Female Circumcision/Mutilation: a question between Cultural Relativism vs Human Rights.

While cases of female genital mutilation sparks public outcries, it is interesting to note that male circumcision does not. Both practices of female and male crcumcision  have been present in society since ancient times. Today in it is still present throughout the world with some forms being readily accepted into educated western societies. For example in England  Male circumcision arose in the early 19th Century as a “cure” for masturbation, it was used mor as a “health measure”. However by the 1940’s the British upper classes had virtually discontinued the practice of male circumcision. It would be interesting to see if there is a common denominator between the practice of clitoridectomy and infibulation amongst women in Africa and Male Circumcision in North America. Reasons and justifications have been out forward by people practicing these customs, and the  range from:

Clitoridectomy and infibulation in Africa

• “She loses only a little piece of the clitoris, just the part that protrudes. The girl does not miss it. She can still feel afetr all. There is hardly any pain. Women’s pain thresholds are so much higher than men’s
• “ The parts that are cut away are disgusting and hideous to look at. It is done for the beauty of the suture”
• “ Female circumcision prtoects the health of a woman. Infibulation prevents the uterus from falling out. It keeps her smelling so weet that her husband will be pleased. If it is not done, she will stink and get worms in her vagina.
• “All women in the world are circumcised. It is something that must be done. If there is pain, then that is part of a woman’s lot in life”.

Male Circumcision in America

• “It’s only a little piece of skin. The baby does not feel any pain because his nervous system is not developed yet.”
• “An uncircumcised penis is a real turn off. Its disgusting. It looks like a penis of an animal.
• “An uncircumcised penis causes urinayr infections and penile cancer. It generates smegma and smegma stinks. A cricumcised penis is nore hygenic and oral sex with an uncircuncised penis is disgusting to women.”
• “Men in all the ‘civilised’ world are circumcised.”

But a question to ask one self at this point is what are the effects of male circumcision? Do they also suffer fom the same risks as women do? Male circumcision is a common practice in the West. Both procedures are cultural tradition, that have no real benefits. The are also major differences between the two types of circumcisions, the mosy important difference is that female genital mutilation impedes the natural functioning of the female body in ways that male circumcision does not. A 35year old Sudanese woman who was in favour of female circumcision said, “ Yes, I have suffered from chronic pelvic infections and terrible pain for years now. You say that all of this is the result of my circumcision? But I was circumcised over 30 years ago! How can something  that was done for me when I was four years old have anything to do with my health now?. A similar statement was made by a 35 year old American male who had undergone male circumcision and due to this suffered medical problems. But still did not realte his problems to the circumcision he had undergone 35 years ago. “ I don’t seem to have much sensation in my penis anymore, and it is becoming more and more difficult for me to reach orgasm. You say that this is th result of my circumcision? That doesn’t make any sense. …”

However after looking at these statements, there is no doubt that in the case of female genital mutilation, there is no evidence to “suggest that it might be medically beneficial in anyway”. Instead it “causes far more problems than actual benefits”. 

Why has this procedure been kept? Why does it still exist? I ask myself these questions. Yes I understand tht the procedure is culturally, religously embedded in theses societies but surely culture and tradition should be dynamic and change gradually with time. The move to awareness???? I still remember the day my older brother underwent circumcision. My parents wanted it performed by trained medical doctors, so that it was done properly. I guess I was still very young to undestand what my brother had gone through, all I could remember is that he was in pain the morning after his operation, and my parents brought him sweets and fruit to make him feel better. I also think that I was more concerned with all the attention he was receiving at that point and was not really concerned about the amount of pain he was in. Though it has just dawned upon me, what if I had to undergo the circumcision operation, knowing my cultural and religious background. Would I be still sitting here feeling utter remorse for all the women who have suffered terribly from this practice?.

There seems to be a huge amount of pressure placed on social acceptance. The perception of purity and cleanliness of the woman is a very desirable factor encompassed around the whole matrimonial proceedings.

In all cultures there is the stigma of having to live up to what society as a whole percieves to be right and in a way perfect. As Simone de Beauvoir once said, “One is not born a woman; one learns to be one.” If there is something right in this statement, “it follows that women itself is a term process, a becoming, a constricting that cannot rightfully be said to originate or to end. As an ongoing discursive practice, it is open to intervention and resignification”  many of us realise that perfection is unattainable, but we still try to at least live up to it. Woman have danced to the tune and are victmins to the merciless world of perfection. Fashion, beauty, breats augmentation and plastic surgery are all ways that methods in which women from all walks of life undergo to become more desirable to the male figure . Realistically they may not all hold the same risks as female genital mutilation, but the same justifiaction to undergo the procedure can been seen….. Among practicing groups, almost everyone in the community is circumcised- those women who are not circumcised are traditionally prostitutes or members of outcast or formerly “slave groups”. Inter marriage with a non circumcised woman or man is usually not allowed or extremely rare. When it does occure, the non circumcised future spouse has to become circumcised. Even during conflict, on way which was used in identifying the other is whether or not he or she is circumcised.

