FGM

[GLaDOS]

.

GLaDOS, I don't think anyone mentioned 'hate' before you???

And black savages or noble savages...WTF!!!???

I am just pointing out that a lot of views/literature etc on FGM ARE racist and DO portray those places where FGM is practiced as savage. Or if not savage then certainly of a primitive culture, based on something historical, reinforcing the discourse of the western world being modern and progressive and the 'other' as primitive etc.

(BTW I am saying this knowing that FGM is not something than never happens in Western society, but all literature on this tend to portray it as happening in developing countries, specifically rural places, and that when it occurs in Western countries, it is in the context of being within an immigrant family)

It would be interesting. Or rather it is. There is plenty of stuff on it.

Manatee, there is no point discussing things if you cannot define what you are discussing. And actually, you are incorrect, I think, 'woman hating' was a phrase used in posts previous to mine - I then added the defintion to 'misogyny', which is not contentious. Even Wiki concurs en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misogyny

I am in total agreement with you that some views and literature on FGM are racist. No one has done that here however, so again, I'm unsure why you are pressing a moot point.

To say that some cultures are primitive is not racist however. 'Primitive' is not in in itself a value judgement, in anthropology is is descritive. That's something that's easy to lose sighty of if you only see the world via the humanities, where everything is discourse and structuralism is king. Or was.

FGM is of interest in cultures where it occurs endemically. Where it doesn't occur endemically, its a curiosity and a crime, more often than not.

I'm not quite sure what I am arguing with either of you about, maybe you could define that for me?

manatee would this be a entirely different discussion do you think if fgm was a) a matter of choice (oh, hang on it is for many) and b) done in a modern well equipped theatre under general anasthetic?

Must we be arguing?

Am a little confused where you were going with proximate and ultimate causation vis a vis misogynism. (putting kids to bed long and distracting process)

ANd just as a clarification, FGM, is usually practiced in 'primitive' highly patriachal or theistic cultures, where ever they are situated.

It is a crime in 'western culture' (for all it's putatiuve flaws) however, where women have unprecidented rights of automony over their own bodies and choices than in the cultures where FGM is endemically practiced..

Interesting cos one of the things I read in the NI search this morning was that the Dutch government are considering allowing FGM in hospitals, as a means to make sure it is done safely.

And if people choose then the context in which the choice is made is obviously an issue... What is a women WANTS to???

GlaDOS- You tell me which words or phrases you would like me to define and I shall do that for you

Female circumcision in "western" culture is not a crime if chosen by the recipient. The law only gets in the way when the practices of an individual have a realistic probability of causing their death.

LOL

I mean arguing in the best possible sense. Again, its a word that can have certain negative meanings attached to it. Maybe debating would be better. If so, can you define for me what we are debating?

I thjnk it's been hedged that we are all 'not agreeing' with the practice of FGM. So what is it that we are debating?

As for proximate/ultimate causation, I posted a pretty good introduction to the concepts and couldn't do better really. I can't however join the dots for you.

Sorry, that was too sweeping - uk law I should have said.

Oh and I am pressing the point for the sake of balanced argument, even if nobody here DID say anything that hinted colonial style overtones, it is still an issue tied up in FGM, and I was under the impression from the title of this thread that it was a general discussion of FGM???

glados no no, please join dots. I understand fully what they are. are you saying the biological imperative is a proximate cause of misogyny?

GLaDOS... I am not really in a debate I don't think... Just a conversation where people are stating their opinions on an emotive and complex subject.

manatee I agree it's an emotive subjective which in itself makes it hard not to polarise opinions.

Yes, and it does have a shock factor which can cloud people's views of the issue.

Um, I think you are very wrong on that point Tattifer. FGM doesn't come under the mantle of 'lifestyle choice' in the west. It isn;t just banned in the west either, but in many african states.

There is also the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which was ratified by the UK Government on 16th December 1991.

This followed by the FGM act in 2003, and many child protection protocols.

But again, I have no idea why you are asserting these points without context of your bigger 'argument' - what is it?

I am not being very clear, I mean people often just think 'OMG that is horrific' (going to the serious-anti polar) without reference to the context.

Which as always in any debated subject, the presence of one extreme view will produce an extreme opposite.

(In my head I have a pair of scales...)

I think we are making assumptions to think that every case of FGM is forced in some way. Even if the choice is made in the context of what we would consider to be misguided beliefs, it is still a choice.

glados voluntary genital mutilation, cutting, piercing, saline injections, tattooing etc etc are not illegal in the west. and, bizarrely yes, are lifestyle choices, the emphasis being on the word choice - of the individual as an adult, not the choice of the relatives of a child - which is different, obviously.

Argument - misogyny is not the driving force of cultural practices such as female circumcision. Exactly, pretty much what I first said. It may not be nice, the practice may be advocated by some misogynists, but misogyny is not the driving force.

This really isn't the place to join dots, I' afraid. I'm here for lite relief myself.

Plus it takes time. If you are interested, read the link and let it sink in. "are you saying the biological imperative is a proximate cause of misogyny? " I actually don't understand the question either, sorry. 'Biological imperative' has a very different meaning when coming from a humanites perspec - usually a pejorative one. Also proximate and ultimate causes are not dichotomous.

Tattifer, what we began discussing was not "cutting, piercing, saline injections, tattooing etc" - and to say it was is to equivocate.

If that is your question, I answered it a couple of pages back. But to expand, misogyny certainly is an element of cultural practices such as FGM, and an important element which cannnot be discounted and needs further research, as does further research into the phenomenon that is called misogyny.

So there we have it. I'm off to watch telly

Oh well Manatee, you just got your extremist sparring partner to carry on passing the time

glados are you being a toosh patronising linking me to presumably a page that explains the meaning of equivocate?

Isn't joining dots light relief?

Ok cool. But I still don't think misogyny is a driving force - that still allows for it being a factor for some of those involved.

And yes, hate to introduce you to something weird but genital mutilation for some in the west is a lifestyle choice.