China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Genitals
Published in Lisa Jean Moore, Monica J. Casper, The Body, 2014
Lisa Jean Moore, Monica J. Casper
In New Zealand, the Human Rights Commission convened a series of roundtables to explore the human rights issues of intersexed individuals. In 2012, Europe’s first intersex human rights organization, OIIEurope, was founded as an “umbrella” organization, joining Organization Intersex International (OII) World and numerous other national/regional NGOs including OII United Kingdom and OII USA.
The Spatial Impacts of COVID-19 Restrictions on LGBTIQ Wellbeing, Visibility, and Belonging in Tasmania, Australia
Published in Journal of Homosexuality, 2021
Ruby Grant, Andrew Gorman-Murray, Briohny Briohny Walker
We received 231 complete survey responses. Participants ranged in age from 14 to 78 with an average age of 33.5. The majority of participants (32% n = 74) identified as cisgender women, with smaller proportions of cisgender men (20.3% n = 47), non-binary people (11.2% n = 26) and transgender men (5.6% n = 13) and women (6.9% n = 16). Of the 7.7% of the participants who preferred to describe their own gender, the most common responses were genderfluid, agender, and combinations such as transgender/non-binary. We garnered the most responses from bisexual people (29.8% n = 69), with other commonly selected sexualities including gay (26.8% n = 62), queer (25% n = 59), lesbian (22% n = 51), and pansexual (19.9% n = 46). Of the 6.4% of the participants who identified with sexualities not listed, the most common write-in responses were demisexual and panromantic. According to Intersex Human Rights Australia (2020), approximately 1.7% of the wider Australian population are intersex, although this is difficult to capture and define for a number of reasons. In line with these figures, 1.8% of the participants in our study described themselves as intersex.
The OHCHR background note on human rights violations against intersex people
Published in Sexual and Reproductive Health Matters, 2020
Human rights defenders, led by intersex human rights organisations, have called “for prohibition of unnecessary or deferrable medical interventions”, effective independent oversight, and the development of rights-affirming standards of care. Malta and Portugal have implemented legislation intended to end these practices; while these are important developments, their implementation is mixed or lacks evidence. Reflecting statements by Special Rapporteurs and Treaty Bodies, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights supports such efforts, calling for recognition of the rights of intersex children “to bodily integrity, autonomy and self-determination”, ensuring “that no-one is subjected to harmful practices or unnecessary medical treatment during infancy or childhood”. The Committee on the Rights of the Child and the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women have called on states to abolish “harmful practices”, tackle impunity and provide redress. Research, too, should meet human rights standards. Clinical research should not justify human rights violations. The report calls for the development of rights-based lifetime medical protocols, access to independent support, and oversight.
Ageing in obscurity: a critical literature review regarding older intersex people
Published in Sexual and Reproductive Health Matters, 2022
Breaches of intersex peoples’ human rights are well-documented.9,10 Violations include “ … forced and coercive medical interventions … [lack of] legal recognition, and access to justice” (p.13).11 Within most countries in the global North, irreversible and medically unnecessary procedures on children with variations of sex characteristics continue, with outcomes often reported as being poor and/or damaging.12,13. Bauer et al.14 argue that non-consensual, unnecessary, irreversible childhood intersex medical interventions form serious human rights abuses and are cultural practices comparable to female genital mutilation and torture. At an international level, a raft of human rights proclamations by UN Committees, the Council of Europe, and other bodies – driven by the work of intersex human rights defenders – increasingly argue against genital surgery on minors too young to give consent, and other ethically problematic procedures such as coercive sterilisation, experimental treatment, and traumatising medical examinations.11 However, there is a dearth of analysis concerning the sexual, reproductive, and other human rights of older intersex people specifically, and a lack of consideration of policy and practice issues. The sparse literature that exists indicates that levels of disability may be higher amongst older intersex people than amongst the general populace.5 Under the American Disabilities Act,15 “disability” refers to a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life functions, including, but not limited to, reproductive functions. Intersex people who have been rendered infertile or left with sexual difficulties through medical interventions should therefore qualify as disabled.