| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
It has nothing to do with Islam, we're endlessly told. Yet those who object to its banning so often turn out to be...Islamic scholars.
By Marwa Al-A'Sar for DPA (thanks to all who sent this in):
In an act that has sparked outrage among Egyptian women's rights activists, a controversial Islamic scholar filed a lawsuit against the minister of health protesting against a recent ban on female circumcision, a practice referred to by rights groups as female genital mutilation (FGM).Egyptian Sheikh Youssif al-Badri claims the ministerial decree violates the Egyptian Constitution as well as Islamic principles.
Conservative Muslim and Christian Egyptian families have their daughters circumcised as a means to preserve their chastity. Recent studies revealed that about 90% of Egyptian women have been subjected to the practice.
In June, the Health Ministry banned doctors and nurses from carrying out the procedure. The announcement followed the death of an 11-year-old girl in Upper Egypt as a result of the procedure. Medics who carry out circumcisions may face imprisonment and being stripped of their medical licences.
While al-Badri argues that the practice is necessary in curbing women's sexual inclinations, women's rights activists and physicians disapprove of his view.
"Many of the circumcised women who seek our help were traumatised, having no ability to lead a normal sex life, which affects their relationships with their husbands," said Nihad Abul-Qomsan, head of the Egyptian Centre for Women's Rights.
She accused Muslim sheikhs in the Arab world of being distracted from the vital issues. "No one of the sheikhs coming up with such arguments has ever considered in his agenda the deteriorating socio-economic conditions we are undergoing," she noted. "Instead they try to play the role of the Islam advocates."
Egypt's top Islamic and Christian authorities were quick to voice support for the ban, saying the practice had no basis either in the Qur'an or in the Bible.
"The Constitution is based on the Islamic sharia law, which does not stipulate FGM, giving a wife the right to enjoy sex with her husband," Khalil Mustafa Khalil, who holds a master's degree in FGM legislation, told the independent al-Badeel newspaper.
Posted by Robert at December 20, 2007 8:42 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
There seems to be a gigantic surplus of "scholars"
lately spouting off on a variety of topics. Don't cesspoolian schools train people for other things than being a "scholar"? Maybe if they train their people in more than the Koran these nations wouldn't be the cesspools that they are.
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at December 20, 2007 8:53 AM
Wow...how does one get a masters degree in FGM legislation?
Why would one want one??
Posted by: HistorianTheologian at December 20, 2007 9:10 AM
Interesting that it's almost always men who oppose FGM. Wonder how vociferously they would defend the male equivalent?
Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at December 20, 2007 9:10 AM
Interesting that it's almost always men who support FGM. Wonder how vociferously they would defend the male equivalent?
Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at December 20, 2007 9:11 AM
It does not violate Islamic principles as long as the cut is not too "severe."
Hadith Narrated Umm Atiyyah al-Ansariyyah:
A woman used to perform circumcision in Medina. The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said to her: Do not cut severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for a husband. (Sunan Abu Dawud, Book 41, Number 5251)
http://www.themuslimwoman.com/hygiene/femalecircumcision.htm
Posted by: irish_infidel at December 20, 2007 9:28 AM
HistorianTheologian, I was thinking the same thing. Do you think they offer that degree at Harvard, too?
Posted by: Lori B. at December 20, 2007 9:44 AM
Khalil Mustafa Khalil, who holds a master's degree in FGM legislation, told the independent al-Badeel newspaper.
My God, what's next in islamic academics, doctorates in wife beating? Imagine spending years in a classromm learning the minute aspects of female disfiguration. Must be a fascinating experience and is probably only available to muslim males.
Torture, mutilation, beatings, psychological abuse, imprisonment, spousal rape, enslavement---just a few of the joys of being a "free and respected" muslima.
Posted by: Susanp at December 20, 2007 10:59 AM
I have always heard that FGM was a tribal custom.
Shows what I know. Maybe it's a Islamic tribal custom.
Well, isn't that special.
Posted by: tanstaafl at December 20, 2007 1:53 PM
Where is a Lesbian Avenger when you need one?
Posted by: tanstaafl at December 20, 2007 1:55 PM
Medics who carry out circumcisions may face imprisonment and being stripped of their medical licences.
Hmm... If I were going to strip something from a Dr. Mohammed Josef Mengele for performing FGM, it would not be his licenses. Let's see, what would a goat raping, child mutilating, pedophile really miss? Hmmm
at December 20, 2007 4:00 PM
I hereby issue a fatwa against making fatwas.
There are too many fat ones flying around now as is.
Posted by: alexon at December 20, 2007 5:39 PM
The irony here is that their whole "excuse" for female genital mutilation is to keep a woman pure by removing her ability to experience sexual pleasure. However, not only is the practice of it barbaric, but also it does very little to curb a woman's experience of sexual pleasure. As most educated, civilized people know, although sexual pleasure can be obtained from the outside of the woman's body, the majority of pleasure is experienced from the inside through penetration. God, in his wisdom, made this gift hidden in such a way that it is almost impossible for anyone to spoil it. In other words, a woman doesn't need a clitoris to have an orgasm. I just find it ironic that for all their pontificating about modesty, sexual virtue and uprightness, in reality the Muslims don't know the first damn thing about female sexual anatomy.
