As a freshmen, I took an anthropology class: Understanding Cultures. In it, we were exposed to many different cultures and subcultures. One of the topics was female genital mutilation/cutting/circumcision, which primarily takes place in Muslim countries in Africa, and some still occur in Asia and the middle East. It is banned by most western nations, and the World Health Organization, Amnesty International, and the United Nations have all taken a stance against female genital mutilation Putting it lightly, the graphic movies we watched and revealing literature we read were horrifying and made me cringe. There are a variety of ways that females' genitals are mutilated for the purpose of maintaining "purity," becoming a woman, and reducing sexual pleasure (for just the female). They can involve cutting, removing, burning, or sewing shut various genitals, as explained in this article. Many who undergo such procedures are very young girls (sometimes infants). Many are forcibly held down and must endure great pain with these often irreversible alterations, often without anesthesia. These practices are unsafe, using knives or razors for cutting, which can result in excessive bleeding or death. Despite this, some still support female genital mutilation. Below is a video explaining the cultural significance of female genital mutilation to a Sierra Leone community.
How is or isn't this a feminist issue? Should the WHO, UN, and Amnesty International take a stance or get involved, or should tradition be respected? Is it acceptable for infants and children be performed on or just adult women? Is it okay only if the procedure is reversible? Should western countries be more open to this, allowing it in hospitals (and, perhaps, providing a safer experience)? Do you see this as a way in which women are honored and cherished or violated and reduced?
This is a feminist issue because it is not acceptable to perform unnecessary surgery without the consent of the patient. The only reason this surgery is performed is to suppress women. It makes the statement that women cannot control themselves without surgically preventing them from having sex or being enjoyable. It also takes away the woman's right to make her own choice. Even if the surgery is reversible, this implies that two unnecessary surgeries should be performed in order to make sure a woman cannot have sex before marriage. I believe the value in a virginal bride should be held in the personal choice they have made to abstain until marriage and the reflection of their strong personal values/morals, not the condition of their genitalia or the male getting a boost in ego that he has been the only person to have sex with her. Female genital mutilation is a violation of women's rights and choice, unnecessarily violates women's bodies treating them like slabs of meat (which is ironic because the so-called purpose is to preserve purity of women), and degrades women by deeming them unable to sustain from sex unless surgically inhibited.
This reminded me of the Enloe reading discussing the words "natural" and "traditional" and how they support oppressive systems. I think female genital mutilation is definitely an example of an oppressive system which is supported and may be masked as an acceptable practice because it is backed up by the word "traditional". Something should be done to help to stop such horrendous practices which so intensely violate women's rights and bodies.
This idea of female circumcision to culture is more than just “making sexual acts not pleasurable for women”. I myself, come from background where this has been practiced. Like most conversational issues some things are taking out of context. By no means do I support this. The reason behind circumcision is to prevent women or men from committing adultery and to ensure that the name of the family or perhaps dignity is persevered. The procedure that is done in most cases are not safe and is not necessary. The influence is from culture not religion. These practices are very old practices, and once something is passed on to a culture is very difficult to forget. Also what we consider normal in the United States is not necessary normal in Africa or the Middle East. When we look at issue effecting women in different parts of the world or women who come from different cultures, we need to look the issue with very careful eye; there could more to the issue than what is apparent.
This is an area of culture that I do not understand and I am conflicted with. First of all this seems to be a horribly dangerous and painful procedure that is done for the sake of cultural normative and rights of passage. I say this lightly, but I also understand that rights of passage are deeply rooted within cultures and fulfill a strong role within societies. The female circumcision connects the members of that culture together through a horrifically intense procedure and experience. This must be a very powerful bond and it is obvious that it is because female circumcision is still practiced. I’ve been trying to connect it in my mind with other cultural extremisms that we have in the USA and the only thing that I can connect it with is cosmetic surgery. Maybe it is a very poor connection, but they are both practices that alter the human body to little benefit except for ascetics and cultural acceptance. Granted the ascetics are not very applicable to female circumcision from our perspective, but that must be an attractive quality for males in those cultures.