I am an undergraduate student in Women and Gender studies. I aim to be a human right lawyer for women and children in developing countries and have just conducted a summer internship in Tanzania as part of TAWLA (Tanzanian Women Lawyer Association) to defend the sexual reproductive rights and good governance of local women there. The insights I have gained throughout this internship led me to offer a new and broader perspective on sensitive issues such as Female Genital Cutting, regardless of my personal opinion on the matter.
The Republic of Uganda, Ministry of Health
THE NECESSITY OF FEMALE GENITAL CUTTING: DEFINING GENDER IDENTITY
Background
This paper examined the prominent cultural and social significance of Female Genital Cutting (FGC) among local population in Africa. Through this essay, the aim is not so much to condemn this practice as an unethical act of mere barbarity, but to offer a different outlook on the matter, free from any cultural imperialist ideals. The result suggests that not only FGC is a practice that originated from the West (England), but also that this procedure shares many similarities with labia reconstruction surgery undergone by Western women.
Practiced in at least 28 countries on the continent, modern day Africa is subject to a wide controversy on the issue of female circumcision. Within the frame of this post-colonial era, many regard the procedure that includes the partial or total removal of the external female genital organs as a human right violation of girls and women. This issue is still preeminent today as the Western world is encouraging a war against such actions. Indeed, no later than Friday morning February 6, 2015, a woman was arrested at Heathrow Airport for “conspiracy to commit female circumcision”, as she was travelling to Ghana (BBC.com). The 42-year-old woman was traveling with an 8-year-old girl and was arrested by the police, which was implementing a female genital cutting awareness campaign. Ghana is one of the “countries of prevalence” for Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), and passengers in outbound flights to those countries are closely watched. Thus, while FGM is undoubtedly an ongoing issue, the debate remains if, from a native perspective, female circumcision can be considered amoral. I would support the claim that African women female circumcision can only be characterized as amoral by virtue of cultural imperialism’s definition.
Growing up as part of the African Diaspora and being raised by parents of different ethnic backgrounds (as my mother is Gabonese and my father is French) gave me both the drawback and the advantages of being raised bicultural as it gave me a broader insight on the world. From my African side, I was acculturated with high family values; however, my Western mindset is more prominent in defining my character. Indeed, I would say that, in some regard, I had a cultural imperialism view on Africa in the extent that I used to despise some aspects of my African culture, judging it in accordance with the European standards I received. I was brought up hearing that Africans were lazy, had no respects for the rules and that the whole continent was hopeless. My own mother left Africa and sought to never go back as she believed that nothing good could come out of there. Hence, she set the example for this predicament of self-contempt which prevented me from self-improvement. By denigrating those alleged African characteristics, I was denying one part of my self-identity. I denied having any bonds with Africa because I refrained myself from the possibility of associating with a culture which views women as the second sex, and advocates the perpetuation of such a practice, amongst others. Nonetheless, I now consider my past reaction as narrow-minded as I did not consider the issue with cultural relativism and was influenced by the opinion of people that surrounded me. That perspective was not mine, and I firmly reckon that while tackling the subject of female circumcision, most people are only spreading the hearsay of others. Indeed, I have interviewed five of my classmates about the issue. While none of them talked about the potential cultural significance of this practice, to them, female circumcision was akin to dire pain and encouraged women’s subordination. I went on by asking how they have been acquainted with the issue, to which they responded that it was fundamentally the image displayed on the news. As there are generally more than meet the eyes, we can conclude from those responses, that we are being presented a one-sided, ethnocentric picture of female circumcision by the media.
The Western world fosters the idea that the practice is a barbaric tradition. Indeed, the term “mutilation” is generally used and presupposes atrocious harm, as opposed to female circumcision, which can be defined as “the initiation of a female into a group (usually an age group) through ceremonies and the practiced of clitoridectomy” (Barker-Benfield, 90). The discussion of language reflects the culture from which it emerges as it conveys the meanings of normalcy. This dichotomy and the choice of wording by the Western world come to support their view on the matter. Thus, they hold the belief that this custom should be condemned as it denies women’s basic rights. This belief is related to the discourse of human rights and white feminism and is more importantly driven by the ideas of “global sisterhood”. It is the notion that women around the world are united by patriarchy. Thus, Western feminists feel the burden to rescue the “sisters” abroad while fostering the idea that women that voluntarily engage in this practice are misguided and helpless. In this sense, in the eyes of white feminism, the custom is “cruel” and “inhuman” and must call for opposition. I have to challenge this argument based on the intersectional form of understanding of gender identity and oppression. Indeed, as different regions may have different style and forms of oppression, what rings true for Western women does not necessarily for African women. Those feminists do not dispute the moral status of these practices but rather the global feminist discourse on it. Claims can be made to question this western standard notion of oppression.
