1
   

Female Genital Mutilation

 
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 May, 2003 07:51 am
In fact, as with many bizarre gender practices, it is often we women who also strongly take their desirability "onboard" as it were, and defend them as part of our identity - possibly a part of the rigid sex role conditioning that afflicts both sexes? Just as men are often, in my experience, most policing of their sons' not being "sissies" -and just as packs of boys are also aggressive in exclusion of their "different" in some way peers.

I think I am rambling!
0 Replies
 
mac11
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 May, 2003 08:03 am
Carrie, thanks for starting this thread. I haven't had a chance to read the links provided, but I will. Female genital mutilation is a horrible and little-known practice. I can't imagine how we're going to end it, but we must find a way.

However, regarding rib removal, that is purely a myth. Here's the Snopes page: http://www.snopes.com/horrors/vanities/ribs.htm
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 May, 2003 08:07 am
dlowan- Maybe you think that you are rambling, but to me, you are making a lot of sense. Yes, there ARE gender defined roles, and going against them will cause problems with your peers. This is true of both sexes. But the male roles are designed to perpetuate men as the dominant sex.

Have you ever thought about why, in Western society, male homosexuals have gone through a lot of difficulties, while lesbians have had much less?
Also, no one thinks anything of a woman wearing trousers. But a man in a dress.....................
0 Replies
 
MsSpentyouth
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 May, 2003 08:52 am
Some clinics in the US are working with African immigrant populations to change the nature of FGM. There are clinics in Seattle, for instance, that have developed great relationships with northern African immigrants and offer circumcision ceremonies in which a small nick is made at the clinic rather than by traditional practitioners -- just enough of a nick to draw blood, which satisfies the requirement for ritualistic "cleansing" in some cultures where FGM is practiced.

I believe the key to eradicating FGM is to begin dialogues like these with practitioners and their communities to create mutual understanding and the possibility of choice for women.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 May, 2003 08:56 am
That is a very interesting process, MsSpentyouth - any more details?

And welcome to A2k!
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 May, 2003 09:05 am
MsSpentyouth- Welcome to A2K! Very Happy I think that whoever thought of the ritual that you described is a genius. In one fell swoop a woman goes through her culture's rite of passage, without being mutilated. Bravo!
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 May, 2003 09:12 am
Excellent, Ms.Spentyouth (and welcome!)

I love to see that kind of subtlety and creativity employed rather than more imperialistic "your way is wrong, my way is right, do it my way" methods.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 May, 2003 09:40 am
OK, I've got "Wombs and Alien Spirits" in front of me. Some quotes:

Oh god, the anthropology-speak; "In this sense, women's amplification of zar beliefs into a possession cult can be seen as a kind of a counterhegemonic process... a feminine response to hegemonic praxis, and the priveleging of men that this ideologically entails, which ultimately escapes neither its categories nor its constraints."

Shocked This part was underlined by my college self, and I get it after some squinting, but geez.

OK, this seems to be the most pertinent section:

Quote:
As Hayes (1975) has rightly observed, virginity assumes a special significance in northern Sudan, for here its physiological manifestations are socially controlled. Its loss does not entail an absolute and irrevocable change of state, but one which is, in part, reversible. As she succinctly remarks, "In Sudan, virgins are made, not born" (p.622). Contrary to Western assumptions, "virginity" in Hofriyat is a social construct, not a physical condition. and it has less to do with sexual innocence than a woman's dormant fertility....

Thus, while the operation restrains female sexuality, this is not the prupose avowed i by women. Informants asser that it is performed on young girls so as to make their bodies clean (nazif), smooth (na'im, and pure (tahir), this last term furnishing the Sudanese colloquial for circumcision in general: tahur ("cleansing" or "purification"). Women say a girl who has not been purified through circumcision may not marry, thus may not bear children and attain a position of respect in later years. Circumcision prepares her body for womanhood: it confers on her the right to bear children, while marriage provides her with opportunities to advance her position by giving birth, especially to sons.

The promiscuity argument earlier described apparently confuses the sexuality of women with their ability and perogative to bear children, where these aspects of womanhood ought to be distinguished. The pleasure argument, on the other hand, overly dissociates the sexuality of makes from their ability to impregnate women. I once overheard a man talking about his beautiful bit 'amm -- father's brother's daughter and the preferred spouse -- whom he wished he had wed. This woman had been married for over a year and had not yet conceived. Said the man, "By God, if I had married her, she would have ahd twins by now!" Despite appearances, then, fertility is of paramount concern to bother sexes.

Infibulation [fgm] neither increases nor for that matter limits male sexual pleasure -- this is largely irrelevant here -- so much as it ensures or socializes female fertility. By removing their external genitalia, female Hofriyati seek not to diminish their own sexual pleasure -- though this is an obvious effect -- so much as to enhance their femininity. Pharaonic circumcision [fgm] is a symbolic act which brings sharply into focus the fertility potential of women by dramatically deemphasizing their sexuality. In insisting upon circumcision for their daughter, women assert their social indispensibility, an importance which is not as the sexual partners of their husbands, nor -- in this highly segregated, overtly male authoritative society -- as their servants, sexual or otherwise, but as the mothers of men. The ultimate social goal of a woman is to become, with her husband, the cofounder of a lineage section. As a respected haboba[/] she is "listened to", she may be sent on the haj (pilgrimage to Mecca) by her husband or sons, and her name is remembered in the village geneologies for several generations.

Village women do not achieve social recognition by behaving or becoming like men, but by becoming less like men, physically, socially, and sexually. Male as well as female rites stress this complementarity: while the salient female reporductive organ is enclosed by infibulation, that of the male is exposed or, as one Sudanese author states, "unveiled" through circumcision. Only after genital surgery are people eligible to become social persons, to assume the responsibilities of life as Hofriyati women and Hofriyati men,


Ow. My wrist.

