Final answer:
The statement focuses on objectification, particularly in a medical context, and reflects the experience of feeling treated as a usable body rather than a holistic individual. It underscores concerns about biomedicine and the medicalization of personal issues, common critiques from medical anthropologists.
Step-by-step explanation:
The statement "It was like being on an operating table in full glare... To him I am not merely a usable body." primarily highlights objectification. The comparison to being on an operating table suggests a sense of vulnerability and exposure, while the second part of the statement implies being seen not as a whole person but as an object to be used. The full glare of an operating table could metaphorically suggest a lack of privacy or autonomy, reinforcing the theme of objectification.
Medical anthropologists have critiqued biomedicine for marginalizing other forms of healing and knowledge, which may support a reading of the statement as a critique of how some forms of medical treatment can lead patients to feel objectified. Furthermore, the medicalization of women's issues, such as pregnancy and childbirth, has resulted in many women feeling that their bodies are being treated mechanically, rather than holistically. This connects to the statement by indicating how personal issues are converted into medical cases, sometimes at the cost of personal dignity and agency.
Therefore, the statement is not about medical treatment, abuse, or distrust, but rather reflects the process by which individuals, particularly women, can feel dehumanized by the medical system's approach to their bodies.