Female circumcision unlike male circumcision is often thought to purify and protect the next generation from dangerous outside  influences, to bind all youth to their peers or age set. As part of intensive group socialization it also firmly establishes age set relationships, generational respect and authority patterns.

Justifications for female and male circumcision is that it is necessary to make a child a real female /male. But then the question that comes to mind at this point is.. how??? If the operation is performed on a three year old girl, how is this transition meant to make her a woman at such a young age. After reading a few more articles, I became more aware of the reasons, usually the young circumcised girls would be married off at such a young age to her spouses family to ensure her chasity and purity as a wife and to make sure that she has not slept around and is still a virgin. At marriage, the authority of the bride is transferred to the spouse’ patriline. The respec and economic value of the bride to her patriline and her spouse is dependent upon her unquestioned virginity as demonstrated by the intact corcumcision. Ensuring marriage in a society in which men have been taught that only circumcised women make good wives. Female Circumcision is percieved to control female sexuality and ensure marital chastity. At or before marriage , brides to be are inspected by their prospective marked female in-laws an by their mothers, aunts and other older female relatives.

Tradition, custom and religion all contribute to the survival of FGM and it is mostly women who carry out and defend the practice. The families that authorize the procedure believe for the reasons outlined that they are acting in the best interest of future of their daughters. If the family uses the female circumcision to preserve their daughter’s virginity  this carries a great deal of financial value and respect in FGM practinsing communities. Families try and ensure the greatest financial security for their daughters as well as their own dignity in the eyes of the community. In addition, FGM provides those who perform the procedure with a cource of wealth and social staus.

 

There is the explanation that men are are hard and women are soft and that the soft part of a man’s genitals e.g. the prepuse or foreskin and the hard part of the female genitalia e.g. the clitoris must be removed in order to make the man truly all hard and the female all soft. Evidently thissounds very much like an all wives tale and has been passed doen form generation to genration, holding no real medical evidence to back it up.

Female circumcision also has the function of implanting fear, pain and being ashamed and cast out if not a virgin or chaste wife. The actual day of circumcision is a day of accomplishment and recognition as a full adult member of society. Some have compared it in the Western context as a combination of “first communion, confirmation and sweet sixteen occasions”. The young girls more recognition including attention, special beautiful clothing, special food and jewellery after the coming of the ritua, than at any other time in her life except on the marriage day. The parents find it much easier to  find a mate for theier circumcised daughters- Not many men want to marry a woman who has not be circumcised, because circumcison is believed to inhibit a girl’s sexual desires, men believe women who have undergone FGM, will be faithful as wives and that children they bear will be undisputably the husband’s.

What is it about a woman’s sexuality that is such a threat to a man? What happened to women or men? In a Western perspective, “The 1970’s were great years: Mick Jagger and the Rolling Stones, flared tousers, lowfat margarine, Charlie’s Angels and a wine that went by the name of Bull’s Blood. A decade when women were women and men were men. Back then was the time we had ever been sure in our minds that we knew what se and gender were- like all good things, this uncertainty has come to an end.”   

Some literiast s believe that a women’s place in society and how they are seen in the eyes of men, has been outlined from the biblical times, as Butcher states, “ Then one day the Devil appeared to Eve in the form of a serpent, and he temtpted her to eat an apple off a tree. Eve, in turn, tempted Adam to eat the apple, and this is why woman is of the Devil. She  was that way from the very beginning, and she has been trying to tempt and dominate man ever since.” As for man, he “is of God because he did not sin and he reamined pure. He only sinned after he was tempted by woman to sin. He was and still is close to God than is women”. This  explanation aims to try and justify the religious element in the gender dichotomy.

But is the practice of female genital mutilation a practice based upon culture or religion?. FGM has been closely identified with Islam, but neither of the two main sources of muslim law, the Koran and the Sunnah, mention the practice. Many scholars claim, that the relationship between Islam and FGM is the the idea of purity. But there is considerable debate as to whether it is or not enjoined by the Koran. The Prophet Mohammed is reported as saying, “Circumcision is an ordinance in men and an embellishment in women.” Female circumcision was also practiced in the West, promoted in the United States and Britain during the 10th and early 20th centuries as a custom for lesbian practices or suspected inclinations, masturbation, hysteria etc. This highlights an interesting issue about the cultural relativity of this practice.

