Autonomy, Bodily Integrity and Male Genital Cutting

Abstract

Human rights discourse related to sexuality has increased dramatically since the mid-1990s. The 1994 International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in Cairo, followed by the Fourth World Conference on Women (FWCW) held in Beijing in 1995 were arguably major steps forward in terms of women’s rights and the rights of all regardless of age, sex and gender, health-related conditions, and Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity and Expression and Sex Characteristics (SOGIESC). FGM/C receives significant attention at a global level, and the eradication campaigns graphically highlight the serious negative impact this has on girls and women as a global human rights and reproductive health issue. At the same time, medically unnecessary male genital cutting without informed consent has been relatively unchallenged if ever discussed by major bodies advocating for sexual and reproductive health and rights (SRHR) as human rights. As with the push against sex-normalizing medical procedures employed on intersex infants and children, there are strong, reasoned arguments against medically unnecessary genital cutting without free, full and informed consent that applies to all, regardless of gender and sex characteristics. The ripples of movements of advocacy including “intactivism” and respect for bodily/sexual boundaries and privacy are slowly but surely progressing. Despite all the complexities and challenges, double standards in the promotion of SRHR must be addressed. “Leave no one behind” is the central promise of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and asserts the rights of all infants and young children to grow to an age where they can make their own informed decisions about their bodies.