Mutilation, deception, and sex changes

Journal of Medical Ethics 13 (2):86-91 (1987)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The paper considers and rejects two arguments against the performance of sexual reassignment surgery. First, it is argued that the operation is not mutilating, but functionally enabling. Second, it is argued that the operation is not objectionably deceptive, since, if there is such a thing as our 'real sex', we do not know (ordinarily) what it is. The paper is also intended to shed light on what our sexual identity is and on what matters in sexual relations.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-09-13

Downloads
124 (#371,477)

6 months
19 (#572,430)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Michael Lavin
Stanford University (PhD)

Citations of this work

Race and Bioethics.Alexis Shotwell & Ami Harbin - 2015 - In John D. Arras, Rebecca Kukla & Elizabeth Fenton, Routledge Companion to Bioethics. New York, NY: Routledge. pp. 543-556.
Call for Papers.Talia Mae Bettcher & Ann Garry - 2007 - Hypatia 22 (3):242-243.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references