The Common Practice Of Female Genital Mutilation

For class today, we read two brief articles on genital mutilation. In class, we also watched V-Day: Until the Violence Stops. Female genital mutilation is the removal of some or all of the external female genitalia. It is performed with a blade with or without anesthesia. I have been aware of the idea of male circumcision before, but I had honestly never thought about female circumcision before the reading. It shocked me to learn that certain cultures did not want women to have sexual desires. As a teenager growing up I did not know enough about my own body, I could only imagine what it was like to not understand your own body and not understand why your community would want you to have a FGM procedure done. Leyla Hussein explained that she

Everyone has their own perspectives on things and practice certain actions differently. After reading Martha Nussbaunm's piece made me realize how few other cultures deal with difficult circumstances. Female genital mutilation violates human rights regardless of what country you are from, what culture you are and what you practice in my opinion. Males and females are made exceedingly opposite within private parts so I agree and object to "female circumcision". Doing certain activities comes with dangerous health risks and and ultimately untimely deaths. That was the outcome these young woman faced in Fauziya's hometown. They were forced into this practice and own choice to protect their dignity was denied in which moral respect for others were

R/ The female genitalia mutilation is one of the cruelest rituals still practiced in most parts of the Middle East and mainly in Africa. This tradition is considered by the World Health Organization a global concern. This ritual clearly violates the human rights of girls and women and is extremely painful. The reasons for this atrocity could vary among regions and are linked most to cultural and social factors, but the two most prominent reasons are: a process to

This research is limited only to the ethical issues of Female Genital Mutilation(FGM). Ethical issues about other kinds/types of mutilation like the tattoos or markings, surgeries, transplants and piercings are not furthermore discussed, explained, and identified in this research.

Now that we know little about the mutilation process these females undergoes; let’s ask ourselves “Why would someone ever agree to conduct such procedure on their own will?” If mutilation emphasizes the clear violation of human rights, why is this procedure being implemented in many different countries? Well, this issue is due to different ethical, and moral perspective; one may believe that female mutilation is morally right; while others may think it’s a violation of human rights. Let’s first explore the ethical theories on this

Even though FGM is a controversial topic and many oppose it I feel Ahanonu and Victor were able to effectively analyze their audience. The authors were able to appeal to the readers especially mothers by eliciting feelings through connotative meanings and emotional tone (Purdue OWL: The Rhetorical Situation). When reading this article I thought about what I would do if I were in this situation. Whether I agree with FGM or not the authors made me feel empathy for the mothers and feel that they are doing what they think is best for their daughters. Data analyzed from the study showed that 44.2% of the mothers felt by getting their daughters circumcised they were preventing them from becoming promiscuous, preserving their virginity, preventing premarital sex and increasing their chances of marriageability. 30.5% of the mothers believed getting circumcised would promote their daughters to be faithful to their spouses (Ahanonu and Victor,

However, I question such reasoning. Is FGM a human rights violation? I believe it can be, especially in cases in which the practice is done on children and/or forced. And while this may be true in many cases and the masking of this under the guise of maintaining tradition must be addressed by the world community, female circumcision is not always forced and is possible to be performed on a consenting adult for various cultural reasons. This may be a difficult argument to follow in countries such as Djibouti and Egypt, in which the prevalence of FGM reaches close to ninety-eight percent of the female population. However, there are many countries in sub Saharan Africa such as Kenya and Liberia that are closer to fifty percent and many countries with an even smaller percentage of the female population being circumcised , so there is some level of choice in these countries. No matter how unnecessary and barbaric some may see the practice, FGM must be acknowledged as a cultural practice in cases in which it is not forced but rather sought after by a consenting adult, utilizing cultural relativism in recognizing that female circumcision may be an acceptable practice to some people and their culture should not be persecuted unnecessarily by members of the contemporary human rights movement who cannot relate to it for no reason other than that. So the question is asked again, is female genital mutilation a violation of human rights? Only in some cases. For this reason, to

The subject of FGM (Female Genital Mutilation) reminds me of the severity of FGM as well as its ties with culture and religion in Ethiopia - my country of origin. The issue personally affects me because it stirs up very unpleasant memories and thoughts. I remembered my oldest female cousins and neighbors going through this kind of practice twenty years ago. I even remember the women who executed the procedure. Like many of the people who carry out female circumcision, this woman was not medically trained to perform the procedure, nor did she use proper medical equipments and anesthesia. The majority of the people who support female circumcision use their religious and cultural values to explain their support for FGM. However, FGM is a brutal practice that exposes women to extreme pain and possible risk

FGM is still practiced by 28 Countries worldwide. Highlighted by the World Health Organisation “three million girls undergo some form of FGM every year in Africa alone”.

Maintaing a relativist perspective in the study of human rights means that one must analyze aspects of culture and contrast them to theories of morality without coming to an absolute truth of what is believed to be right or wrong. Cultural relativists acknowledge that while all human beings who inhabit the earth should have their human rights valued and respected, cultures vary greatly, and what may not be acceptable in one region might be the norm in another. Especially considering the fact that the concept of human rights is a western ideal that is theoretically accepted by some, but not necessarily adopted in the culture as a whole. In analyzing the human rights topic of female genital mutilation (FGM), cultural relativists Steiner and Alston

Imagine this! Being either a young girl or a woman forcefully bound against your will while elders perform a procedure called Female Genital Mutilation (FGM). The young girls and women who are forced to have this procedure done not only loses their rights to sexual pleasure but their rights are sliced, chopped, punctured, and finally burnt away. Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) otherwise known as Female Genital Circumcision (FGC) is also a controversial topic in Western societies. This paper will examine the history of Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), hegemonic perspective on Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), health consequences of having this procedure done, how Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) affects women’s sexual function, and women who

Female Genital Mutilation is believed to have started in Egypt 2,000 years ago and spread from there. Only a few years ago, FGM was considered a cultural tradition, but now the United Nations has labeled it as a violation of human rights. Canada, Denmark, the Netherlands, and the United States has declared Female Genital Mutilation grounds for seeking asylum and is a punishable offense (1).

Female genital mutilation is a practice deeply enmeshed in the cultural beliefs of many Africans and select groups around the world. Also, just like any other culture, they will cling even more strongly to their ancient traditions when their beliefs are challenged by people from an outside culture. When someone from another country comes to a tribe to essentially tell them that one of their most basic traditions is wrong, problems usually ensue. This is mainly because, in an African’s point of view, the outsider does not understand the tribe’s beliefs and so has no valid privilege to tell the tribe what they should or should not do. In this way, even if there are a select few men and women that support the foreigner’s view, they run the

The radical implication of cultural relativism is that every cultural practice or belief requires an attempt to understand it from a sympathetic perspective, no matter how abhorrent the practice may seem (Greenwood & Stini, 1977, p182, as cited in Schultz & Lavenda, 2005, p25). However, relativistic thinking does not give free licence and acceptance to all practices; for example, female genital mutilation. There are boundaries drawn by cross-cultural universal values that require an observer to question why a cultural group practices

Female genital mutilation (FGM) is not a morally justified practice. It is an unnecessary procedure that has no medical health benefits to the girls and women it is being performed on. According to Utilitarianism, we should produce the greatest amount of pleasure for the greatest number affected. Utilitarian’s also believe that we should alleviate the greatest amount of pain and suffering for the greatest number affected. Based on Utilitarian grounds, FGM has no medical health benefits and it is a completely unnecessary act on females in this culture. It is also an extremely painful procedure that has very serious short term and long term side effects, including death.