A Primitive, Disgusting Practice

December 6th, 2007 By: marc moore | Tags:

NY Times blogger John Tierney wonders:

Should African women be allowed to engage in the practice sometimes called female circumcision? Are critics of this practice, who call it female genital mutilation, justified in trying to outlaw it, or are they guilty of ignorance and cultural imperialism?

The topic is to be debated at the American Anthropological Association’s annual meeting.  What could there possibly be to debate?

Dr. [Fuambai] Ahmadu, a post-doctoral fellow at the University of Chicago, was raised in America and then went back to Sierra Leone as an adult to undergo the procedure along with fellow members of the Kono ethnic group. She has argued that the critics of the procedure exaggerate the medical dangers, misunderstand the effect on sexual pleasure, and mistakenly view the removal of parts of the clitoris as a practice that oppresses women. She has lamented that her Westernized “feminist sisters insist on denying us this critical aspect of becoming a woman in accordance with our unique and powerful cultural heritage.”

Contrary to what Ahmadu says, the issue isn’t about denying women’s empowerment or reducing anyone’s cultural heritage, it’s about the maiming of toddlers and young girls not of an age to make an informed decision or have such a decision respected if they were able to make it.

This article says that there are some possible benefits to certain types of operations on the female clitoris.  As a lay person I will not dispute the validity of these claims; however, given the life-long effects and possible reduction or elimination of the so-called patient’s sexual life I would submit that no amount of cultural relativism should permit such an operation to be forced on a minor.

I applaud Dr. Ahmadu’s commitment to her unique culture and respect her right to, as an adult, do whatever she wants with her own life.  But that in no way gives credence to the idea that children’s future sexual practices and enjoyment should be mandated by primitive tribal customs.

Dr. Richard Shweder, who will also be participating in Saturday’s debate, would disagree, as he’s on record as saying:

…speaking as a moral realist who believes that moral realism is compatible with cultural diversity in social norms I conclude with a brief moral evaluation of the culturally endorsed West and East African practice of genital modifications for both females and males.   I use the global campaign aimed at the eradication of female genital modifications on the Africa continent as an example of some of the hazards of cultural parochialism and ethnocentrism that arise in making condemnatory moral claims about the unfamiliar cultural practices of third world “others.”   A properly applied moral realism, one that is free of ethnocentrism, should be slow to judge others and must be grounded on accurate and valid cultural knowledge and not on overheated rhetoric and sensational depictions designed to reinforce our own cultural prejudices in the name of universal human rights.

Strictly speaking, Shweder is correct, of course.  But in the same way that modern cultures have worked to eliminate “age inappropriate” sexual relationships and other practices common to many primitive cultures, female genital mutilation in children should be discouraged as a matter of policy at the state level.

There is also the question of forced FGM for adult women at the hands of their husbands and/or relatives in some cultures, notably among certain segments of the Muslim population.  From an ethical point of view, this situation as the equivalent of rape.  No consent, you understand.  But then we’ve seen how Saudi Arabia treats female rape victims, haven’t we? 

A wrong is a wrong and should be acknowledged as such, even at the risk of foisting western cultural values on other, less-developed societies.  While this may be anathema to Drs. Ahmadu and Shweder, I would suggest that their interest in maintaining the relative purity of certain primitive tribes and their rituals is at best a secondary concern to the well-being and individual human rights of the young women involved.

To Tierney, who concludes:

If I were asked to make a decision about my own daughter, I wouldn’t choose circumcision for her. But what about the question raised by these anthropologists: Should outsiders be telling African women what initiation practices are acceptable?

I say that the answer is yes, western women should indeed tell their African and Muslim counterparts exactly what their cultures may be depriving them of, namely the certain dignity of making their own choices and, perhaps, the ability to feel the deepest, most meaningful pleasure life has to offer - the female orgasm.

 

h/t Debbie Schussel (note:  her article contains a graphic, sickening image that, to me, defines the issue quite clearly)

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  1. Lynx
    December 6th, 2007 at 13:11
    Reply | Quote | #1

    “genital modifications”, what an euphemism, it’s like calling putting someones eye out “visual adjustment procedure”.

    Though I think it’s good that we no longer force our own culture unto others in the old way, at the point of a sword, there is a long way between that old style and this. Of course moral relativism happens everywhere, our sense of right and wrong on different issues changes by cultures and over time, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t defend our own moral values if we honestly think they are the best ones. Geez, every OTHER culture defends their values and we consider that a GOOD thing, we should be no different.

    I would suggest that their interest in maintaining the relative purity of certain primitive tribes and their rituals is at best a secondary concern to the well-being and individual human rights of the young women involved.

    This reminds me of a passage from Daniel Dennet’s book “Breaking the Spell”. Dennet talks of the example of a primitive tribe that is hostile to outsiders, and who anthropologists urge be left alone, because they want to and because they are a very pure example of a stone-age culture devoid of outside influence. He suggests that by not giving them the chance to even SEE other options, we are being arrogant, wishing to keep primitive cultures as prized artifacts.

    From what I’ve read female circumcision (and why don’t men cut off the first inch of their weewee pray tell, if it’s soooo harmless?) makes women frigid and often damages them in other ways, even killing some from infection. You can call me a cultural egocentric, but I find the practice barbaric and wrong. It’s true we shouldn’t force people in other countries to follow our cultural mores, but it’s certainly our right to decide to whom we send and not send aid. I think at minimum we should strive to make the process voluntary and forbidden for underage women. Also, I categorically oppose the mere suggestion it be made legal in countries in the West. So far as I know, we haven’t yet become that silly. At least in Spain, the practice is persecuted severely, up to and including removing girls from the custody of fathers who show intention of sending them back to Africa to be mutilated.

  2. Michael van der Galien
    December 6th, 2007 at 13:50
    Reply | Quote | #2

    Lynx, it was happening at lot in the netherlands, the government now opposes it more aggressively, but it’s still happening, especially among people from Somali heritage. Anyway, I basically agree with the rest of your comment.

  3. C Stanley
    December 6th, 2007 at 13:58
    Reply | Quote | #3

    If it were more akin to male circumcision (some arguable health benefits, very quick procedure which doesn’t have apparent aftereffects psychologically or sexually) then I’d say, to each his own. But since it’s a much more aggressive and painful procedure with definite long term effects, it should be opposed- certainly as a procedure on those who can’t consent if not on all women.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.


Warning: is_writable() [function.is-writable]: open_basedir restriction in effect. File(error_log) is not within the allowed path(s): (/home/p6525pol:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php:/tmp) in /home/p6525pol/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 500