> As to "I don't believe it is seen as analogous to the circumcision of
> boys. I really don't. The mutilation of women is, I believe, bound
> up in fear of women's sexuality," belief has nothing to do with it.
> In many of these societies female genital mutilation happens at the
> same age as circumcision of boys, and the members of those societies
> consider the practices analagous.
I don't want to argue - ok. Strike that. I do want to argue. I may not
have as much experience in this area as you but I have come in contact with
several women who have been mutilated in this way and in support of what
they say (from the amnesty website):
[Control of women's sexuality and reproductive functions
In many societies, an important reason given for FGM is the belief that it
reduces a woman's desire for sex, therefore reducing the chance of sex
outside marriage. The ability of unmutilated women to be faithful through
their own choice is doubted. In many FGM-practising societies, it is
extremely difficult, if not impossible, for a woman to marry if she has not
undergone mutilation. In the case of infibulation, a woman is "sewn up" and
"opened" only for her husband. Societies that practise infibulation are
strongly patriarchal. Preventing women from indulging in "illegitimate" sex,
and protecting them from unwilling sexual relations, are vital because the
honour of the whole family is seen to be dependent on it. Infibulation does
not, however, provide a guarantee against "illegitimate" sex, as a woman can
be "opened" and "closed" again.]
Tina
|