Female Circumcision

In the most parts of the world today, gender equality has progressed significantly. Women are free to pursue their aspirations and desires in a very supportive society. Unfortunately, this is not the case for all women. Millions of girls and women today are fighting for their most basic right, the right to their body. Despite increased backlash female circumcision is still shockingly prevalent in many third world countries. Many advocators of female circumcision argue the procedure is an integral part of culture. Despite the cultural significance of female genital mutilation, the procedure is a violation of rights and causes intense psychological and physical pain for women worldwide. This essay argues for the banishment of female genital mutilation
in support of basic human rights.
So why is this brutal practice still so prevalent today? In a survey conducted on 400 women in areas with high circumcision rates, participants were asked to name their reasons for circumcision. Among the most popular results were societal acceptance, tradition, increased chances of marriage, and religion (Wright 253). Many elders in areas with high circumcision rates advocate the procedure as a way to repress sexual desires in women and to keep women “pure”. Uncircumcised women are often unable to find a spouse and live a difficult life (Cloward 379). In alternate studies done on Sudanese youth, Pereda and Pérez-González discovered that while both men and women were aware of the consequences of female circumcision, most advocated the practice (561). This leads experts to believe that the strongest supporters of female genital mutilation were community elders. Interestingly, women were found to be the least supportive of the practice (560). Since the strongest supporters of female circumcision have the most influence in communities, women are forced to undergo circumcision and suffer the physical consequences or opt out of circumcision and suffer the societal consequences or ostracization, no matter what their opinion is.
Advocates of female circumcision argue that banishing the practice is an infringement on religious rights. In an article called “On the trail of a taboo: Female circumcision in the Islamic world”, Charles Foster undergoes a trek across the Middle East attempting to find the religious roots of female circumcision. Throughout the article Foster discusses the topic with Middle Eastern doctors and Islamic leaders, who discuss the importance of circumcision in Islam. Foster concludes that the practice is loosely tied with Islam. Despite the evidence being very anecdotal, the article fails to address any evidence from religious texts connecting Islam and female circumcision. However, in research done by Sarah Johnsdotter in the Qu’ran and other religious texts, she finds little to no evidence linking female circumcision and Islam. Instead, Johnsdotter cites many Muslim communities strongly against the practice (371). If the practice has little roots in religion, it cannot infringe on religious rights. Instead, researchers believe female circumcision is largely cultural, as it varies in type from place to place and is strongly supported by elders in communities (Cloward 406).
Many advocates of female circumcision argue the procedure is voluntary, that the women who undergo circumcision have made the personal decision to do so.
These advocates fail to mention that girls are essentially forced into the procedure due to society and are forced to make the decision at a very young age. Ninety five percent of female circumcisions take place between the ages of one and sixteen (Wright 254). Girls are circumcised before sexual maturity and the ability to make a drastic decision. In a case study by Pereda and Pérez-González, the women studied were circumcised before the age of eight and were strongly encouraged by town elders to do so (561). Not only are the girls too young to undergo drastic changes to their body, they are also ill-informed on the repercussions of female circumcision. More often than not, the procedure is done by members of the community who are not medically trained. During the circumcision “razors, razor blades, scissors, knives, and occasionally pieces of sharp glass” are used to cut the labia and little to no anesthesia is used (Imoh 40). The circumcision can vary in severity, some circumcisions involve the complete removal of the external genitalia while others remove only the clitoris or external labia. Female circumcision is physically and mentally exhausting, especially on younger women. Not only are young girls and women forced to endure this brutal procedure, they suffer extreme physical and psychological side effects as a
result.
The side effects of female genital mutilation are significant, and can vary from cysts, infections, extreme pain, complications with menstruation, infertility, and problems during childbirth. Not only are these very serious side effects, they follow a circumcised woman throughout her life. In studies done by The Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine, circumcised women were more likely to have longer hospital stays, neonatal issues, and hepatitis (Chibber, El-saleh, El harmi 833). These complications are also more serious as many hospitals in areas with high circumcision rates lack the appropriate resources and knowledge to assist circumcised women (Johnsdotter 365). Some advocates of female genital mutilation argue that the practice can be comparable to male circumcision, a widely practiced procedure. However, comparing the complications between the two procedures tells a different story. While less than one percent of men who are circumcised have complications, the majority of women who are circumcised have complications that are fatal (Cloward 400). In fact, some researchers advocate male circumcision as a means of preventing HIV in Uganda (Odoch, Kabali, Ankunda, Zulu, Tetui 1). This makes the two incomparable in most researcher’s eyes, despite both involving the removal of genitalia. In addition to the physical effects of female circumcision, women must suffer intense emotional scarring and mental illness due to the procedure.
Women who are forced to endure circumcision suffer from depression, low self esteem, decreased sexual desire, and a myriad of other mental health issues. In studies done by The Journal of Maternal-Fetal and Neonatal Medicine, 38% of women suffered post-traumatic stress related to their circumcision experience (Chibber, El-saleh, El harmi 833). Again, women with these issues are unable to receive the proper attention due to the lack of mental health training in areas with high circumcision rates (Johnsdotter 365). Case studies by Pereda and Pérez-González examine the mental health of circumcised women. Even more than twenty years after the procedure, the women suffer fear of sexual intimacy and intercourse (563). Additionally, women are unable to discuss these issues since female circumcision is met with such high regard. These women are instead forced to deal with these problems on their own, which often makes side effects persist and worsen (Cloward 399).
For researchers, the most telling sign of the extreme danger of female circumcision comes from personal experiences of women who have undergone the procedure. In studies done on circumcised women who have emigrated to more developed countries, there is a stark difference in the opinion on female circumcision. Rather than embracing the practice, the women strongly oppose it (Pereda and Pérez-González 561). When women are free to exercise their opinions on female circumcision, they are against it. The women also opposed circumcision of their daughters, a noticeable difference from parts of the world with high circumcision rates. While these women were able to escape a repressive lifestyle, millions of women still suffer in Africa and parts of the Middle East. These women are forced into a submissive lifestyle that denounces them sexually, mentally, and physically. Eradicating female genital mutilation allows for societal growth in parts of the world that may need it the most and benefits humanity as a whole.
For advocates of female circumcision, the increased efforts of many world organizations to ban the practice is looked on as erasing cultural identity.
Where do we draw the line between culture and basic rights? Can we support a culture that inhumanely treats half of its members? For most experts, the practice of female circumcision is ingrained in a culture that suppresses women. Female circumcision is meant to “clean” a woman and keep her from sexual desires, and remove “male” parts of a woman. (Wright 252). Women are often forced into circumcision due to societal pressures and desire to maintain position in her community. While advocates say this is “voluntary”, if a woman does not decide to be circumcised her quality of life is dramatically decreased. (Cloward 379). For a girl living in an area with high circumcision, the choice is clear. Unfortunately, the consequences of her action remain. She is haunted by a lifetime of physical and psychological side effects that follow her to the grave. By allowing female genital mutilation to continue, we are supporting a dangerous society that disregards the health of millions of females worldwide. While culture is incredibly important to a community and its people, we cannot support an aspect of culture that leaves women vulnerable emotionally, mentally, and physically, and is causing millions of deaths each year. The banishment of female genital mutilation will save millions of women from dying pointlessly, and will allow for a
culture that empowers women, and empowers humanity.