Comments | sigelphoenix: The obligatory FGC post [Women and Violence, Part 6]

sigelphoenix

The obligatory FGC post [Women and Violence, Part 6]

May 11, 2007 20:14

[This is part of my series on Women and Violence, which I am writing as a project for a Women Studies course I'm taking. For an explanation and information on my intentions with this series, please see the introductionYesterday some of my classmates gave a presentation about female genital cutting (though the terminology they used, and which is ( Read more... )

women and violence, school, anti-racism and racial privilege, sex and body issues, feminism and sexism

Comments 7

mockingbirdq May 12 2007, 04:02:03 UTC

I had the experience when I was younger of actually knowing someone who had suffered genital mutilation of a lesser degree and didn't understand why the west was so concerned with FGM because, in her words, "Americans do the same thing to their baby boys."

As long as routine male infant circumcision is the norm in most of the US, it makes them look hypocritical to protest FGM. Granted, FGM can be more physical and sexually damaging, but most of the cultures that practice it don't see FGM that way. They do what is demanded of their culture.

Which doesn't make cutting a girl's clitoris, hood or other parts right, any more than cutting the sensitive nerve laden foreskin off a baby boy is. *Ahem, off my soapbox now*

tekanji May 12 2007, 06:38:05 UTC

Just to preface my argument, I am against circumcision. I don't think that parents have the right to change the bodies of their infants, especially in such a dramatic way. Especially regarding something as intimate as one's genitalia.

However, I am very uncomfortable that your comment fails to acknowledge the difference in health risks. Even with the mildest form of FGC the risk of complications is high.

From the Wikipedia article:
A June 2006 study by the WHO has cast doubt on the safety of genital cutting of any kind.[27] This study was conducted on a cohort of 28,393 women attending delivery wards at 28 obstetric centers in areas of Burkina Faso, Ghana, Nigeria, Kenya, Senegal and The Sudan. A high proportion of these mothers had undergone FGC. According to the WHO criteria, all types of FGC were found to pose an increased risk of death to the baby (15% for Type I, 32% for Type II, and 55% for Type III). Mothers with FGC Type III were also found to be 30% more at risk for cesarean sections and had a 70% increase in postpartum ( ... )

tekanji May 12 2007, 06:40:00 UTC

Er, I should clarify: I'm against forced circumcision. If a man decides later in life that it's something he wants to do, and he is old enough to understand and accept the risks, then I have no problem with that.

I'm not as keen on the same rhetoric for FGC (or labiaplasty, for that matter) because of the differing power dynamics, although I think we should be very careful with any legislation that we enact in order to acknowledge and preserve the agency of women in this area.

sigelphoenix May 13 2007, 18:39:53 UTC

To be fair, mockingbirdq did acknowledge FGC's greater damage potential. But I share your worry about equating male circumcision to FGC, because there's the risk that the comparison will be used to "prove" that women are not particularly oppressed by genital surgeries.

Like I said above, the usefulness of drawing the connection between the two is that it keeps us from relegating genital surgeries to the realm of the "uncivilized." I want to highlight the similarities between Western/non-Western attitudes towards the supposed cleanliness and attractiveness of genitalia. At the same time, of course, the social pressures and power dynamics faced by men and (Western and non-Western) women are vastly different.

Thread 5

lilisin May 28 2007, 19:06:28 UTC

Backtracking now ( ... )

sigelphoenix May 28 2007, 21:41:22 UTC

Personally, I think it's an advantage to not have a firm opinion on this topic, because it's so complicated. Saying that this is what we should think and this is how we should act doesn't really work when there aren't clear right and wrong sides.

I agree with you that the health hazards are one of the worst - and probably the most immediate - risk. Even if the culture and the individual woman want the surgery, there's no reason to increase the risks of infection.

Along with making the procedure sanitary, I also think education is paramount. Helping women develop their own feminist analysis of the practice would be my goal. Of course, the same goes for things like labiaplasty in the West.