Comments on: AAA redux: Female circumcision

By: Madonna Dennis

Madonna Dennis — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 19:50:15 +0000

First off, let me state that I am not for any circumcision, whether male or female. Whenever, I do decide to have children, if they are boys, they will not be circumcised. The article mentions that there is no proof of a patriarchal mindset behind female circumcision. However, I would like to know what facts they had to back up that statement. Yes, they did state that they spoke to circumcised and uncircumcised women but I don’t recall seeing any male interviews. No one has asked the male population how they view the issue. Africa’s system is mostly patriarchal and therefore most women are going to follow their customs and ritual in order to obtain a husband (it is important to note that not all cultures in Africa perform FGM and not all women who have it done attain husbands). It was interesting to me that the comment in the article that was made by African women stated that they saw the clitoris as being a kind of mini penis, for lack of a better word. The penis is the greatest symbolic and physical difference between man and woman. Man , who is the head of the family and holds the power. If a woman has a ‘mini penis’ and extension of a man’s penis what does that say about the woman?
Also, I think sexual pleasure needs to be define as one author commented in the article. Sexual pleasure for some women could be knowing that their husband is being satisfied. It doesn’t necessarily has to be pleasure experienced by them. There are also different levels of sexual pleasure and different ways of attaining. The article did not differentiate between sexual pleasure from vaginal intercourse or any other means. I agree that there is not enough research done in this field. Without adequate in depth research no one can truly come to a fair conclusion on the topic of FGM. One thing is for certain though. The word mutilation is quite dramatic and is a propaganda used to inflame one side’s specific ideals.

By: Lance Gravlee

Lance Gravlee — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 20:37:32 +0000

@Madonna: Have another look at Dr. Shweder's remarks on the TierneyLab blog. Pay special attention to his comments here. Shweder argues that the practice of female circumcision is not a good indicator of patriarchy or gender inequality. There are many societies with steep gender inequality where female circumcision is not performed, but male circumcision is. In Shweder's words: "Considering the prevalence, timing, and even the intensity of the relevant initiation rites and viewed on a worldwide scale, one is hard pressed to argue that this is an obvious instance of a gender inequity disfavoring girls." And: "The practice is also a poor example of patriarchal domination." What do you make of his argument?

By: Madonna Dennis

Madonna Dennis — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 18:29:17 +0000

While the concept of cultural relativism suggest that we should see each culture as equal and judge them by their own standards, it doesn’t state that you should turn a blind eye to cruel treatment. This matter goes far beyound culture. It is a matter of human rights. Female mutilation in and of itself is not what everyone is fighting against. It is the rationalization behind why it is performed,and also how it is performed. If it was done because of some belief other (than that women aren’t suppose to feel pleasure and they are at the mercy of their husbands) under more sanitary circumstances then I don’t believe it would have caused such an uproar. Of course, you will always have feminist and other group objecting the practice but it would not be as big an issue as it is now. It is not the ‘mutilation’ so much as the domineering patriarchal mindset that is behind it.