 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 term that describes the principle that all human beings, males and females, should not involuntarily be subjected to medically unnecessary genital modification and mutilation, including male or female circumcision, or sexual reassignment-surgery , which includes intersexual children. Genital integrity is usually neutral with regard to voluntary procedures performed on consenting adults.
Overview
This viewpoint is often considered the opposite of circumcision advocacy, which is critical of any efforts to oppose infant and child circumcisions. Some in the genital integrity movement merely oppose such circumcisions as harmful or unnecessary, whereas some want childhood circumcision practices abolished. The political and legal movement promoting the adoption of genital integrity as a fundamental human right is 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 and females, and that laws should also apply to involuntary sex reassignment.
Genital integrity implies a view that is generally anti-circumcision with regard to involuntary circumcisions, particularly procedures on infants and children. This viewpoint is generally not anti-circumcision with regard to elective adult procedures, nor does genital integrity imply bias against persons having any particular genital status.
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
Support for genital integrity declined after 1930. The publication of Douglas Gairdner's paper (http://www.cirp.org/library/general/gairdner/) in the British Medical Journal on December 24, 1949 marks the beginning of the resurgence of the genital integrity movement after a period of decline. John M. Foley, a West Virginia physician, published an article (http://www.cirp.org/news/1966.07_Foley/) that supported genital integrity 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 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 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 been a benefit to the genital integrity movement because it has facilitated communication with the public. The genital integrity movement began creating websites in the mid-1990s. During that time period, female genital integrity was protected in the U.S. by the 1996 Female Genital Mutilation Act. This period also saw the formation of genital integrity organizations in Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom.
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.
Activism in the United States
Genital integrity awareness week (GIAW) is the annual demonstration and march against infant circumcision. It is organized by individuals committed to genital integrity issues and takes place in Washington, DC. These individuals refer to themselves as intactivists, a term which is a blend or portmanteau word, created by combining portions of two words: intact activists. Intactivists are activists for human genitals remaining intact. The slogan "the foreskin is not a birth defect" has been prominent during some events.
External links
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 1996, the US congress passed the law prohibiting genital modification and mutilation of normally-developed female minors. 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.
See also
External links
Genital Integrity organisations
Criticism of Genital Integrity / anti-circumcision organisations
| 
