In the New Duranty Times -- where else? To resist this barbarity, you see, would be ethnocentric.
"A New Debate on Female Circumcision," by John Tierney in the New York Times (thanks to LGF).
Should African women be allowed to engage in the practice sometimes called female circumcision? Are critics of this practice, who call it female genital mutilation, justified in trying to outlaw it, or are they guilty of ignorance and cultural imperialism?[...]
Dr. Ahmadu, a post-doctoral fellow at the University of Chicago, was raised in America and then went back to Sierra Leone as an adult to undergo the procedure along with fellow members of the Kono ethnic group. She has argued that the critics of the procedure exaggerate the medical dangers, misunderstand the effect on sexual pleasure, and mistakenly view the removal of parts of the clitoris as a practice that oppresses women. She has lamented that her Westernized “feminist sisters insist on denying us this critical aspect of becoming a woman in accordance with our unique and powerful cultural heritage.” In another essay, she writes:
It is difficult for me — considering the number of ceremonies I have observed, including my own — to accept that what appears to be expressions of joy and ecstatic celebrations of womanhood in actuality disguise hidden experiences of coercion and subjugation. Indeed, I offer that the bulk of Kono women who uphold these rituals do so because they want to — they relish the supernatural powers of their ritual leaders over against men in society, and they embrace the legitimacy of female authority and particularly the authority of their mothers and grandmothers.You can read more about this in Dr. Ahmadu’s essays or in this critique of the global campaign against female genital mutilation, written by another participant in Saturday’s discussion, Richard Shweder of the University of Chicago.
Dr. Shweder says that many Westerners trying to impose a “zero tolerance” policy don’t realize that these initiation rites are generally controlled not by men but by women who believe it is a cosmetic procedure with aesthetic benefits. He criticizes Americans and Europeans for outlawing it at the same they endorse their own forms of genital modification, like the circumcision of boys or the cosmetic surgery for women called “vaginal rejuvenation.” After surveying studies of female circumcision and comparing the data with the rhetoric about its harmfulness, Dr. Shweder concludes that “‘First World’ feminist issues and political correctness and activism have triumphed over the critical assessment of evidence.”
If I were asked to make a decision about my own daughter, I wouldn’t choose circumcision for her. But what about the question raised by these anthropologists: Should outsiders be telling African women what initiation practices are acceptable?
Heavens, no! That would bring back the bad old days of the Raj, of the white man's burden, of Sir Charles James Napier and worse, now, wouldn't it? Or...would it be a simple gesture of defense for these poor women?
Reality is for people who can't handle drugs.
I would hope that these academics could stoop to read "Infidel" by
Ayaan Hirsi Ali. If it's such a good idea, maybe they could have it done to their daughters. As for my daughter, over my dead body.
http://middle-east-info.org/league/somalia/hosken.pdf
http://middle-east-info.org/league/somalia/hosken.pdf
Scroll halfway down:
http://middle-east-info.org/gateway/genocide/index.htm
Warningnc;disturbing images:
http://middle-east-info.org/league/somalia/fgmpictures.htm
http://www.londonschoolofislamics.org.uk/DiscView.asp?mid=864&forum_id=2
I'm waiting for the university courses that tell us how great Chinese footbinding was and how terrible it was that imperialistic Western outsiders influenced people to stop the practice.
I'm waiting for the university students and academics of Chinese descent to start binding their daughters' feet as a way of reclaiming that part of their lost cultural heritage.
Because surely that's next, right?
I mean, all cultural practices are all equally good, right? Who are we to judge?
Do I get an A+, professor?
As long as the enemies of West do it, it MUST be good.
Even defending mutilating little girls' private parts is acceptable to these self-loathing, infra-misogynistic, anal-sadistic lunatics.
This is going on in my city, in my suburb, right now in the USA, even though it's against the law. No one will strop it because it's "cultural".
If it's Muslims doing it to consenting Muslims, I'm not going to spend my energy trying to change their culture. If someone wants to reason with them? Sure, why not? Allow medical organizations to criticise the practice? Okay. But going in to forcibly "save" them from themselves? No thanks. Not unless we do it "right", and that's going to be messy for all involved.
Should outsiders be telling African women what initiation practices are acceptable?
Are you trying to tell me what practices are acceptable? I hope you're not. Because it is part of my unique and powerful cultural heritage to be a cultural imperialist. You, as a multiculturalist, cannot complain about my cultural quest for cultural dominance.
I'll be visiting soon... have your tribute ready.
all of a sudden a white man's (Richard Schweder) opinion is of value? Whatever happened to the days of the abortion debate and the ads in NY subway where our opinions didn't count?
“feminist sisters insist on denying us this critical aspect of becoming a woman in accordance with our unique and powerful cultural heritage.”
according to Dr. Ahmadu
Oh, yes, by all means, let's preserve this unique and powerful cultural heritage. So many beautiful and moving traditions have been wiped out by nasty Western cultural imperialism. Think of the inspiring and meaningful ceremonies of the Aztecs with their tens of thousands of human sacrifices to their gods every year -- a powerful cultural tradition now tragically lost. Or the cannibalism of the Fijians, such a wonderful part of their cultural heritage, so unthinkingly crushed by the Western imperialists.
