I don’t think it’s a “Men vs. Women” thing… it’s a Men Controlling, Owning, and Oppressing Women thing, which has reached so deeply into the society that the women are the ones carrying it out.
Watch the video. It’s 32 minutes long. Straight from Daddy’s mouth you see exactly how it’s a massively sexist practice. When Mommy demands that Daddy mutilate her sons so she can then sell them to someone it will no longer be a sexist practice.
I don’t think you’ll find too much disagreement here with the proposition that the practices should not be accepted. But I don’t agree that it fits the definition of crimes against humanity that you carefully cut and pasted into your OP. If your goal is to formulate a simple label that highlights the evil of this practice, you do your cause no good by calling it “crimes against humanity” any moe than you would by calling it arson or embezzlement. I suggest simply “gross human rights violations” as an alternative.
I don’t have time for the full 32 minute docu but I do have time for half. Which half would you advise I watch?
I don’t have to watch a video. I spent two years in West Africa. It’s not a “men oppressing women” thing. The men are relatively indifferent to it - not against it as such, but far less emotionally invested in protecting it than the women. It’s not the fathers insisting that the girls do this, it’s their mothers and their grandmothers.
Thank you for your contribution.
Good!
First half.
You’re welcome. Don’t believe everything you see on a youtube video.
As noted there are many good medical reasons for male children getting snipped - certainly shouldn’t be banned as some have suggested, but it’s not something I would ever choose for my child purely for cultural reasons.
As I said in the other thread, it’s a terrible thing to do. (Probably not as bad as, say, supporting a global economic system that keeps large swaths of humanity in abject poverty, but it’s still really bad). Nobody in the other thread said it was hunky dory.
What many said, and what you seem to refuse to consider, is that men have less ability to stop this repression than women do.
An individual woman can refuse to circumcise her daughter. An individual man can pressure his wife not to circumcise the daughters, but this decision is not traditionally his to make. If she’s set on doing it, it’ll be very difficult to dissuade her, short of violence.
As others have mentioned, women defend this practice far more fearsomely than men do.
So, yeah: I’m all about prosecuting people who commit this form of child abuse, even if this means filling the jails with mothers. I’m not comfortable with prosecuting people who “tolerate” it, because that’s insane. (I understand you’re not calling for either. I’d definitely be okay with prosecuting people who commit this act.)
Again, where I think you’re being far too simplistic is your Women=Persecuted, Men=Persecutors ideology. It’s far more complex than that. In this instance, the relevant power imbalance isn’t men vs. women, it’s adults vs. children. In other cases, the relevant power imbalances are white people vs. black people, or rich people vs. poor people, or Catholics vs. Jews, etc. And in almost all cases, the set of persecutors is a subset of the set with relative privilege.
I work quite a lot across West and Central Africa, can’t say I am sold either on this Evil Men conspiracy since, like Dio, it seems to me that it’s the old Market Ladies who are into the tradition.
Anyway, this seems like a bit of recreational outrage in the end.
In any case, modern education and awareness raising seem to be effective in changing things, I can’t recall ever meeting any educated people for the practice.
“The men want the women to be circumcised so that they can avoid the extramarital afairs when they are left at home.” - Rhoda, African woman working in the group fighting against FGM.
Nancy’s mother: “Yes, I know cutting is bad, but who will marry her if she isn’t?”
“We have no cows, so a girl’s dowry is our only option”
Nancy’s father: “I’m thinking if she gets cut and married off, we will get the cows to educate her brothers”
Gertrude wants to become a doctor. She ran away from home to her grandmother’s to escape being cut, on advice from her mother who needed time to work on convincing her father to ALLOW her to not be cut.
** Gertrude’s father**: "Somebody has already bought me beer and cows as a dowry. A suitor is coming. So why is my daughter not getting cut? If she is against cutting, we will take her by force."
Gertrude: “I wanted to go far away so I wouldn’t be found by my father, because he may be furious.”
Rhoda: “Men fear that ‘I marry an uncircumcised woman, I’ll be laughed at in the community, people will not value me.’ Unless we remove the stigma, there’s no way to stop.”
Conversation between Gertrude’s Father (GF) and mother (GM)
GF: My father asked me about Gertrude’s suitor. I told him we were progressing. Now what can I say?
GM: I’ll explain to that old man.
GF: What do you mean you’ll meet with him? The bridegroom is on his way with cows!
GM: Whose bridegroom?
GF: You must be aware that once the Pokot take a person’s goods you’re committed?
GM:Taken goods? I didn’t go through labour pains for my daughter to be sold like that!
GF: Others are cutting their daughters. I will be the laughing stock when people are enjoying the beers they get for their daughters!
GM: I will not cut my daughter for that!
GF: So you are the one that suggested my daughter run away? Get out! I will stay here with my sons! Go away with your food! People are getting wealth, cows, goats, goods, and beer too!
They talk some more and he tells her to go away, they are divorced.
Yeah, there’s nothing sexist going on, the men aren’t involved at all…:rolleyes:
Gertrude’s father is ultimately convinced, he’s the one I spoke of in the OP. But it’s interesting to note that what seems to have finally pushed him over the edge into acceptance was the notion that if he gets on board with letting Gertrude persue her education and she becomes a doctor, she’ll be worth even more money to him.
Why do you think you know more from watching a youtube video than people who have actually lived and worked in these regions?
Who said the men aren’t involved at all?
:rolleyes:
Same reason she thought she knew about polygamy from watching part of an Oprah special on it and the same reason she thought she was all up on diet and nutrition from reading half a book?
Okay, Stoid watched a video. Bravo, outrage du jour. I’m sure over the entire range of the areas in Africa where female circumcision is practised there are all kinds of different drivers. In West African experiences I have, men are obsessed about virginity, can’t recall anyone caring about circumcision. Of course the Wikipedia map also suggests that in West Africa the practice is a lot more varied than in African horn and less dominant by %. Maybe there is a strong sociological difference.
(Actually from the map it’s really quite intriguing as to the spacial limitation of the practice. Wonder if there are any proper historical investigation)
I do have quite a bit of respect for the Guardian, however, and they produced it.
Interesting that you bring this up. I received a personal message last night from Stoid indicating my problems with her stance are based on her having schooled me in the Taubes thread. Perhaps the relationship is not so tenuous. :rolleyes:
It’s not a case of one old time cleric supporting it. This is older than both Christianity and Islam but it has an added layer in Islam.
**Fatwas are published opinions by Muslim religious scholars. They are non-binding in law. But Muslim believers are expected to follow them. In Egypt, a number of Fatwas have been issued by the influential Egyptian Fatwa Committee on FGM:
2007-JUN-24: As noted elsewhere, the Mufti of Egypt, Ali Gum’s announced that: "… this custom is prohibited.“d.”**
If you find a Coptic Christian link supporting this by all means post it. All I’ve been able to find is that it is practiced culturally by Coptic Christians in the region.
As I’ve said before, this practice is older than both religions. But unlike the Christian religion, Islam is structured as all encompassing social/political entity and as such weighs in on all manner of society with Fatwas. It is only in the 21st century that they have reversed the earlier Fatwas encouraging the practice.
The bottom line is that Islam had added another layer of approval to this regional custom.
Not your problems with my stance, your attitude: they are separate things. But your confusion isn’t such a surprise since the real thrust of the message was your reading ability which you touted in this thread and which Taubes found depressingly less than stellar.
But this thread is about FGM, not you, or me, or Taubes, or any other threads.