Feminists and human rights activists have created resentment by not respecting the social and religious implications of FGM. One Somali Woman states, “if Somali women change, it will be change done by us, among us. When they order us to Stop, tell us what to do, it is offensive to the black person, muslim who believes in the circumcision. To advise is good, but notr order” The practice has been actively addressed  by the world at large. Most conclusions on this topic are directed towards total eradication with gradual effect. Theses discussions seem to redefine the nature of  African womanhood, objectify an african woman as ignorant and powerless. Assessing cultural values of people through different cultural frameworks, has often led to distortions, misinterpretations and misrepresentations. The view of an outsider may even result in the further entrenchment of the prcatice. International effortsto end genital mutilation began in 1979, when the World Health Organization published statements against it. Many Human Rights organistations view FGM as a violation of basic Human integrity and rights and call for its eradication. Three United Nations agencies announced its efforts to end FGM, these being World Health organistation, United Nations Population Fund and United Nations Children’s fund. All these agencies asked for world support for their goal, calling FGM as “unsafe and unjustifiable traditional practice”. Amnesty International has also come out against FGM, saying “the practice is a form of violence and a violation of bodily intergrity”. Although there is all this resentment to the practice, there has been no benfitial dialogue between the two sides. Not until the 1980’s when a United Nations special Working Group on Traditional Practices, adopted the most successful and maybe the only realistic approach to the issue. They succeeded because of the manner in which they arrived at the conclusion that “ the practice of female circumcision had lost its cultural relevance in the modern age. Perhaps this breakthrough method  was effectice because it was sensitive to the tension between universalism and cultural relativism, and steered away from that conflict. It did not even define female circumcision as a “human Rights violation or place the practice in the context of gender oppression” which many of the other International bodies had stressed upon. Perhaps this approach inclusive of cultural sensitivity but declining to confront cultural relativism directly, can succeed in eradicating female circumcision. 

In Africa the rational for genital surgery are as diverse as the continent itself. People living in Africa were the procedure os practiced state that it is done for the noblest of reasons, the best intentions and in good faith. One writer states that the fact that it can be performed in public in the countries that permit it, demonstrates that the practitioners do not consider it to be “dirty laundry” or a “dark hidden secret”. The argument that the practice is a tool  of gender oppression has been counter attacked from an african perspective, stating that the process of circumcision applies to both male and women, thus the framework that differentiates it according to gender is not a based argument.

 Furthermore if the Feminst argument is taken in to consideration, there are many other aspects of the feminsts moivement, that need to be revealed. Rosemary Hunter speaks about the English speaking first world, mainstream liberal, radical, cultural and socialist feminisms who have argued that there are certain experiences shared by all women, whther due to biology or social economic structures, or a combination of thses that fundamentally differntiaties women from men.

There are many feminists who believe or have theories that women do not share certain essential experiences “as women”. We are all inextricably different, we come from different cultural backgrounds with different upbringings. This inevitably outlines our path in life and how we percieve the world to be. Women’s experiences in the world today are based a lot upon their  race, ethnicity, class,colonisation, religion and or sexual orientation as well as gender. Yet however these differences exist, mainstrean feminists have tended to ignore these issues. Their view of equality and feminisn has tended to assume the characteristics of white, first world heterosexual and frequently middle class women- and this obviously excludes the experiences of “other women” Rosemary Hunter Article…. 

This is a view of one form of domination. So while the african women has to withstand the brutal act of female circumcision, she also has the pressure of the demand of   having to disegregate  her experiences in life in order to identify with mainstream feminism.

It is already hard enough for a black woman to enforce her equal rights in her home territory, and it seems to be doubly unfortunate for that women to be Black or from some other ethnic origin other than white. Feminist theory is incomplete when it ignores race and ethnicity, and fails to take into account the specific and particular concerns of Black women from diverse cultural backgrounds. Western feminists studies persistently portary third world women as cultural victems of barbarous third world men: tradition and religion are some of the things that are given a “priviledged explanatory power”- they assume there is an extreme obsession with matters such as the veil, seclusion and clitoridectomy, and little recognition is ever given to these women’s lives.

However, it is all fine critcising and discussing the view that western feminist view african women , but then again how does law view the concerns of african women? An African American feminist, Kimberle Crenshaw stated that the law fails to account for the intersectional experience of black women.

