Conceptually we are at odds with other civilizations in the world on the issue of 'universal rights.' My question is this: If we believe there are universal rights given to all people, shouldn't we proactively try and change the conditions for those currently being denied those rights. Everyone seems to think slavery is wrong, and would oppose that. With Islam, for instance, at least as practiced in many countries, does not allow equal rights for women. So shouldn't we oppose Islam? Over 100 MILLION women have been subjected to what has been called the 'largest human rights abuse the world has seen' in the form of female genital mutilation, many at the direction of Caliphs in the name of Islam (although I will conceed that there are also non-Muslims that practice FGM). Shouldn't we be opposing a religion that apparently dictates these actions? Read some of these descriptions and let's hear what you think... "Female genital mutilation, sexual blinding of women, or female circumcision is a culture-based practice which is conceived of as an integral aspect of living in the communities which support its use. This procedure (includes) the complete removal of the clitoris (without anesthesia - HS note), the labia majora, and labia minora using anything from an old, rusty knife to a sharpened rock to a jagged piece of glass (El Dareer, 1982: 3)." After the clitoris is excised and all external genitalia are carved away, the bleeding raw edges of the large lips are held together by thorns or other fastening devices - until a scar forms to close the entrance to the vagina. The legs of the little girl are tied together for several weeks until the wound heals; a tiny opening is created by inserting a splinter of wood - to allow urination. Thus virginity - which is considered especially important by Moslem men - can be proven before the bride price is paid to the father. These dangerous operations result in permanent health damage: hemorrhage and shock, which may be fatal; many infections including tetanus, scarring which obstructs normal childbirth and may result in death of both mother and baby; infertility due to infections. The operations are performed on children only a few days old up to puberty - depending on the ethnic groups. They cause urinary and menstrual problems, frigidity, painful intercourse and obstructed labor: the highest childbirth mortality is recorded in areas where FGM is practiced."
Women who are circumcised in other countries are not opposed to it. I studied abroad in Africa. The women there do not see it as torture or abuse. It is a way of life for them. So, although americans see it as an act of violence, it is not really the case.
Ridiculous. Then why do they have to hold them down? And why is it that women flee to escape it? And isn't it true that often a woman battered in the home will not view her husband as 'abusive'? Isn't it true that someone KIDNAPPED will often sympathize with their captor (aka the Stockholm syndrome)? And the support you speak of is AFTER the fact. "The operation is forced on approximately 6,000 girls per day, worldwide -- about one every 15 seconds. Since FGM is practiced when the girls are young, they are unable to give their informed consent." The simple fact is that women are misled with a variety of justifications about why FGM is practiced, or they simply are not consulted. These are some of the reasons for the practice...let me know which you think is correct: -The clitoris is dangerous and must be removed for health reasons. Some believe that it is a poisonous organ, that can cause a man to sicken or die if contacted by a man's penis. Others believe that men can become impotent by contacting a clitoris, or that a baby will be hydrocephalic (born with excess cranial fluid) if its head contacts the clitoris during birth. Some believe that the milk of the mother will become poisonous if her clitoris touches the baby during childbirth. -Bad genital odors can only be eliminated by removing the clitoris and labia minora. -An unmodified clitoris can lead to masturbation or lesbianism. -FGM prevents nervousness from developing in girls and women. -FGM prevents the face from turning yellow. -FGM makes a woman's face more beautiful. -If FGM is not done, older men may not be able to match their wives' sex drive and may have to resort to illegal stimulating drugs. -An intact clitoris generates sexual arousal in women which can cause neuroses if repressed.
gimme a friggin break. I'm sure when these oppressed and abused women decide to risk their lives and protest this horrific practice, their going to pick out the ever famous, studying abroad, rezdawg to spill their guts too.
Then why not go after China which has one of worst reputation on human rights? How about other Asian countries like Thailand which looks the other way while their young girls (some very young) are sold as sex-slaves? Or how about Latin American countries which use so called "Death Squads" to oppress their own people? Where would we stop being the world's "policeman"? Are we prepared to fight the entire world? OR do we just go after the "little" countries that we can crush while not doing anything about the "heavy-hitters"?
Hayes makes very good points. Why are we willing to not acknowledge our hypocrisy about human affairs? We need to be consistent. I am astonished to hear that the Palastinian people can not be citizens in ANY arab country, yet, we only hear about Israel and their issues with them. We need to treat everyone equally. DD
I don't know. I agree that genital mutilation is barbaric, but I'm not a big fan of taking the "white man's burden" attitude towards the rest of the world. I don't mean to offend anyone in this thread. I just am pessimistic about the chances of success of overturning cultural traditions.
that's a little different...those weren't deep cultural hatreds...ultimately, we fought and died alongside the Russians in WWII. Here you're talking about an ancient religion...a faith. That's quite different. I tend to agree with BK on this one, as pessimistic as it might sound. The hearts of men are pretty damn cold and black.
If we're going to be fighting global holy wars based on the outdated and barbaric practice of genital mutilation, I'm all for it. Judaism is right at the top of the list. Did you know their religion commands them to cut off a large piece of skin from the penis? This is done to babies, often without anesthesia. Shameful.
Hey, Just wanted to say that FGM is NOT condoned or required in Islam. It is a cultural tradition in many African countries and has no religious history. People might use religion as a crutch to do stuff like this, but its definitely not in Islam. Womens right ... again, as you said ... most Muslim countries violate their rights, but based on religion alone, women have MANY MANY rights in Islam. It's just sad that the menfolk have twisted it around to where it suits them. We just had this conference in DC where this was one of the topics ... very enlightening. --rockit
Indonesia has the largest muslim population in the world. Their president is a woman. The U.S. has yet to have a female president, or vice president. Maybe we should attack our own country because we haven't demonstrated equality the way the largest Muslim country in the world has. The way some Muslims practice Islam does oppress women. The reason why we don't go to war on Islam is that not all Muslims practice Islam this way. In fact most don't. The other reason is that even though we disagree with something war isn't the best or most moral solution.
From what I understand it used to be done without anesthesia nearly all the time. Now they often use a topical numbing cream to help de-sensitize the area. I'm not sure how effective it is as opposed to other forms of anesthesia. According to Jewish custom, a medical circumcision (performed by doctors in a hospital) does not fulfill the dictates of their law. It is to be performed in the home either by the father of someone the father has designated to act on his behalf (usually a "career" circumciser known as a "mohel"). Mohel's are not doctors but they usually do have some type of extra medical knowledge.
i really don't mean to lighten the situation with careless humor...but that reminds me of Seinfeld "he's a one-in-a-million mohel!!!" I guess i just assumed there was some anesthesia as there is in hospitals in this country.
I'm aware of it. I am constantly reminded of it. Seriously, though, I don't think these things (circumcision vs. female genital mutilation) are equivalent. My equipment still functions properly. I don't think the same can be said for a woman who has her clitoris and labia lopped off.
You cannot compare male circumcision. It would only be comparable if you chopped off the whole penis.
If Jews had their penis AND their testicles chopped off (without anesthetic), then that might be a decent anology.