Well, it's too late to save these lost traditions; but we can still save genital mutilation in Africa. So what if thousands of girls die from it each year, and thousands more are crippled for life; it's a powerful cultural heritage.
Then what about other powerful African heritages -- like inter-tribal massacres that are tantamount to genocide? Should we intervene in these inspiring and moving spectacles? I guess not. The next time they start killing each other by the hundreds of thousands in Rwanda and Burundi, in Somalia, in West Africa, or Zaire, or the Sudan we must realize that it's all just part of their unique, colorful, and powerful heritage.
"Should outsiders be telling African women what cultural practices are acceptable?"
The point is that this is not being done to women; it's being done to girls, usually very little, defenseless girls who have not consented to anything and who can't fight back. Tiny, terrified, often frail and malnourished little girls, who usually have no idea what is happening and why this horrible thing is being done to them, only that it is connected somehow with the dirty shame of being female. This article makes it sound like FGM is a joyful ceremony undertaken by full-grown women; what utter b***sh*t. Most women, even the most fanatical, are too chicken to have this done to them voluntarily; when women agitate to be allowed to do this as their "right", keep in mind that it is not themselves they are doing it to; it is children. They have already been damaged, and now they insist on their right to damage others and continue the barabaric cycle ad infinitum.
So yes, to that particular question. So mutilating and torturing chldren is one of your "cultural practices,"; well, protecting children from mutilation and torture is one of MY cultural practices, and I will fight to defend it; if it has to come down to which one of us is stronger, then so be it.
Seems like child abuse to me. If adults want to subject themselves to it - be my guest.
"Sir Charles James Napier.."
Would that be the anecdotally naturally logarithmic Napier, or the anecdotally "peccavi" Napier?
From the article:
as well as
It doesn't actually surprise to learn the only "legitimate" power women of the faith have is over the wholeness of their body. It sounds like a control issue especially when combined with this belief system wholly based on 'submission' . . . along the need for supernatural acceptance for such insanely subserviant obediance.
Reminds one of this phenom as well:
As mentioned above in the comments, if the practice of FGM is desired by fully consenting adult women - so be it. However, when this act is performed on a minor or without informed consent on an adult - it is reduced to a selfish control issue and is heinously criminal.
Just because an African woman might BELIEVE that this ceremony proves the inherent "specialness" of an female adherant's spiritual powers, doesn't mean its true. Misogyny wears many disguises and ancient, cultural beliefs, passed down from a multitude of prior generations, will die hard. Let a few generations of non-mutilated females take their places in African society and then see if these females will just be running to have their primary means of erotic pleasure taken from them.
The practice, as engaged willingly by adults or by coercion to minors is barbaric and medically unsound.
Now if they were lining up for forced medical infertility, then that is a position I could support whole-heartedly.
"Voluntary", of course.
Well, what nerve of the "doctor " to talk about outsiders, when the practice is now being taken to the outside world -it's spread from Africa to the West, - Europe and Canada and the U.S!
Who is she to talk anyway - for other women. When evidence has shown that African women that have experienced it and have escaped to other countries are now talking about it.
Notably, is the Sudan model, Waris Dieri
http://www.waris-dirie-foundation.com/
How they, as children suffered - and how it undermines their health- mentally and physically- how frustrated they feel that they cannot have any marital satisfaction.
Just because the stupid woman went back - a mature, fully grown idiot, doesn't mean that little girls are not in great danger of a terrible death.
It's another evidence, of just how much islam has imposed on other cultures, and how islamic men royally hate the female, and as such, teaches their women self-hatred.
The excuse that it was a Pharaonic influence - is hardly an excuse in these times. Plus the fact, that it is a lie - since there is hardly a record of the Ancient Egyptians imposing it on themselves - since the Ancient Egyptn women had contiguous equality with the males.
Certainly, since islamics themselves have destroyed all their ancient records and erase from momory, the true events of pre-islamic days, to then change and invent other events, it seems more than likely, that it is a lie, when islamics state that sexual mutilation of little girls was conducted before mohamed.
I'm tired of cultural and religious "sensitivity" - I've had it - enough is enough. To keep accepting lies and keeping quiet - is to enable the islamics and their push to take new territory.
And another thing, what happened to the islamic respect for allah? And who are they to change what allah has created? Who are they to question what allah has created, and remove a portion of the creators work?
Let them keep their "unique" social practices in their "unique" cesspits, where they belong. If they wish to be mutilated, so be it. Little girls have no choice in the matter and many die from infection or bleed to death. If the masochistic bitches want to revel in the glory of their barbaric cultures, why do they venture into the evil, imperialistic West, where their treasured traditions are not fully respected? To get educations maybe? For what? So they can go home and resume life as a savage?
