Female Genital... Whatever
What to call it? That seems to be the problem. If you use "mutilation" as the third word, you're disrespectful against the women it has been used on, despite the fact that it is a mutilation, though only if we're talking about anything beyond removal of the clitoral hood.
Removal of the clitoral hood? Closest possible analogy to male circumcision, so, that could be "female circumcision", right? I, at least, can go with that, it's as non "mutilating", though completely useless, as male circumcision.
Beyond that? Taking away the clitoris, the clitoris and part of the labia, or taking the whole works away plus sewing it up? I don't care how "disrespectful" the terminology is, but that is mutilation. Why be respectful about a practice that isn't respectful towards the women who it's used on?
But, okay. Shouldn't use "FGM" anyway, all right. I suppose using FGC (female genital cutting) is as neutral as you can get, but it doesn't convey what is done. And if anyone uses female genital surgery, I'm going to scream. "Surgery";
1 : a branch of medicine concerned with diseases and conditions requiring or amenable to operative or manual procedures (Merriam-Webster)
# The branch of medicine that deals with the diagnosis and treatment of injury, deformity, and disease by manual and instrumental means.
# A surgical operation or procedure, especially one involving the removal or replacement of a diseased organ or tissue. (The American Heritage)
4. a medical procedure involving an incision with instruments; performed to repair damage or arrest disease in a living body; "they will schedule the operation as soon as an operating room is available"; "he died while undergoing surgery" [syn: operation] (WordNet)
I had no fucking idea that taking away normal(ly functioning) parts of the outer female organ was a "surgery". To me, surgery implies fixing something, making it better. Completely destroying parts or the whole of the outer female sexual organ is not making it "better", is not "fixing" it.
How about FGD? Female Genital Destruction? Because removal of the clitoris functionally destroys a dimension of female pleasure that's not connected to reproductive sexuality. Going even further and sewing it up doesn't just destroy the outer sexual organ of a woman. It negates it. Annihilates it. It's a smooth, negative space where there before was a positive (as in, folds and parts part of a normal vulva that existed, and taking this away negates it) space.
I'm tired of passing off various efforts of change/destroy the female body as "surgery", as "fixing" it, as "making it better" as "making it societally/culturally acceptable, whether that "acceptable" is outside pressure or one the woman experiences in her head.
Breast surgery? Adding or taking anything away (besides reducing breast size because it's injuring you); Wrong.
Taking away "excess" fat? (If it's not done because all that is threatening your life); Wrong.
Putting in toxins or whatever in your face or other places to smooth out wrinkles? Wrong.
Binding feet? Wrong.
Cutting off the clitoris, or the clitoris and labia and then sometimes sewing it up? Wrong.
Most of the examples up there I count as "wrong" simply because they're mostly done so the female body will conform after some social/cultural idea of "good/beautiful woman" (or to avoid excessive attention, like huge breasts can give you), but they're also harmful, and all of them are destructive. They destroy a woman's body. End of fucking story.
So, really, fe/male circumcision is also "wrong", but it doesn't destroy anything, really (except when it does, due to accidents), but it's completely useless.
But, okay. I suppose FGC will have to be used, even though it does not express the complete destruction of (part of) women's sexuality as well as genitals. There's nothing "respectful" about destroying women's sexuality, and "FGC" doesn't really express the whole dimension of annihilation going on in that procedure, but, whatever, right? It's not just about the destruction of women's genitals, you know. It's about the destruction of a dimension of pleasure not tied to what traditionally is seen as the be-all and end-all of the Woman; reproductive function. Babies. Woman as Nothing Else but Mother. It's about the destructive annihilation, physically, culturally, socially and mentally, of a part of women's sexuality that is independent of reproduction.
...
Come on, now. Call me a sex-fixated imperialist (or should that be sex-and-genital-fixated imperialist, to be more complete?). I know you want to, right?
Removal of the clitoral hood? Closest possible analogy to male circumcision, so, that could be "female circumcision", right? I, at least, can go with that, it's as non "mutilating", though completely useless, as male circumcision.
Beyond that? Taking away the clitoris, the clitoris and part of the labia, or taking the whole works away plus sewing it up? I don't care how "disrespectful" the terminology is, but that is mutilation. Why be respectful about a practice that isn't respectful towards the women who it's used on?
But, okay. Shouldn't use "FGM" anyway, all right. I suppose using FGC (female genital cutting) is as neutral as you can get, but it doesn't convey what is done. And if anyone uses female genital surgery, I'm going to scream. "Surgery";
1 : a branch of medicine concerned with diseases and conditions requiring or amenable to operative or manual procedures (Merriam-Webster)
# The branch of medicine that deals with the diagnosis and treatment of injury, deformity, and disease by manual and instrumental means.
# A surgical operation or procedure, especially one involving the removal or replacement of a diseased organ or tissue. (The American Heritage)
4. a medical procedure involving an incision with instruments; performed to repair damage or arrest disease in a living body; "they will schedule the operation as soon as an operating room is available"; "he died while undergoing surgery" [syn: operation] (WordNet)
I had no fucking idea that taking away normal(ly functioning) parts of the outer female organ was a "surgery". To me, surgery implies fixing something, making it better. Completely destroying parts or the whole of the outer female sexual organ is not making it "better", is not "fixing" it.
How about FGD? Female Genital Destruction? Because removal of the clitoris functionally destroys a dimension of female pleasure that's not connected to reproductive sexuality. Going even further and sewing it up doesn't just destroy the outer sexual organ of a woman. It negates it. Annihilates it. It's a smooth, negative space where there before was a positive (as in, folds and parts part of a normal vulva that existed, and taking this away negates it) space.
I'm tired of passing off various efforts of change/destroy the female body as "surgery", as "fixing" it, as "making it better" as "making it societally/culturally acceptable, whether that "acceptable" is outside pressure or one the woman experiences in her head.
Breast surgery? Adding or taking anything away (besides reducing breast size because it's injuring you); Wrong.
Taking away "excess" fat? (If it's not done because all that is threatening your life); Wrong.
Putting in toxins or whatever in your face or other places to smooth out wrinkles? Wrong.
Binding feet? Wrong.
Cutting off the clitoris, or the clitoris and labia and then sometimes sewing it up? Wrong.
Most of the examples up there I count as "wrong" simply because they're mostly done so the female body will conform after some social/cultural idea of "good/beautiful woman" (or to avoid excessive attention, like huge breasts can give you), but they're also harmful, and all of them are destructive. They destroy a woman's body. End of fucking story.
So, really, fe/male circumcision is also "wrong", but it doesn't destroy anything, really (except when it does, due to accidents), but it's completely useless.
But, okay. I suppose FGC will have to be used, even though it does not express the complete destruction of (part of) women's sexuality as well as genitals. There's nothing "respectful" about destroying women's sexuality, and "FGC" doesn't really express the whole dimension of annihilation going on in that procedure, but, whatever, right? It's not just about the destruction of women's genitals, you know. It's about the destruction of a dimension of pleasure not tied to what traditionally is seen as the be-all and end-all of the Woman; reproductive function. Babies. Woman as Nothing Else but Mother. It's about the destructive annihilation, physically, culturally, socially and mentally, of a part of women's sexuality that is independent of reproduction.
...
Come on, now. Call me a sex-fixated imperialist (or should that be sex-and-genital-fixated imperialist, to be more complete?). I know you want to, right?