We must first examine the cultural significance of this procedure in term of gender and age, which are the main factors of social organization in African societies and determine the distribution of responsibilities in the society. Indeed, international controversy has cast women as victims but they are mostly the one perpetuating this tradition. The fact is that there is a strong relationship between gender and body modification in countries that practiced this custom. Indeed, femininity is closely tied to virginity and marriageability, which can only be guaranteed by circumcision. The term virginity is not understood in the Western sense of not having sexual intercourse, but virginity is made through female genital cutting. In those communities, Female Genital Cutting (FGC) is about defining gender. The physical presentation does not guarantee gender identity but genital cutting does, as it is thought of as eliminating “masculine” parts. In this regard, not only is there no distinct female and male identity without cutting, but the notion of cleanliness results in that women that don’t undergo the procedure might be stigmatized and rejected. To understand the seriousness of this ritual, we must look into Lynn Thomas’s work Female circumcision in Africa in which she introduces the case study of Kenyan women who responded to a ban of circumcision implemented by colonial campaigns in 1956, by declaring “Ngaitana”: “I will circumcise myself”. Indeed, those girls defied the ban by purchasing razor blades and going to the bush to circumcise each other. One of the girls participating in the protest stated that her motive was due to family and societal pressure. She claimed: “I remember why I got motivated. It’s because my grandmother used to tell me “you’re left here alone with your dirt”” (Thomas, 140). This comment clearly shows that not only uncircumcised women are a minority group but that their status is highly looked down upon. Additionally, this statement shows that while most colonial figures held the belief that male were the main agents behind this protest, the reality is that circumcised women, mothers and grandmothers were the instigators. This fact comes to demystify the discourse that advocates that this practice is embedded in the social pressure of a patriarchal system. While opponents of female circumcision might argue that values of a patriarchal system might be internalized by women, we may dispute this claim by stating that while it might be true, the fact remains that women benefit more from this practice than men. Indeed, while more African societies are governed by a system of seniority, this rite of passage not only transformed girls into women but it acknowledges their position of authority. The circumcisers are solely elder women, they are not only responsible for the arrangements for the ceremony, but they are also the one passing on the tradition, knowledge and responsibilities attached to becoming a woman. Moreover, the girl transformed into a woman is thus ready to get married, and one of the primary functions of marriage is to enable economic access resulting in social power.
A notable element is that most of the traditional societies that practice the cutting are agrarian societies. This detail is of paramount importance in analyzing not only the societal organization but also the importance of womanhood in those communities. In those societies with low population density, the fertility of a woman is highly regarded, as offspring are a source of wealth. Thus, female circumcision presents itself as a “bargaining tool and enforces complementarity rather than subordination to men” (Thomas, 131). With marriage, the woman is the head of the household and rules over anything associated with domesticity such as cattle or land rights. However, only a married woman benefits from this privilege and only the circumcised women are eligible for marriage.
Therefore, most opponents shifted their arguments from the concept of barbarity to dispute it based on health concerns, judging it as detrimental to women’s health. According to the World Health Organization, female circumcision may cause bleedings, infertility, and problems urinating. Moreover, it is said not to have any health benefits and rather nurtures conceptions of what is considered proper sexual behavior as well as cultural ideals of femininity and beauty. While those accounts prove to be true, we must first bear in mind that there seems to be a stigma on female circumcision. Male circumcision shares some similarities as for instance: it impedes sexual enjoyment in that circumcised male have more difficulties reaching ejaculation or orgasms than uncircumcised men. Nonetheless, male circumcision is legal in most countries around the world. Hence, we may first wonder why male circumcision deems to be acceptable and why is the main focus on female circumcision. We can offer the argument that the prevalence of male circumcisions is rooted in the religious requirement. Indeed, the book of Genesis mentions that God issued a command to Abraham that every male child shall be circumcised. Thus, performing male circumcision symbolizes faith in God. Moreover, the fact is that Christianity, Islam and Judaism are the main world religions, fact that can explain the wide acceptance of the practice of male circumcision, as the Christian population alone accounts for 2 billion of the world’s population. In this instance, religious dogma dictates human behavior in determining the acceptable. Conversely, female circumcision is more reinforced by traditional religious leader and thus less likely to be accepted by the majority. Alongside this idea is the fact that male circumcision is associated with the idea of manhood and virility as a man who is not circumcised is often labeled as sexually impotent (Krieger). On the other hand, the circumcised woman is seen as oppressed, and any culture that encourages it, is seen as backward while the culture of the imperialist is seen as the ideal.
