22,237
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
wikify Informed consent
If you like, please consider now if your hand signal would have been different if you have had this information before, that we were talking about the clitoral foreskin. And if that is the case, it may be a sign that gender stereotypes and cultural influence affect us in our assessments. In cultural areas different from your own it might have been different again. Because cultural influences are very different.
The supporters of the [[Worldwide Day of Genital Autonomy]] come from very different cultures. That's one interesting thing about that day. What unites them is that they all share the opinion of the Australia High Court. Any such intervention is a mutilation if it occurs without the person's [[informed consent]]. We oppose to the standardization of children. Private parts are private parts. That should be sure and remain that way. We stand for diversity. Diversity is beautiful. Thank you for your attention.
|Author=[[Victor Schiering]]
|Source=[[WWDOGA]] 2020
}}</ref>
}}
<br>
<youtube>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=145nV0nyvIQ&list=PLP3sy53e5kvFnGCYvkFmpJz9dGS0dzkcX&index=8</youtube>
|Text=Dear people interested in the the [[Worldwide Day of Genital Autonomy]]! Today I want to talk about language. Because language shows and reveals a lot. Especially the unconscious. I don't want to have to read terms like "a piece of [[skin]]" or "a shred of [[skin]]" anymore. It is inhumane to talk about parts of human genitals like this. Haven't we already been further?
Unfortunately there are also aggravations yet. At ''DIE ZEIT'' (German paper), the leading editor Patrik Schwarz wrote that a [[foreskin ]] removal, I quote, "does not affect the normal use of the penis". it has come this far. Now you are told from ''DIE ZEIT'' what the "normal use" of a penis shall be. Whose standards actually apply? Maybe this gentleman’s or those of the people supporting him? But how does my [[penis]] concern to these people? Or the penises of millions of other people? Something like that is reactionary thinking, to which we clearly must show the “red card”.
For me, the link to the "Demo for everyone" (anti-LGTTIBQ * activity) is clear, which also wants to tell us who we should have sex with and for what purpose. And that includes WHAT you have sex with. Is that supposed to be standardized now? The WWDOGA says: NO!
{{Citation
|Text=Dear people interested in the [[Worldwide Day of Genital Autonomy]]. My name is Victor Schiering. I am chairman of ''[[MOGiS e.V.]] - A voice for those affected'', an association of those affected by interventions in sexual self-determination in childhood and adolescence. The association was founded 10 years ago by victims of sexual child abuse.
Over time, the association has opened itself to those affected by other forms of interventions in the sexual self determination. For example genital surgery. That's how I came to this organisation.
Solidarity is a basic principle of our association. As people who have experienced different things and still get together, we have to agree on what we have in common, for example the possible lifelong consequences of what we experienced. There is no “hierarchy of suffering” here. So that one would say to each other: “But you have it much easier than I have”. Everyone has his own story. And no one is to judge the experiences of others. Only the person concerned may do this for himself.
Solidarity is also an important point in the [[Cologne circumcision court judgment| Cologne ruling]], which we are going to celebrate again this week. Something incredible happened eight years ago: A non-therapeutic [[foreskin ]] [[amputation]] on a boy was considered as a criminal offense. On what basis could this judgment be made of?
In 2000 the German Bundestag passed a law: the right of the child to non-violent upbringing. Whether you were used to doing something with children, whether you had always done it that way, the intention of the adults: from now on, none of this played a role in the basic classification. With this, our society has set itself a very high standard!
The judges of the Cologne Regional Court took this seriously. This is lawyers’ work: always to double check whether their judgments correspond with the high standards. On May 7, 2012, they lit up a previously blind spot. They made it clear that we cannot apply different standards to children based on their genitals in opposite to if they had a different genital.
Sometimes I remember those people protesting this act of solidarity of the [[Cologne circumcision court judgment| Cologne judgment]]. And by that I don't mean those people with cultural closeness to what was discussed there, but people who should actually judge completely independent. But then I think again and know, that this was back then, and now let's look forward. And there are more and more people who understand how important the impulse of the Cologne judgment was.
At an even higher level, [[Worldwide Day of Genital Autonomy ]] is an act of solidarity too: People of different cultures stand together in solidarity on one point in particular: As stated in the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child:
* no person, no child may be disadvantaged or preferred on the basis of their gender.
[[Category:Intactivist]]
[[Category:GREENS]]
[[Category:Germany]]
[[de:Victor Schiering]]