But if it is just a ceremony like christening and no physical harm is done, as Willy says, then why is the non-harmful version wrong?
Cujo says it 'legitimises' the real thing. How does it do that? You could equally argue that it deligitimises the real thing by offering a non-harmful ceremonial alternative.
It is certainly not 'as bad as' the real thing i.e. surgical excision of the clitoris.
Distorting the figures of actual physical harm does not further the agenda of stopping FGM.
As some have said the FGM abbreviation covers a wide range of "cuts/scratches/arbitrary removal of a body part(s)". Defining and monitoring the sub groups would at least let people understand the gravity of the problem, if in fact there is one. To lump then in one specific body area is ridiculous. To allow different religious/cultural groups set their own standards is something we need to all live with. Start a group for the ladies who put plugs in their ears, the ladies who put plates in their mouths, the ladies who stretch their neck with metal rings, the ladies who pierce their ears, Noses, Nipples, men who also have piercings ........
If you personally don't like theses things dong get involved with those that do. Just walk away.
Who are these so called standard setters and who agreed they would be the judges? I know, I know, it's the rich ones who believe they can buy just the right doll to take care of, dress up and parade in front of their friends. Some are even named after the country they were born in and year of their birth, how chic!
But hey let's just try out all our new vacinnes and drugs on them first.
A tray full of GOLD is not worth a moment in time.
Originally Posted by OhOhOriginally Posted by OhOhOriginally Posted by OhOhYou've just highlighted very well where your argument falls flat - children don't do this to themselves. Adults do it TO them.Originally Posted by OhOh
Originally Posted by panama hat
I am presuming that children don't administer FMG to themselves. It will be done by family or friends. In western society many doctors offer genital surgery. Is this just for consenting adults or are children requesting it and the parents signing a piece of paper.
Neck Ringing:
Wiki suggest the neck ringing starts, to their knowledge, at 2 years old. Presumably their mother or family actually do the wringing.
Lip plates:
"Among the Surma (own name Suri) and Mursi people of the lower Omo River valley in Ethiopia,[2] about 6 to 12 months before marriage, a young woman has her lip pierced by her mother or one of her kinswomen, usually at around the age of 15 to 18."
Are these ladies considered adults, do they have a choice of being "plated"? I suspect it's a cultural thing imposed upon the ladies by peer pressure, not an individuals decision if they intend to remain in their village.
Ear/Nasal Plugs.
"The Mursi is a tribe found in Ethiopia known for their women decorating themselves with wooden plates in both their ears and bottom lip.[15] Around the age of fifteen and a year before her marriage, a young woman has her lip and ears pierced by her mother."
Circumcision:
No request from the child asked in a large % of the genital mutilation.
We also have a whole list of, what some might say mutilations, called "body piercings", Noses, Ears, eyebrows, lips, tongues, nipples, stomach, male and female genitalia. Is society demanding yellow stars to be worn by all that have such mutilations?
All these actions could be construed as mutilations of ones own or a family members, bodies.
One could suggest a fifteen year old African, Asian or western girl has in some way an adult status however. Or is one countries definition of adulthood to be imposed on all?
Is age relevant, should the cultural practice undertaken by some communities be allowed to persist or are the worlds citizens to be forced to accept lurid definitions of normality upon them? Who will decide these things will it be government officials inspecting ladies and men to score the extent/legality/barbarity of their mutilations, will legally available taxpayer funds be withdrawn if a mutilated person is found, will they as some have suggested be deported or forced to wear some emblem - a yellow star possibly?
Or is it just the Female Genital portion of the mutilations which requires decisive action by some?
Originally Posted by OhOh
You didn't read the articleOriginally Posted by OhOh
Not to minorsOriginally Posted by OhOh
8-day olds requesting genital mutilationOriginally Posted by OhOh
Anyway, it is illegal in western countries, irrespective of parental consent . . . added to which - which little girls would request such a thing?
Sometimes, OhOh, arguing a point simply for the heck of it doesn't make sense
So like male circumcision then. That is why I don't favour either form of circumcision frankly, but if there was a particularly barbaric form of male circumcision- as there is with FGM, would this not be the logical priority to eliminate?Originally Posted by panama hat
Originally Posted by panama hatRead the punchline, as some have! The rest is called things to ponder or same say, evidence to support an opinion . Not that many here require evidence to support their own preconceived opinions.Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
Originally Posted by OhOhYes, thank you for the clarity and the raising of a taboo subject. The possible male equivalent is accepted, is legal in many countries and few NGO's trample over what is probably considered, by some, to be mutilation by cultural consent. Why not?Originally Posted by sabang
Why then do they try and trample over other cultural mutilations? Is it because they are poor, uneducated, unarmed, brown people and as such, some believe, have no rights? Or is it because they are female?
If one was to raise that issue all sorts of religious and ethical questions would appear from under the stone of acceptance by a group of people who "must not be named", "must not have the finger of doubt pointed at them" and have "exceptional" authority, "probably".Originally Posted by panama hat
So any reference to equally barbaric mutilation performed on male children is "probably" a taboo subject?
I personally believe that it is a cultural thing and we must allow different cultures to express themselves as they wish. If one feels strongly enough, take some steps away from the said culture and never look back.
Last edited by OhOh; 10-02-2016 at 10:25 AM.
This article suggests you are correct PH. I've pasted a few interesting conclusions.
http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/Pnacu138.pdf
The dangers of FC increase with the medicalization of FC, since, as found in this study, midwives tend to use scissors instead of penknives and more often use them for cutting of the clitoris (incision and excision), where traditional providers more often use penknives for more symbolic acts of scraping or rubbing, and sometimes pricking or piercing the outer part of clitoris.
The common argument that FC, if performed under hygienic and medically
controlled conditions and by a trained medical provider, is the lesser of two evils
compared to the greater risk of severe complications from unhygienic procedures
performed by traditional providers, is also not acceptable.
Since culture is a social construction that is highly colored by the opinions and values of males and of religious leaders, successful strategies must involve messages that reach diverse audiences, including men, opinion leaders, religious leaders and policy makers. Traditional birth attendants, health practitioners and women must also be targeted.
Furthermore, an anti-FC campaign that is initiated by outsiders can be perceived as an attack on culture and tradition, instead of on the harmful practice.
^More like covering the politicians and government health workers arses to ensure "compliance" with UN orders and ensure the payments from Ameristani AID programs continue.
Most "FMC" appears to be of little significance, little or no bleeding, little or no pain, no psychological damage and at the lower end of the scale.
Most parents are unsure of the origins of the procedure, but then most parents failed to be educated beyond infants/junior school so that's not surprising. (rural conditions, religious leaders seen as more trustworthy than politicians. A la Thailand)
The greatest number of FC appear to be generated in the main cities. (Peer pressure)
Most parents will continue with the cultural FMG practice. (It obviously hasn't done any lasting harm to most women)
A storm on a teacup according to your study.
^Maybe money to the education budget would change attitudes more?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)