FGM, Should We Soften Our Approach?

[sausageeggbacon111]

Been fuming for the last couple of days after reading about a medical paper in America suggesting we soften our approach to FGM (article here). Apparently we are being culturally insensitive to people by wanting to punish people who commit FGM.

Is it just me or has the medical world gone mad? I have spent 8 years involved in campaigns against FGM then some crazy person (IMHO of course) comes out with a paper that the very premise of makes me want to vomit. So aggrieved about this as those who want to continue with this barbaric tradition will roll this rubbish out to defend their position every time they are challenged in the future.

Legislation put into practice, is how.

No we should not soften our approach. Beyond that second Georgette, Palmer.
May be this is cultural imperialism but I don't have any problem in saying "we do know best."

If I had a baby boy and lived in America, and my husband wanted him circumcised, and I said yes, would I be doing it out of love and a genuine belief that it was best for him? Or would I just be going along with something that was a "cultural tradition" because someone else said they wanted me to?

For me, agreeing to have your small daughter's entire clitoris carved out of her with a rusty razor blade and no anaesthetic, and possibly also her labia then sliced and stitched up, is something done out of control, fear and compliance.

I really can't see parents forcing their daughters to do this out of love. It is fear and indoctrination. I have seen the worst of this and tried to get the message out to people in certain African countries that it is not of benefit to any girls and the belief is structured by religious leaders who use it to control the section of the community who don't have penises.

I really hope that we never let this become anyway acceptable in any way what so ever.

It has to be fear - fear of a child being unmarriagable, of going against "culture": what a hateful word culture is - the sins that are committed in its name.

All these mothers, quite apart from turning a deaf ear to their child's screams, must know of girls who become infected, girls who die in childbirth etc. because of what is done out of "love". Fat sort of love that is.

YANBU and no we shouldn't

We are so quick to condemn it (obviously) that I think it's easy to forget woman who have had it done are proud they feel clean and acceptable and want the same for their daughters. They perform the act out of love which I think to the western mind is just unfathomable.

But some 'cultural practices' do need to be stamped out.

Some people are proud of beating their children, we don't say, "Oh in that culture parents who love their children beat them" we call social services.

I agree with Milk there can be a cultural abyss which is difficult to cross and I sometimes wonder if some sort of Juju ceremony with a threat of spirits coming after your daughter might do more good than traditional education in eradicating this in the UK.

I have worked with people from some African countries who will just shake their head and say, "no, no that won't happen" and there is no convincing them otherwise. I have been told with all sincerity that an African President is a witch and if you go against him he will send bees to kill you.

I have worked with Drs who believe in Juju, people with a good education not from remote villages and working in the UK , but the belief is so strong it is unshakable.

Soften the approach? Nah, we need stricter rules. That nonsensical labiaplasty I think it's called thing ought to be illegal, too, because THAT's really a double standard. Like, they aren't allowed to mutilate a woman's genitals for chastity, but if a woman wants to pornify herself, that's okay?
And piercing little girls' ears. It's a matter of degree, but it's also a violation of a child's body for no other reason than making her attractive to men.

However, just outlawing something will not stop it. There also need to be information campaigns on the increased risks in childbirth, etc.

Most importantly women have to be freed from the need to "get a man", because that's what makes a lot of mothers mutilate their daughters in this way; the fear that the daughter won't be able to marry if they don't.

That sort of approach would benefit all women, since many mutilatons that "Western" women do to their own bodies are also driven by the conscious or unconscious fear that they might become old maids if they don't.

Aaaand we are back at the equal pay debate. Isn't it funny how all feminist topics are connected?

I have been told with all sincerity that an African President is a witch and if you go against him he will send bees to kill you.

African bees have a reputation for being very angry. I wouldn't mess with an African beekeeper!

I would like to see harsher and more frequent punishments.

CULTURAL RELATIVISM and all things close makes me very very angry.

Education is available to those that live in the West ignorance about FGM being torture is no excuse. In Africa where education has spread about FGM rates drop dramatically.

If these people cannot see how horrific and vile it is then perhaps a prison sentence and sacrificial lambs will help.

No we should not soften our approach. It should be harder. Women have their genitals like they are for a reason. Cutting things and sewing things damages them, often beyond repair. It endangers the life of the woman when it is done and later in childbirth. It is ignorant and pointless it needs to go.

Parents may be doing it out of love, but I fail to see why that means they have to be indulged in this. Some parents may subject daughters to child marriage out of a sense of love and protection, and we should not be going along with that either.

The premises on which FGM is based are very worrying. They posit women's sexual desire as unimportant at best and sexual pleasure for women as unclean. They elevate male sexual control and pleasure as being more important than anything, even women's ability to give birth in safety. Giving even token defence to such ideas is fraught with danger.

I also fail to see why 'cultural insensitivity' is such an obvious wrong that all our morals and shared values have to be compromised to avoid it. There is nothing wrong with identifying moral absolutes that everyone in a particular society is expected to obey. All societies do it, and I never understand the hand-wringing Western apologists who can't seem to grasp that. Interestingly though, the necessary compromises they advocate for are almost never to the disadvantage of e.g. the Establishment, but women or people in lower socio-economic groups.

People are not saying 'We know best' so much as 'We cannot stand for that', and rightly so.

It my belief that the fathers* and doctors who have allowed / carried out this mutilation should be expected to undergo some mutilation of their own. Nothing major - removal of little finger, removal of testicle, sewing up of nostril or eyelid.
I demand my belief to be respected.

• I'm going to let the mothers off on the basis that they are likely to have been mutilated already.

I imagine that many parents do feel it is the right thing to do, but that is all the more reason to make it clear that we find it a revolting, despicable and illegal practice. If we're not clear then those parents will pass on the 'tradition' to the next generation and we'll never end it. It's not about blaming the parents of children who were already mutilated. It's about saving future generations.

Every parent (and every child at an age to understand) needs to be made aware of how illegal it is and I'd suggest asking people we allow to move here to sign a declaration that they will not allow it (no matter where they come from)

That way anyone who felt it was too much a part of their culture to give up would know where they stood. Anyone who signed it and then did it to a child could hardly claim a moral position or pretend ignorance.

The problem with trying to persuade people to stop it voluntarily is they will feel they are putting their daughters at a disadvantage by doing so, because they know other parents will still be doing it. I feel sad for parents who would end up being prosecuted, but I suspect that is what will be necessary to get it stopped - if the risks are perceived as greater than the benefits. There is no "good" answer to this, but I think on balance prosecutions, while sad for those prosecuted and their families, would in the end prevent a great deal more suffering than they would cause.

It's interesting how the 'oh but it's their culture' excuse is so rarely used in situations in that disadvantage men. We would be horrified if black people in America weren't allowed to drive, for example, simply because they're black. And in fact there was protest and outrage when black people in South Africa were barred from leading full lives under apartheid. Where are the protests about women being barred from driving in Saudi Arabia?

I absolutely beggars belief that anyone would ever advocate going easy on any adult who slices a child's genitals, no matter what the reason for it. And I imagine if it were little boys having their penises slit in half there would be none of this fucking nonsense.

Seeing as the paper is American I wonder how much of it is motivated by the growing backlash against MGM. Which would be fucking typical wouldn't it?

France seems to be able to deal with this so much better. I'm aware there is criticism of the French government for trampling over other groups' culture but not mutilation girls in France won out.

France's tough stance on female genital mutilation is working, say campaigners

gu.com/p/3mdy5?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard