Calling it female circumcision makes it sound almost normal, given 
the acceptance of male circumcision, which is also a form of 
mutilation, though except in rare cases (infections, medical errors 
resulting in the penis being removed, and a recent case in New York 
in which two babies contracted AIDS from an ultra-orthodox moyel who 
followed the practice of removing the foreskin with his teeth) not in 
the same league as to consequences. Problem is, the societies that 
practice it do see it as analogous to the circumcision of boys, and a 
perfectly normal thing to do. Years ago when I was living in Paris 
there was a story in the papers about the trial of two 
coteivoiriennes who had mutilated a nine year old girl. The mother 
had held her down while her aunt did the job. Horrifying. One can 
imagine the girl's terror and pain. In that culture they also 
initiate boys into manhood with circumcision. The women told the 
judge that they had no idea the practice was illegal in France--they 
thought everybody had it done--and would never have broken the law if 
they'd known. What's unusual about the case you remember in London is 
that someone with a medical education was involved, presumably for profit.

Eradicating the practice in Paris or London or New York should be far 
less challenging than in the villages where it's been universal for 
as long as anyone remembers. Massive educational campaigns would 
help. As in other attempts at change brought in from the outside 
educaion is more effective if one understands the function of the 
practice in the culture. In most cases whatever the rationale was in 
the distant past has been lost to myth.

The term female circumcision covers a number of different procedures, 
none of them analogous to castration, which would be the removal of 
the ovaries. Removing the clitoris or labia (some places do one or 
both) is more like cutting off the glans of the penis. Some cultures 
limit themselves to removing the hood of the clitoris, which is 
closer to what happens in male circumcision. There are other horrific 
things done to young girls: in some places their labia are sewn shut, 
leaving a small opening for urine. The idea is that the stitches are 
removed when a girl marries. If she survives the infections she's 
likely to come down with.

Why the press in Britain and the US refer to these things as 
circumcision is beyond me. Maybe as you suggest, Joanna, it's 
cultural relativism pushed to an extreme, though the British tabloid 
press isn't usually that sensitive. Mutilation would be more accurate.

There's another issue here. I'm a devout cultural relativist--too 
much anthropology, maybe. But this is just too awful. Am I suggesting 
that intervention from the outside into practices I consider beyond 
barbaric is justified even if the consequences would be social 
collapse? Do I, do any of us, have the right to make that decision? 
I'm not suggesting an answer: I'd probably rescue the girls and devil 
take the consequences.

The Australian anthropologist Kenneth Read describes in The High 
Valley (one of the essential anthropology texts, and a great book by 
any standards. Is Read read in Australia? A national treasure) a 
signal moment of cultural change in a village in the mountains of 
Papua. It had been the custom forever for girls to be married at 
eight or nine to adult men. The practice had fallen very recently 
into abeyance as a result of changes in the economy of the village 
with the intrusion of foreign influence. Read witnessed what was 
probably the last such marriage. The women were furious, and tried to 
stop it, but the girl's father pushed it through. This is a famously 
macho society. At the end of the wedding there was the usual male 
procession (I may be mixing up the details--I've read the book 
several times, but not for over a decade) from the girl's native 
hamlet to her husband's. As it passed through a narrow gorge the 
women attacked the men, throwing at them anything they could get 
their hands on. No one had ever heard of such a thing happening before.

Mark

At 06:45 AM 3/30/2006, you wrote:
>Yeah, of course. That way it sounds cultural, just something *they 
>do. Part of their religion, innit?
>
>joanna
>
>
>>Cliterectomies are still known to take place on young British females
>>(although they are of course illegal).
>>I have a vague memory of a medical student being prosectuted for carrying
>>several out fairly recently.
>>And the British tabloid press still refers to them as female circumcision
>>rather than female castration/mutliation.
>>
>>Tina
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Weiss" <[log in to unmask]>
>>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2006 10:01 PM
>>Subject: Re: Help! The grass is singing
>>
>>
>>>At 04:41 PM 3/29/2006, you wrote:
>>> >On 29/3/06 11:50 PM, "Mark Weiss" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > But what I've been talking about at some
>>> > > length isn't a question of discipleship, but of dialogue.
>>> >
>>> >Sure: but how can you presume the dialogues of others? Especially with
>>> >something as multiply conscious as poetry.
>>>
>>>OK, so as a poet you're in dialogue with Eliot. If you say so.
>>>
>>>
>>> >And the, yes, Abrahamic images
>>> >are somewhat patriarchal, no?
>>>
>>>OK, like Sarah, the father of many tribes.
>>>
>>>Maybe we should ban all reference, no matter how formulaic, to
>>>anything produced by earlier generations--they were so unPC.
>>>
>>>I presume that you're trying to be funny. Just in case, this kind of
>>>feminism is the self-indulgence of the privileged. If we all chose
>>>other references there would still be clitorectomies and massive
>>>amounts of gender-directed violence. Best not to waste one's time on
>>>this simplistic nonsense, I would think. Especially when dealing with
>>>something as "multiply conscious" as gender.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> >Plus there's something Oedipal in this insistent interring of Eliot. But
>>> >this is merely intransigent back and forth.
>>>
>>>Hey, aint my daddy. Or mommy.
>>>
>>>I will admit to a taste for provocativeness, tho. A quality we share.
>>>
>>>
>>> >All best
>>> >
>>> >A
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >Alison Croggon
>>> >
>>> >Blog: http://theatrenotes.blogspot.com
>>> >Editor, Masthead:  http://masthead.net.au
>>> >Home page: http://alisoncroggon.com