It has occurred to me, something that is very probable- the actual origin of FGM is that the islamic males having so many women together - decided to make sure the women could not have have no relations other men - but no love relations with each other - as well.
That's a possiblity that cannot be overlooked - and put on the table to be considered.
It is so sickly Orwellian to read this fake "empowerment" defense of female subordination, much as Muslim women do with the hijab. Ah, the joy of pain, unequal sacrifice, and lifelong loss of sexual pleasure!
"Should outsiders be telling African women what initiation practices are acceptable?" If universal human rights mean anything, absolutely. Come up with a new initiation ritual--how about a good hair cutting or a special tattoo on the rear end?
Look at this way; when children are abused they often become abusers as adults. FGM should be viewed in the same light as child sexual abuse along with its horrific psychological implications.
And it doesn't surprise me in the least that those women who had it done to them as children or young adults would want to apply to other women as well.
Anyone remember the National Geographic pictures of the African women with the huge round plates in their lips?
I'm sure there was joy in that ceremony.
How come we don't see that in the local Walmart?
"Now if they were lining up for forced medical infertility, then that is a position I could support whole-heartedly."
...you're speaking of liberals, no doubt.
you're speaking of liberals, no doubt.
Posted by: RoobartSbunsar at December 4, 2007 1:02
Did you know that liberals have a much lower birth rate than conservatives? It is a documented fact that red states have more babies than blue states, presumably because they're populated by illiterate, radical Christian rednecks. The evil right wing conspirators will enjoy watching the liberal population fade into oblivion because they're too selfish and eco-conscious to procreate. There will be no one to inherit their odious legacy; how tragic.
Translation from academic-ese:
"Individuals and their rights as individuals do not matter.
Power processes with legitimacy within a culture do."
(After all, individuals die, but cultures and societies theoretically have the capacity to exist forever... which we all know is the true test of greatness.)
For someone who claims such connection to her own culture, she sure has managed to suck up an awful (and I do mean awful) lot of French and German philosophy.
It goes to show that white men's writings are ok if they constitute apologetics for delegitimizing the individual.
What is hilarious is that not a liberty-minded person in the world would have a legal-oriented problem with women choosing to do this as adults, any more than they'd have a problem with women choosing to get breast implants. It is a total strawman in any context other than speaking to PC-bots who are already faithful supporters of having government force everything right and forbid everything wrong.
I just had a look at the Waris Dirie foundation web-site, via the link given above. (I have read Waris Dirie's book 'Desert Flower' and the sequel).
Like Ayaan Hirsi Ali she underwent FGM as a young girl - like Hirsi Ali she found it a traumatic, terrorising experience which left her crippled (unable to urinate quickly and easily, and with agonisingly painful menses). She describes graphically how wonderful she felt, later in her life, when a Western gynecologist was able to at least restore normal urinary function.
Unlike Hirsi Ali, Waris Dirie has had a child. She states unequivocally that the birth was made dangerous and difficult by her genital scarring - masses of rock-hard scar tissue, so tough that the obstetrician attending her had to resort to tools normally used for dealing with bone, in order to make it possible for the child to emerge.
There is no way that Type II and Type III FGM can be described as anything other than deliberate, debilitating, and indeed life-threatening crippling of women - the deliberate infliction of lifelong pain, the deliberate setting up of women for obstructed and prolonged labours (increasing the likelihood of vesico-vaginal and ano-vaginal fistulae, that is, tearing that permits uncontrollable leakage of urine and stool), and for bladder, kidney and uterine infections caused by the fact that urine and menses cannot be quickly released. Babies die or suffer brain damage because of prolonged/ obstructed labours.
That, of course, is for those women who survive the initial procedure rather than perishing from catastrophic haemhorrhage or infection - as many do.
This custom is - like the breaking and binding of little girls' feet in Old China - utterly indefensible. It is just plain evil. Pure sadism.
Perhaps a bunch of midwives and obstetricians need to do a large-scale study, comparing the length and ease of labour, frequency of complications, infant and maternal morbidity and mortality, and apgar scores of the surviving newborns, in two groups of women - the first being women of normal health who have NOT undergone FGM, the second being women who have.
I would bet my bottom dollar that, on average, the NONMUTILATED women would have quicker, more straightforward labours, with fewer complications, fewer birth injuries, and healthier newborns, than the mutilated women.
The normal, unmutilated perineal and vulval tissues are designed to stretch and expand amazingly in order to permit a child to pass. Wrecking this function by turning that part of the body into a blank mass of rock-hard, inflexible scar tissue is, frankly, both stupid and murderous.
The sooner this revolting custom is denounced and stamped out by the vast majority of humanity (after all, it isn't just 'Westerners' who don't do it - plenty of pre-Western AFRICAN peoples DIDN'T do it; non-western cultures all over the world don't do it! - just ask the Native Americans or the Hindus - ask the Buddhists), the better.