Think of it this way, in relationships, business or otherwise, what's sub-communicated is just as important as what's explicitly communicated. Often it's more important. And what's communicated via most agile processes is that programmers are unimportant cogs with no business knowledge that can't be trusted to not stray from important tasks. I think that's ugly.
On my team, agile is a process used among peers to coordinate. No one is a cog. No one is checking up on anyone. We keep each other aware of what's going on because you have to in order to coordinate and collaborate. My manager is just one voice among many on the team. He isn't tasked with monitoring my work because I don't need a babysitter.
I'm sorry that you work somewhere where you feel someone's monitoring or checking up on you. Where I work that kind of situation is called a Performance Improvement Plan. If you're not in that situation and are a highly productive individual, then your culture is broken and you should look for a different job.
But you're wrong that agile and scrum are at fault. If you used any other process, you'd have the same problem.
Anecdotally, the last place I worked, I was on a small team that didn't really do agile. This was composed of some of the most competent, extremely smart people I've ever worked with that had decades of experience in the CAD field and had worked together for a very long time. We're talking people with like dual PhDs from very respected universities that have been working in the field for like 20 years; kept very sharp by going to C++ conferences, were very particular about testing and code reviews, and so on. I remember the corporate office tried to impose agile on these people, and after humoring it for about a month the whole thing was mercifully abandoned because everyone felt like it was ridiculous and it was slowing things down and causing a bunch of friction when some ridiculous consultant wanted us to do "planning poker". The only people that really wanted it in the first place were essentially remote project managers that were annoyed with these uppity engineers that thought they knew better (which frankly: they did; 20 years writing CAD software and you're going to learn a thing or two, whereas the project managers were pretty much just dabblers -- and when they couldn't convince people to do what they wanted by merits of their argument, they just wanted to install "process" to essentially strong-arm people into doing their will)
Part of the argument is that often the more junior members of them team know the surgeons are making mistakes, but there's no way for them to point this out without being bullied. Anectodes include the wrong leg being cut off while members of the medical team know it's the wrong one, but darent risk their career to mention it.
I'm not sure how this relates to your comment, except your line about other professions reminded me.
When you buy a grocery product you get a list of every ingredient and all the nutritional info.
It's nothing more than transparency and accountability. The one paying the money wants and deserves to know what it's for.
Also, software development is quite a bit different than other engineering disciplines, at least at the application development level.
If you can't answer "why are you working on this?" easily then you're not doing your job. And if you resent being asked the question, then you either are self employed or you forgot who pays your salary.