Female Genital Mutilation.... or Modification?
At A Glance
Author L. E. Knowles
Contact L. E. [email protected]
When N/A
Location Indiana
A quick preface for you.... I originally wrote this paper as an assignment for my Women's Health course. I became interested in this topic after reading the articles in BME/news, and decided I needed to do some investigating myself. I wanted to make sure the information used was accurate and I also wanted to develop my own opinions. I can't help it, I am a scientist.

I did actually turn this in. I am from Indiana, not the most liberal of states, but my hopes remain high. Education can be a powerful weapon or a great defense. (I have not got a grade back yet!)

In writing this paper, I tried to keep my own opinions as far away as possible, although they prompted the writing of it in the first place.... I wanted to present facts and lead the reader to a logical conclusion, which I, of course, see as my opinion. But, I did (obviously) add a little of my opinion when editing this for submittal.

Thank you for reading.

Female genital mutilation (FGM) (or as I would prefer, female genital modification) usually brings about horrific tales of non-consensual torture of a women's body. Governments around the world are striving to eradicate this procedure which is done to young women upon, or before entering their child-bearing years. However, almost everyone who is a part of the culture agrees with these actions, but this is, of course, not the universal case. In the United States, specifically, one does not typically think about FGM being commonplace, however, there are women here who have had it done to them, and the procedure is and has been performed here. Many governments are making the procedures illegal as they enter into the "modern" world. The government in the United States has reacted by making female genital mutilation illegal here as well. However, there is a large, and growing group of women who choose to modify their genitals for a multitude of positive reasons. This strikes many as counter-intuitive. How could a woman choose to cut or even remove parts of her genitals?

By making FGM illegal, and trying to stop it from occurring, the governments of foreign countries are taking a cultural standard of femininity and forcing those who value the custom underground, bringing about numerous other problems. A common social perspective is to see oneself as normal and others as abnormal. FGM is a perfect example. Women in Africa and parts of Asia have, for many generations, performed FGM as a ritual of passing into womanhood. During the ceremony the elders educate the girl about menstruation, child rearing and the duties of a wife before or after performing the circumcision. Following the procedure the community usually welcomes the new woman with a festive party including gifts. While the conditions of the operation remain in question, and are, by far, NOT being promoted, these women, and men, see having a female's genitals altered and/or sewn together as defining femininity. The most extreme cases of FGM involve removal of the clitoris and labia. The remaining portions of the labia are then sewn together with a small opening left for urine and menstrual fluid. The woman's husband then has the responsibility and right to open the women up to impregnate her. She is usually sewn shut after the birth of the subsequent child. This ensures that the woman's children are her husband's, and that the patriarchal society in which they live will remain strong. There are many obvious problems associated with the way things are done currently. Most operations occur without the consent or knowledge of the woman and under non-sterile conditions with inappropriate tools such as stone blades, old razors etc. The consequences of this can range from death due to infection, sexual dysfunction, and birthing problems. However, if this practice is made illegal women will be much less likely to seek out help when problems do arise, and conditions will only get worse as practitioners are forced to move underground to escape the prosecution of the government.

There is no way to force these people to stop FGM altogether. The practice is so ingrained in their culture that is would be impossible to create an" ideal" environment as we, in the western world, see it. The basis of womanhood and the structure of the society depends on it. The practice serves to hold the woman's sexuality at bay, thereby making her a "better" caretaker. And I am not saying I agree or disagree with the practice, for that is irrelevant, but rather that if something is done it should be to both ensure the health of the individuals undergoing this procedure and the societal hierarchy. Rather than make the practice illegal, we should train the physicians going to practice there and those that are already there in FGM and it's possible complications. We have absolutely no right to enforce a law we created to try and stop a problem which is only visible to us and other small minorities. Personally, I do think that the women should be able to have the procedure electively at an agreed age of consent. However, it is idealistic to think that this would be successful. There should be trained practitioners that parents can take their children to in order to have the best care possible for their daughters. Here in the United States, newborn boys are circumcised in a method strikingly similar to that of women in "underdeveloped" countries, but in an appropriate environment. The physician excises the tissue without anesthetic, but in a sterile environment. There are problems and even deaths associated with the procedure, not to mention excruciating pain, but, physicians are hopefully trained in identifying complications in time for proper treatment. To some this is seen as barbaric, but it is part of many people's culture and is accepted here despite whether or not you or I personally agree with it .

