Resisting Female Genital Mutilation
Female genital mutilation (FGM), also referred to as female circumcision, is a common practice in Africa, as well as in some Middle Eastern and Asian regions. The procedure involves severing a girl’s clitoris, which is both painful and hazardous to her health. Removing her primary source of sexual stimulation, often against her will, is thought to preserve her virginity and make her more suitable for marriage. [1]
“‘Female circumcision is a traditional practice that dates back hundreds of years in many African countries,’ explains Elizabeth Mwangi, justice and peacebuilding officer for Catholic Relief Services (CRS) in Kenya. ‘Some Kenyan communities are now recognizing the human rights and health issues involved and are taking measures to end the practice. At the same time, they want to retain the important rite of passage and cultural education that are also part of the ritual.’” [2]
The UN reports that over 91 million girls and women have already been circumcised, with roughly three million African girls at risk of circumcision annually. Consequences of the procedure include bleeding, infection, higher rates of infant mortality, physical and emotional trauma, sterility, and death. [1]
The short documentary below outlines the basic problem, as experienced by Egyptian women. Resistance to FGM continues to grow as more rural communities are educated about the risks.
Local and international movements alike have already initiated change. In February of 2003, the First Lady of Nigeria, Stella Obasanjo, called for “Zero Tolerance to FGM” in Africa. This prompted the UN to officially name February 6th the International Day of Zero Tolerance to FGM, and ceremonies marking this day occur around the globe. [3]
In 2007, The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) launched a $44 million campaign to reduce the practice by 40% in 16 African countries by 2015. The Norwegian government was the first major contributor to the campaign, donating $3.5 million to the cause. [4] Activist groups like CRS and End FGM Kenya also educate civilians and raise awareness internationally, in an effort to encourage women to not participate in the tradition. [5]
This decade has seen marked progress in the campaign to end female circumcision. Most recently, in December of 2009, Uganda officially banned it. Now, anyone in the country convicted of the practice “will face 10 years in jail, or a life sentence if the victim dies.” [1] Hopefully, as the resistance movement continues to grow, more nations will follow suit and take formal actions to eliminate FGM altogether.
Sources:
[1] “Uganda Bans Female Genital Mutiliation” BBC News Online. December 10, 2009
[2] “Saying ‘No’ to ‘The Cut’ in Kenya.” (Debbie DeVoe) Catholic Relief Services Online
[5] End FGM Kenya
While I abhore FGM, I have to remember what I learned in my key WMST class about the issue – which is what happened in Kenya when white colonialists decided to put a stop to the practice. What happened was a cultural backlash not just from the community BUT from the GIRLS themselves, who went about “cutting” each other symbolically because the gesture “meant” something to them, to their community. It was about MORE than little girls getting their genitals disfigured.
It’s important to look at the issue as one inside the culture/community itself & THEN work with the people to end it on THEIR terms.
A history lesson can be found in the book, “Politics of the Womb” by Lynn M. Thomas
Whilst agree with the comment above that we need to be culturally aware of interventions, this issue I believe happened in 1948, when Kenyatta made a political statement about colonialism and FGM and the kikuyu culture.
As an anti-FGM campaigner currently volunteering with http://www.forwarduk.org.uk, our approach is to fund and encourage women’s empowerment civil society organisations to provide a space for dialogue for their peers.
With relatively little intervention, if women are allowed to discuss amongst themselves what they would like to change, they do very quickly come to realise how damaging FGM is. This sometimes starts with the women whose daughters have died through the procedure, but spreads to those who are adversely affected by it.
What is also vitally important is that men agree to uphold a community decision to shift away from FGM. Often it is conducted because women know their daughters will not be married if they are uncut. If men agree to marry uncut women, this ensures there are no economic benefits from FGM. It’s also vital that a whole community shifts at once.
So whilst I completely agree with the sentiment above that people need to find their own solutions to shifting, there does still need to be some intervention – either in terms of funding community workers, or health workers or simply funding girls’ education or economic interventions (microfinance?) to act as a catalyst to speed up and prioritise these issues.
So important. Also check out UNIFEM’s Say NO – UNiTE to End Violence Against Women campaign. http://bit.ly/6vsqGO