery either, unless being born a woman and thinking you’re a man turns your breasts into a “deformity.”
Let’s call it what it is. It is mutilation of a healthy human body.
Many years ago I worked at a bioethics institute that deliberated about difficult ethical issues in medicine and biomedical technology. I recall thoughtful conversations in which ethicists discussed how surgery was fraught with moral hazards because, as Hippocrates commands the doctor, “First, do no harm.” And, yet, the very act of surgery involves cutting the body and doing violence to it — albeit for a good cause. The ethicists articulated serious concern when it came to “harming” the human body for enhancement rather than curative purposes.
These ethical concerns are magnified, of course, when there is a question of consent. Does the person really understand the risks and agree to undertake them? Is it a child who is not fully capable of understanding the risks and implications of the procedure?
I’m with the World Health Organization on this one. “Gender-affirming surgery” is a euphemism for mutilation. And the medicalization of this practice is a particularly horrifying development, especially coming from so-called First World nations that were until recently wagging a condescending finger at “backward” cultures engaged in the practice.
Stop the medicalization of mutilation!
Gender reassignment surgery of a child is not only a form of mutilation but is gross medical malpractice. My hope is that Chloe Cole, who was diagnosed with gender dysphoria and started puberty blockers and testosterone at 13 and had a double mastectomy at 15, wins an astronomical amount of money in her law suit against Kaiser Permanente. She started detransitioning just 1 year later. These institutions are preying on vulnerable children who need therapy and are taking advantage of their families who are led to believe that if they don’t let their child have this surgery, they will commit suicide.
If a fully mature adult person decides that this is what they want to do they should be able to but they should first be required to attend therapy sessions to make sure there isn’t some other underlying issue affecting the decision.
To place children on puberty blockers and cross-sex hormone treatment for the purpose of gender reassignment should be a crime.