Document Abstract
Published:
2009
From perversion to pathology: discourses and practices of gender policing in the Islamic Republic of Iran
Progressive transsexual laws in Iran lead to greater oppression
The Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) punishes homosexuality with death but acknowledges transsexuality, and partially funds sex change operations. This article examines how this seemingly progressive stance on transsexuality is connected to Iran's larger, and the authors argue, oppressive apparatus of gender.
In Iran transsexual individuals have been marked as deviant and criminal by Iranian official and civilian populations. However recently there has been the emergence of a new discourse which has brought transsexuals out of the criminal realm of perversion and into the medical realm of pathology. The article looks at the fusion of religious and medical literature that permitted this new discourse to emerge, and discusses the possible ethical and human rights implications. Under this new discourse, gender atypical individuals can regain their gender “health”, and therefore, personhood, provided they surgically reassign their bodies and embrace behaviourally appropriated identities.
It is suggested that this discourse has been empowering for those transsexuals who genuinely desire surgical transformation. The suggestion of transsexuality as a medical disorder has provided these transsexuals, who were previously ostracised, with an thin sense of legal protection. However, the paper concludes, that the discourse is disturbing in that it systematically regards homosexuality and more generally any sexual or gender non-conformity as unintelligible, and punishable by law. The only persons exempt are those willing to transform their “wrong bodies”.
In Iran transsexual individuals have been marked as deviant and criminal by Iranian official and civilian populations. However recently there has been the emergence of a new discourse which has brought transsexuals out of the criminal realm of perversion and into the medical realm of pathology. The article looks at the fusion of religious and medical literature that permitted this new discourse to emerge, and discusses the possible ethical and human rights implications. Under this new discourse, gender atypical individuals can regain their gender “health”, and therefore, personhood, provided they surgically reassign their bodies and embrace behaviourally appropriated identities.
It is suggested that this discourse has been empowering for those transsexuals who genuinely desire surgical transformation. The suggestion of transsexuality as a medical disorder has provided these transsexuals, who were previously ostracised, with an thin sense of legal protection. However, the paper concludes, that the discourse is disturbing in that it systematically regards homosexuality and more generally any sexual or gender non-conformity as unintelligible, and punishable by law. The only persons exempt are those willing to transform their “wrong bodies”.