She goes further to say that its “implicit norm for race discrimination is discrimination against Black men, and its implicit norm for sex discrimination is discrimination against white women” . Thus leaving the Black woman , completely in the dark.

 

Why have African Men supported the custom of female circumcision in there countries? Man has always been an insecure creature simply because he can never be sure if he is the real father of his children On the other hand a woman with usually know if she is the real mother of her children. So could it be, that in order for the man to be assured that he is the father of his children, he oppressed woman? “Restricted her movements, put her inside the house, made her wear a veil and covered her face so that no other man would see her”. Then just to be absolutely certain that she will never be unfaithful to him, “he circumcised her by cutting her clitoris and Labia Minora to kill her sexual desires, declairing her a symbol of beauty and purity.” A large majority of African and Arab men do not have have any regrd for a woman’s sexual desires and the proof is that they do not indulge in any foreplay before the intercourse.  

Western Countries have increasingy been forced to address the presence of female circumcisiom within their borders. Governments have come up with all sorts of strategies of trying to eradicate the practice, some of theses methods come through adopting legislation criminalizing female circumcision. This was the strategy taken by Great Britain and Australia. States such as France and Canada, “prosecute offenders under existing criminal legislation as well as try and grant different degrees of asylum to women who fear returning to their countries of origin because of the threat that exists of circumcision either to them or their daughters.

In Britain, the Female Circumcision Act of 1985 (“Circumcision Act”) made it a crime for any person to “excise, infibulate or otherwise mutilate the whole or any part of the Labia Majora or Labia minora or clitoris of another person. There are also certain provisions in the act that allow the administering of the practice when it seems to be necessary for the physical health of the woman. Examples given here were in the removal of cancerous growths in the genital area, and also which it is more confusing, is llowing the procedure when it is necessary “for the mental health of the person on whom it is performed.” Critics of the Circumcision Act focus on three points, that it discriminatory, unnecessary, and of little practical value. With reference to allowing circumcision to be performed due to mental health need some laboration in this area of the law……

Under the current English Legal system, some scholars have argued that the Female Circumcision is already an illegal practice under the Offences Against the Person Act of 1861. The Act, “criminalizes any unlawful and malicious wounding or grievous bodily harm.” The debate went further to discuss whether consent could act as a valid defense for minors choosing to be circumcised. After various discussions, and debates, it was decided that a “minor’s consent, or that of her parents, could not by law provide a valid defence.”  However even if female circumcision was covered by English law, the existing law is awkward and difficult, the greatest benefit of the Circumcision Act arguably derives from its educational value since the Act has really had no real impact, if it is being meaured on the prosecutions based on its violation. In a way the Act has brought the issue to the attention of the British Public, an important first step in the process of public education. Eduaction can be seen as th only practical way to eradicate female circumcision, and the Act’s greatest value may lie in its contribution to a “heightened social awareness concerning the practice.”

Changes and eradication procedures are also undergoing in Africa, but it seems to be more of a battle at trying to bring awareness that the pratice is extremely harmful to the young African woman. At a conference on zero tolrane of female genital mutilation held in Addis Ababa ( Ethiopia) in February 2002, one speaker defined FGM as the “scourge of Africa.” However there have been active changes taken place indifferent countries in Africa. In Eriteria, over half of the population is against the custom, and slightly less than half of the women registering disapproval.  In Ethiopia  the Ministry of Education has used radio broadcasts to warn about the dangers of FGM. These actions alonmg with governments bans on FGM, have had “encouraging” results. Eradication programmes have also been administered in Sudan, were the locals are drectly involved in the programmes. Amna Abdel Rahman has been working with has been working through organisations such as the Sudan National Committee on Harmful practices, to eradicate FGM. The fact that the programmes are administered by citizens of these countries, as well being part of the United Nations, is taking in to consideration  justifiable concerns about Western interference and cultural imperialism.

 As has been mentioned before, not all African governments have welcomed the efforts to eradicate FGM. In the West Africa Nation of Gambia there haas been certain movements that prohibit any programmes that oppose FGM from being broadcast on state owned radio and television stations and some government members have gone as far as to promote FGM on the television and radio. There have also been some cases where government officials state they will personally fund the practice to continue, and that it has a respectable place in the African society. It may seem that as hard as many groups and organisations are trying to change the current status of this practice, but the attitude of the general public has to change as well. Efforts made by well intentioned Western Forces  may even be having the effect of further enrooting the practice. Many Practioners who make a living from undertaking this custom will simply flee to neighbouring countries and continue to practice.

 

 

---