2008 Woodie Awards
Regarding human rights for women, Liberals should practice what they preach
Natalia Rivera
Issue date: 4/15/08 Section: Opinion
The exploitation of women is a universal reality which continues to be prevalent in many (or perhaps the majority) of societies. One of the most astounding and incomprehensible forms of such oppression is female circumcision.
Also known as female genital mutilation, the act itself refers to any sort of procedure involving the removal of part or all of a girl's external genitalia. The circumcision is often performed under unsanitary conditions and usually without anesthetics. Girls who undergo this procedure face high probabilities of infection, excessive bleeding, disease and even death.
The main purpose of this act is to preserve a girl's virginity and honor. This act is practiced in about 28 African countries and parts of Asia. UNICEF indicates that mutilation is increasing in Europe, Australia, Canada and the United States among African immigrants as well as immigrants from Southwest Asia.
Female genital mutilation is a human rights violation under international law. Policies and laws have been implemented to outlaw the act in several different countries. Despite the policies, projects increasing public awareness and obvious international disapproval of the act, the World Health Organization indicates that the decline of this practice has been slow.
The fact that international efforts have not led to significant declines in the practice is almost unbelievable. It is a well-known fact that female genital mutilation causes serious medical and psychological complications which can maim a girl for life.
Where are these international efforts going wrong?
In general, human rights advocates tend to be liberals. These well-intentioned individuals attempt to dissolve poverty and inequality with absolute diplomacy and pacifist ideologies. I should know - I am a liberal. I have always believed in social justice and cultural understanding. I would usually make an effort to understand cultural circumstances leading to social unrest and injustice. However, I do have my limits.
Also known as female genital mutilation, the act itself refers to any sort of procedure involving the removal of part or all of a girl's external genitalia. The circumcision is often performed under unsanitary conditions and usually without anesthetics. Girls who undergo this procedure face high probabilities of infection, excessive bleeding, disease and even death.
The main purpose of this act is to preserve a girl's virginity and honor. This act is practiced in about 28 African countries and parts of Asia. UNICEF indicates that mutilation is increasing in Europe, Australia, Canada and the United States among African immigrants as well as immigrants from Southwest Asia.
Female genital mutilation is a human rights violation under international law. Policies and laws have been implemented to outlaw the act in several different countries. Despite the policies, projects increasing public awareness and obvious international disapproval of the act, the World Health Organization indicates that the decline of this practice has been slow.
The fact that international efforts have not led to significant declines in the practice is almost unbelievable. It is a well-known fact that female genital mutilation causes serious medical and psychological complications which can maim a girl for life.
Where are these international efforts going wrong?
In general, human rights advocates tend to be liberals. These well-intentioned individuals attempt to dissolve poverty and inequality with absolute diplomacy and pacifist ideologies. I should know - I am a liberal. I have always believed in social justice and cultural understanding. I would usually make an effort to understand cultural circumstances leading to social unrest and injustice. However, I do have my limits.
Viewing Comments 1 - 10 of 26
Mark Lyndon
posted 4/15/08 @ 5:47 AM EST
It's not true to assume that all forms of female circumcision involve an old woman hacking away with a rusty razor blade or a shard of glass. About 90% of girls in Egypt are circumcised, but the form there does a lot *less* damage than regular male circumcision, and it's performed by surgeons in operating theatres. (Continued…)
Frank
posted 4/15/08 @ 11:24 AM EST
Here in America we condemn the practice of others yet we have our own corresponding dirty little practice ? male circumcision.
Forget about any medical justification such as Uncle Harry that had to be circumcised because of infections. (Continued…)
Jono
posted 4/16/08 @ 5:55 AM EST
"My article was specifically refering to female gential mutilation. Nowhere did I mention anything about male circumcision. I was discussing the act as a women's rights issue. (Continued…)
Ron Low
posted 4/16/08 @ 12:09 PM EST
Fortunately, 94% of the world's females are covered by laws banning genital mutilation (if only we could improve enforcement). Males, on the other hand, get cut and people throw a party. (Continued…)
Patrick Hughes
posted 4/16/08 @ 2:07 PM EST
Male and female circumcision aren't even similar. Male circumcision is a simple procedure that doesn't generally have adverse health effects (unless of course its not done by someone who is properly trained). (Continued…)
Frank
posted 4/16/08 @ 8:59 PM EST
"Both Frank and Mark,
My article was specifically refering to female gential mutilation. Nowhere did I mention anything about male circumcision. I was discussing the act as a women's rights issue. (Continued…)
Patrick Hughes
posted 4/16/08 @ 9:18 PM EST
Betsy: Neither of them are cosmetic, so right off the bat you're wrong. Male circumcision is a religious activity, as well as a choice parents make for the child when they are born to try and help reduce the risk of infection. (Continued…)
Patrick Hughes
posted 4/16/08 @ 9:47 PM EST
Mark:
While the comparison between 1 specific type of female circumcision may not be all that far fetched in procedure, the practice itself is something entirely different. (Continued…)
Rebecca
posted 4/17/08 @ 12:43 AM EST
I am in complete agreement with Patrick. I believe male circumcision and femal genital mutilation are two completely differnt things and should not be treated in the same manner. (Continued…)
Paul Zuppan
posted 4/17/08 @ 2:35 AM EST
Patrick and Rebecca(sounds biblical--as in Jewish?),
Question: What happens to the male organ once it is mutilated,oops,sorry, I mean circumcised?(I forgot how sensitive you two are. (Continued…)
Post a Comment