In the United States, FGM is illegal, however, as it is being made common knowledge, and horror stories of women who immigrated here are coming out, some politicians are pushing the issue to the next level. This level is the illegalization of all female genital modification, namely piercing and tattooing. While, under the previous laws, these elective procedures were performed legally in sterile conditions with the consent of the of-age individual. A specific example here is in Georgia where a bill was being passed through the senate banning all female genital piercin. Luckily, for the sake of women's individual rights, it has been rejected. This law would have, once again, force those who want such procedures to underground practitioners where conditions will be less than ideal. It is also sexist, as male genial piercing was not ever under scrutiny, and it takes away from the general agreed upon right of a person to do what they please with their bodies.

The main point of this is to inform the world about women who do wish to have their genitals altered in a way that makes them more pleasing to the individual woman. This can be increased sexual pleasure, more pleasing aesthetics, or to fulfill a cultural or personal obligation. The modification can take the form of a simple piercing all the way to a full blown operation in which tissue is removed or reshaped. The idea that the elective modification of a woman's genitals is illegal and a man can go in at any age, including under the age of consent, and have his genitals altered through circumcision is sexist and should not be allowed. In our modern world where we strive to ensure that men and women are seen equally, it is outlandish to give permission to men to do what they please with their bodies and prosecute women who choose to change the appearance of their genitals.

Ideally, in the United States, the practice of FGM and male genital mutilation/modification (MGM) should be done by qualified physicians or other practitioners electively after the age of 18. This "modification" includes piercing, tattooing, and more "extreme" procedures. This is the case with other modifications including breast augmentation, liposuction, Botox injections, non-genital piercing and tattooing, and countless other elective procedures. Genital modification should not be viewed any differently. While it is unreasonable to think we can change other countries to this viewpoint, there are ways to help without being biased against other's practices as was mentioned previously. Instead of striving to prosecute practitioners and physicians who treat these women post operation we should realize that FGM is a part of the culture whether we like it or not and aid these people so that their chosen belief can be as safe and satisfying as possible to all involved.

We must realize that we should strive to change the things we can and let go the things we cannot. We cannot change generations of tradition, nor should we try, but we can strive to make this tradition safer and hopefully a more positive experience for future generations. We cannot change the desires of women to want to modify their genitals, and if that desire is strong enough the modification will be done at all costs including one's health or even ones life itself. We can provide a safe place for these women to go to have these procedures done by a licensed physician or practitioner in a proper, sterile environment. This cannot be done by making any genital modification illegal, a government should not limit a person' inherent right to one's body. It can be done by giving the sexes equal opportunities to their desired result. We, as a culture need to learn tolerance of other's practices even though they may seem to hard to understand at times.

Here are some of the links I used

1)http://piercing.org/amendment.htm

2) http://www.amnesty.org/ailib/intcam/femgen/fgm1.htm

3) http://www.religioustolerance.org/fem_cirm.htm

4) http://www.fathermag.com/health/circ/gmas/

(this link has some great information supporting the banning of MGM)

5) http://www.bmezine.com/news/pubring/20040325.html

6) Daly, Anna. "Female Genital Mutilation: Consequences for Midwifery." British Journal of Midwifery. May 2004 Vol. 12. NO 15.


Disclaimer: The experience above was submitted by a BME reader and has not
been edited. We can not guarantee that the experience is accurate, truthful,
or contains valid or even safe advice. We strongly urge you to use BME and
other resources to educate yourself so you can make safe informed decisions.


Return to Editorial / Commentary