Nonetheless, this issue seemingly exposes the biases of imperialist view. While female circumcision is nurtured by ideals of femininity, beauty, myth of sexual dysfunction and so forth, the fact is that Western women also subject themselves to medically unnecessary procedures or cosmetic surgery. This idea is emphasized in the movie Orgasm Inc. The movie depicts the expectations that Western culture imposed on women body’s image and role during sexual intimacy. Women are expected to be perfect and flawless. Moreover, our culture enhances our self-consciousness about who we are, and foster youth ideologies. It infantilizes women and encourage them to look like “little girl”. Consequently, women are willing to undergo labiaplasty or labia reconstruction surgery. Through this practice, hegemonic masculinity or in other words practices that promote the subordinate social position of women, is reinforced. This argument comes to support another dimension of cultural imperialism. Western feminists are prompt to object to female genital cutting on the basis of the subordination of women while failing to acknowledge the internal oppression that occurs in the West as well.
Hence, we may wonder whether labiaplasty is significantly different from female circumcision. In her article, Loose lips sink ships, Simone Weil Davis compares those two practices. She claims “anti-FGO laws that now exist in a number of U.S states describe procedures that would definitely include those practiced by Drs. Alter and Matlock, but they use only language that addresses the “ritual” or custom and belief-based cutting of African immigrant bodies” (Weil Davis, 21). She goes on by stating that “it is a prevalent mistake to imagine a quantum distinction between Euro-American and African reshaping of women’s bodies: far too often, they are measured with entirely different yardsticks, rather than on a continuum” (Weil-Davis, 21). Alongside those arguments, is the fact that against preconceived ideas, “female circumcision, has a history in the West and cannot be thought of as a solely African or Islamic custom” (Baker-Benfield, 25). In his work Sexual surgery in late-nineteenth-century America, Ben Baker-Benfield explains that clitoridectomy or “the surgical removal of the clitoris as well as other parts of the labia or genitalia” (Barker-Benfield, 90), was invented and first performed by an English gynecologist, Isaac Baker Brown, in 1858. This surgical procedure was made available to diagnose woman’s mental disorder. Furthermore, in the United States, there have been more occurrences of female castration rather than clitoridectomy. The reasons behind this operation are embedded in the racial context of 1870’s America. It aimed to help the attainment of eugenics ideals through sterilization, “the castration of women starting in the 1870’s was part of the general anxiety about the racial future of white America” (Barker-Benfield, 86). Both examples emphasize the fact that regardless of time and place, a woman’s social value is mostly determined by her genitalia and the medical field supports this idea and customs.
Consequently, we have demonstrated that the Western World is not well-suited to denounce female excision, and characterize it as an amoral deed embedded in the traditional culture of the most remote part of Africa, while having their citizens undergo a surgery that share similarities with female circumcision. Both are pervaded by the social and cultural expectations of their respective cultures. Moreover, the instance of the case study of Kenyan women shows us the limitations of the international discourse and actions to enforce the interdiction of this procedure. We cannot understand this traditional nested practice with contemporary ideals. There is more than generally meet the eyes. When we see subordination of women, they regard it as a leverage to “attain subaltern status and being part of a collective” (Thomas, 131). When we do not observe any apparent health benefits, they recognize an ideal of cleanliness. Lastly, female genital cutting is the practice that defines gender and in both the Western and African worlds’ gender is not fixed and intersects with others systems of oppression for different situated women.
Therefore, in the words of Rogaia Abusharaf, “treating it as a crime and punishing offenders with jail time would in many cases be unfair. Mothers who bring their daughters for the operation believe they are doing the right thing” (Abusharaf, 92). Through their lens, female circumcision is not amoral.
Works Cited
Abusharaf, Rogaia. “Unmasking tradition.” An Introduction to Women’s Studies: Gender in a Transnational World. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2006. 91-97. Print.
Barker-Benfield, Ben, and Caren Kaplan. “Sexual Surgery in Late Nineteenth Century America.” An Introduction to Women’s Studies: Gender in a Transnational World. Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education, 2006. 85-90. Print.
“Female Genital Mutilation.” WHO. N.p., Feb. 2014. Web. 04 Feb. 2015.
“Female Genital Mutilation: Woman Arrested at Heathrow – BBC News.” BBC News. N.p., 6 Feb. 2015. Web. 22 May 2015.
Krieger, John N., Supriya D. Mehta, Robert C. Bailey, Kawango Agot, Jeckoniah O. Ndinya-Achola. “Adult Male Circumcision: Effects on Sexual Function and Sexual Satisfaction in Kisumu, Kenya.” The Journal of Sexual Medicine. U.S. National Library of Medicine, 5 Nov. 2011. Web. 22 May 2015.
Orgasm Inc. Dir. Elizabeth Canner. Perf. Elizabeth Canner, Darby Stephens. First Run Features, 2009. Class.
Thomas, Lynn. “Female “circumcision” in Africa.” (n.d.): n. pag. Smartsite. Lynne Rienner. Web. 04 Feb. 2015.
Weil-Davis, Simone. “Loose Lips Sink Ships.” JSTOR. Feminist Journals Inc., 2002. Web. 08 Feb. 2015.