"The UN Declaration on the Elimination of all Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Beliefs protects the rights of the child against abuse carried out in the name of a particular belief or cultural tradition, stating that, 'Practices of a religion or belief in which a child is brought up must not be injurious to his physical or mental health or to his full development.'" (Amnesty, 1998)I have several specific concerns relating to this and the previous articles. What constitutes psychological harm to a child in the name of religious beliefs? If certain forms of circumcision were seen to not cause true physical harm, but merely harm to mental health, would they still be wrong? If so, then what separates FGM form psychological damage done to children in the name of Christianity by their parents teaching them that sex is evil and that they should be ashamed of their sexual organs, sexual desire, and masturbation? I believe that the harm done to a child is grave in both cases, and yet, this kind of behavior is not attacked in our own culture. Is this then saying that psychological harm is less grievous than physical harm?
Secondly, how does one then take the step to protect Human Rights as deemed by the UN in countries whose cultures are so different from ours in values and social structures, without attacking the culture itself? If one not only attacks an inhuman practice , but along with doing so attacks the traditions and beliefs and history that come along with it, how are we not being judgmental and ethnocentric, not to mention egocentric?
These are hard questions. If we take the leap to agree that there is a moral absolute that deems it wrong to mutilate a child, and we extend this to FGM-despite the cultural reasons for the practice-it is still difficult to excuse imposition into the cultures of people whose lives and values and beliefs and ladders of importance are so foreign to us. If you look at the examples of out cultural beliefs towards women just a half a century ago and even today in the modern world, how can you say that we in the U.S. do not promote the suppression of female sexuality? And yet, instead of focusing on ourselves and how far we have to go, we focus on a practice like FGM, almost as a scapegoat, because it is something that we cannot see as gray, but as black. Then we in the U.S. come out looking whit e by comparison. Is this not hypocrisy? I do not say that FGM is a good or a healthy practice. It is horrific and truly reprehensible. But are we to judge using ourselves as a measuring tool?
Yael Tamir wrote an article that I found on the internet, entitled "Hands Off Clitoridectomy". The entire article was very compelling. He views FGM as a deplorable practice, yet seeks through his article to induce awareness in the Western World about the hypocrisy surrounding the need to make FGM a central political issue and the compulsion to give FGM the title of the greatest evil practice to be the most quickly abolished. (Tamir, 2000)
Once we have an understanding of these conflicts in our own thinking, our ability to be of some honest use in correcting the injustices of others may prove to be much more effective.
In response to the last question, there are two possible methods that I have found that spoke to the issue of trying to eradicate the practice of FGM. Both practices involve internal initiation and change in a community and supported by the community, rather than change through laws or impositions of the government.
The first method it proposed by Gerry Macki, a Junior Research Fellow in Polotics, St. John's College, University of Oxford. His idea relates to the process by which foot binding was abolished in Japan. A full review of his position can be found in "Ending Footbinding and Infibulation: A Convention Account" from the American Sociological Review, December 1996, 61:999-1017. He states the following:
"If a critical mass of people in an intramarrying group pledge to refrain form FGC(female genital circumcision), then the knowledge that they are a critical mass makes it immediately in their interest to keep their pledges, and suddenly makes it in everyone else's interests to join them."Basically, in Japan, high ranking families joined together and pledged to never again bind their daughter's feet and that their sons could not marry any girls whose feet were bound. Soon, other families did the same for reason of social rank and needed marriages. In the same way, this type of pledge associations could work to end FGM in one generation's time. In Senegal, several villages have done this and have ended FGM on a local level. These pledging family groups must also be combined with an education program providing information on health and international matters, like in the program to end footbinding. These footbinding reforms did three things:
"First, they carried out a modern education campaign, which explained that the rest of the word did not bind women's feet. The discovery of an alternative is necessary but not sufficient for change. Second, they explained the advantage of natural feet and the disadvantages of bound feet in Chinese cultural terms. New information about health consequences, again, is necessary but not sufficient for change. Third, they formed natural foot societies, whose members publicly pledged not to bind their daughter's feet nor to let their sons marry women with bound feet."All of these aspects together, when used for FGM, may be extremely effective, especially in societies and communities in which marriage is one of the most important cultural elements, necessary and important.
The second option involves what is known as Circumcision Through Words. Since FGM in many societies is a coming of age event and very important to the development of a child, as well as symbolic to the community, a ceremony and process that addresses the issues of womanhood, coming of age, marriage, honor, and motherhood, would deal with cultural needs while eradicating the need for mutilation.
The Africa News Service, November 19, 1997, in an article entitled "Alternative Rite to Female Circumcision Spreading in Kenya", written by Malik Stan Reaves of New York, states the following:
"The first Circumcision Through Words occurred in August 1996, when 30 families in the tiny village of Gatunga, not far from Mt. Kenya, ushered their daughters through the new program."These programs were supported by PATH(Program for Appropriate Technology in Heath) and MYWO(Maendeleoya Wanawake Organization, an African group committed to ending FGM in Kenya." . . . female circumcision encompasses more than the practice itself. It is often deeply entrenched in the culture, wrapped in a complex shroud of assumptions, taboos, and beliefs that impact a woman's social status and personal identity."
"In answer to that, CTW brings the young candidates together for a week of seclusion during which they learn traditional teachings about their coming roles as women, parents and adults in the community, as well as more modern messages about personal health, reproductive issues, hygiene, communication skills, self esteem, and dealing with peer pressure."
"MYWO and PATH have also developed public awareness campaigns that spread information on the harmful effects of female genital mutilation. According to Dr. Asha Mohamud, a PATH senior program officer focusing on FGM, the two organizations agree that information, education, and public discussion are more effective tools against FGM than direct, prohibitive action."Thus, the best groundwork for eradicating the practice of FGM is most like a combination of the Circumcision Through Words and the footbinding community pledge groups. Also, a major effort must be taken to stop any formal medical clinics from performing FGM on patients for money or other reasons. Their actions so far have supported the notion that FGM is safe and right and accepted in the modern health arena. When brought an FGM case, medical professionals should discourage FGM with medical caution, instead of doing it because of the sanitation issue, although this is a compelling reason. This is an issue for the government to enforce and the medical education programs teach. Any of these actions taken to try to end female genital mutilation must be done with the sole motivation of saving lives, while still respectful of the culture. Things must not be done with intrusion, but with education and respect for culture."Accompanying this Kenyan initiative is an international effort to increase global pressure on the issue. In April [1997], the World Health Organization, UNICEF, and the UN Population Fund announced a joint plan to significantly curb FGM over the next decade and completely eliminate the practice within three generations." (Africa, 2001)