Please excuse typos.
0 Replies
 
Letty
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 May, 2003 12:15 pm
Hi, Carrie, and welcome to A2K. I have been following this thread with extreme interest. This may seem like an over simplification, but I do believe that the entire thing can be summed up in one word:

TRADITION.

In some cultures, tradition is slower to change than others, based upon the availability of education and of the quality of that education.

At this moment, I am thinking about the approach that the medical profession has sustained concerning child birth. Traditionally, the woman listened to what the male doctor said, and did it. One procedure is termed an episiotomy which is supposed to facilitate the birthing process and prevent tearing. I am now wondering about that practice, because I have experienced both. Believe me when I say that I had less pain and quicker recovery with a slight tear than I did with the episiotomy. Now I am beginning to wonder if the male ob surgeons subconsciously "prepare"a woman to suit the future needs of a man.
0 Replies
 
MsSpentyouth
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 May, 2003 01:09 pm
dlowan wrote:
That is a very interesting process, MsSpentyouth - any more details?

And welcome to A2k!

I'm so glad you asked and nudged me to do a little research!

I was involved with refugee populations from the early 1980s until the mid-1990s and knew about the Seattle project from my work with Somali and Sudanese refugees.

When you asked if I had more details, I looked up the clinic I knew about from back then ... and learned that they have been enmired in a great deal of controversy regarding their accommodations and whether those accommodations violage US federal law against FGM.

Here's an article from the Seattle Times from the mid-1990s about Harborview Medical Center's work. Harborview ultimately abandoned its ritual cutting program but continues to work with community education programs to end FGM practices.
0 Replies
 
sozobe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 29 May, 2003 01:13 pm
Oh, interesting! Thanks for that article, MsSpentyouth.
0 Replies
 
Heliotrope
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jun, 2003 02:13 am
Apologies to all.
Just stumbled accross this subject and felt my mind go up in flames.
There is nothing that infuriates me more than this.
There is one thing that infuriates me as much.
My entire rationality vanishes concerning this subject.
I would have entire civilizations exterminated for perpitrating this abomination.
I would have them deleted and forever expunged from the human memory and human history.
All of them.
No exceptions.

I'm actually shaking as I type this.
0 Replies
 
Monger
 
  1  
Reply Sat 19 Jul, 2003 01:00 pm
Crimes are committed by people. They are not committed by abstract entities like nationalities. At any rate, passion seems misplaced when one advocates genocide in order to remove barbarous practices from the world.

The reasons people have decorated & altered their bodies in different ways throughout history (from lip plates of Ethiopia's Mursi to neck stretching in Burma to boob jobs) are diverse.

http://homepages.adhoc.net/rlombardi/imgetio/mursi.jpg
http://www.myanmar.com/gov/tourist/photo/p-dau55.jpg

One small point is that if FGM was to be outlawed based on the WHO's definition, women who freely choose to either pierce or tattoo their own labia would be criminals.
0 Replies
 
Vivien
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jul, 2003 03:47 pm
the trouble is that the mutilation is done to children approaching their teens - NOT to consenting adults.

I saw a programme on it a few years ago which still haunts me. A grandmother and mother held down a girl of about 10 and mutilated her with a knife before stitching her up, leaving just a small aperture for urine/blood. Serious infections were common. No anaesthetic was used and i can still hear that child's screams.

Another young teenage girl lay in hospital haemorrhaging - she had been stitched up so tightly that her new husband couldn't manage to penetrate her - so he had taken a knife to her to enlarge the 'aperture'.

It was absolutely the most horrific programme i have ever seen.
0 Replies
 
Charli
 
  1  
Reply Sat 26 Jul, 2003 08:10 pm
FEMALE SUBSERVIENCE
FGM is practiced to keep females subservient. There are many different practices in many cultures to this end - including unequal pay, etc. The following is from Bartleby.com:

"Ceremonial amputation of finger joints has been practiced in parts of Australia and Africa in conjunction with male initiation rites. In some areas of New Guinea women have finger joints amputated to signify mourning."

Also, there is a tribe - not sure of the name, Africa, New Guinea, or . . . - that practices amputating the two middle fingers of a little girl's hand in order for her to be enjoined into the wars against other tribes. I HAVE seen the movie at University in a sociology class. It is graphic. There are scenes of a small girl immediately after the fingers have been chopped off. She is crying in her Mother's arms and her hand is "wrapped up." Later scenes show the difficulty a grown woman has trying to carry out her day-to-day chores (with the two middle fingers missing).
[/color]
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Mar, 2004 05:47 am
This is definitely right down there with some of the sickest things done to humans.
0 Replies
 
BWShooter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 20 Mar, 2004 11:24 pm
dlowan wrote:

I guess human stupidityand cruelty is endless, sadly.

people do stupid things in the name of vanity. Women especially are prone to mutilate their bodies because of the pressures put upon them.
Someone said my newborn niece looks fat. Hell, she is a baby and babies are supposed to be chubby.
0 Replies
 
drom et reve
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Mar, 2004 02:22 am
A friend of mine was working on a documentary about women facing female genital mutilation for a terrestrial channel over here, Channel 4. It was called 'The Day I will never forget,' and it completely traumatised her; I saw it, and it disgusted me: it showed the rite's barbarity in all its gore as two girls, beyond their wishes, had it done to them; their pained screams-- and subsequent possibility of being infertile-- are enough education for anyone on such a matter; there are fantastic things that ancient societies had: this is not one of them.


0 Replies
 
kitchenpete
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Mar, 2004 05:06 am
Checking in - always interested in this topic. Still need to read some responses.

It appals me and, yes, I know about it in detail.

KP
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/30/2024 at 07:46:36