Posted by: Dumpling at December 20, 2007 5:48 PM
Dumpling wrote: "...it [FGM] does very little to curb a woman's experience of sexual pleasure."
Do you have that on good authority, Dumpling?
This seems to be many men's fantasy, that women's sexual pleasure has nothing to do with the clitoris, so they don't have to waste their time with boring old foreplay. Most studies have consistently shown that a majority of women require some form of clitoral stimulation to have an orgasm. Women's sexuality is complex, which should not be a news flash to your average guy out there...
And it is very, very farfetched to claim that the most extreme form of FGM, suffered by women and young girls all over northern Africa, which involves hacking off all the outer genitalia and sewing together the vagina, making normal urination and menstruation impossible, does not interfere with a woman's ability to enjoy sex.
I believe that the operation usually done in Egypt is the "milder" form, which entails only the removal of the clitoris. This does not mean it is not mutilation on par with hacking off half of a boy's penis. It is NOT the equivalent of male circumcism as practiced by Muslims and Jews, although I do not like that practice either. As painful and nasty as that is, that just involves the removal of skin, does not affect a boy's sexual functioning later in life, and at least has some medically proven benefits (eg., circumcised boys suffer from far fewer infections, and there are far lower rates of HPV among circumcised men and their partners, thus a far lower incidence of cervical cancer in women). The clitoris is an entire organ. Removing it sexually cripples a woman, and that is the point.
I've seen pictures of young Egyptian girls going through the procedure that would turn anyone's stomach. One of them, ironically, was in a beautiful coffee-table book of photos celebrating women's and girls' "coming of age" celebrations around the world. The authors, in justifying their inclusion of this picture, were in full cultural-relativist, who-are-we-to-judge-other-cultures mode. Like I said: truly stomach-turning. It was seeing this picture that gave me the resolve to do everything I can to see this practice eradicated in my lifetime.
It's not unrealistic. China got rid of foot-binding in one generation. But then of course, there were no mushy-headed cultural relativists back in those days.
Posted by: angloirishslav at December 20, 2007 9:06 PM
Dumpling wrote: "...it [FGM] does very little to curb a woman's experience of sexual pleasure."
Do you have that on good authority, Dumpling?
This seems to be many men's fantasy, that women's sexual pleasure has nothing to do with the clitoris, so they don't have to waste their time with boring old foreplay. Most studies have consistently shown that a majority of women require some form of clitoral stimulation to have an orgasm. Women's sexuality is complex, which should not be a news flash to your average guy out there...
And it is very, very farfetched to claim that the most extreme form of FGM, suffered by women and young girls all over northern Africa, which involves hacking off all the outer genitalia and sewing together the vagina, making normal urination and menstruation impossible, does not interfere with a woman's ability to enjoy sex.
I believe that the operation usually done in Egypt is the "milder" form, which entails only the removal of the clitoris. This does not mean it is not mutilation on par with hacking off half of a boy's penis. It is NOT the equivalent of male circumcism as practiced by Muslims and Jews, although I do not like that practice either. As painful and nasty as that is, that just involves the removal of skin, does not affect a boy's sexual functioning later in life, and at least has some medically proven benefits (eg., circumcised boys suffer from far fewer infections, and there are far lower rates of HPV among circumcised men and their partners, thus a far lower incidence of cervical cancer in women). The clitoris is an entire organ. Removing it sexually cripples a woman, and that is the point.
I've seen pictures of young Egyptian girls going through the procedure that would turn anyone's stomach. One of them, ironically, was in a beautiful coffee-table book of photos celebrating women's and girls' "coming of age" celebrations around the world. The authors, in justifying their inclusion of this picture, were in full cultural-relativist, who-are-we-to-judge-other-cultures mode. Like I said: truly stomach-turning. It was seeing this picture that gave me the resolve to do everything I can to see this practice eradicated in my lifetime.
It's not unrealistic. China got rid of foot-binding in one generation. But then of course, there were no mushy-headed cultural relativists back in those days.
Posted by: angloirishslav at December 20, 2007 9:06 PM
I am outraged when I think of this practice. I think it just goes to show that this is the feeling that women are evil and must be controlled in order for men to be safe. I think it also shows what happens when people believe that they own other people.
Posted by: worldlywoman at December 21, 2007 4:30 AM
http://www.challenging-islam.org/articles/circumcision.htm
scroll halfway down:
http://middle-east-info.org/gateway/genocide/index.htm
WARNING: GRAPHIC IMAGES
http://middle-east-info.org/league/somalia/fgmpictures.htm
http://www.londonschoolofislamics.org.uk/DiscView.asp?mid=864&forum_id=2
at December 21, 2007 5:17 AM
""Many of the circumcised women who seek our help were traumatised, having no ability to lead a normal sex life, which affects their relationships with their husbands," said Nihad Abul-Qomsan, head of the Egyptian Centre for Women's Rights."
...I have heard the underground lesbian movement is growing fast in Islam...
at December 21, 2007 7:31 AM
I cannot help but notice that the behavior of so many muslim males has so much in common with serial killers, rapists, and pedophiles.
Posted by: HereticInfidel at December 21, 2007 1:29 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)