Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Coming to America: FGM
I couldn’t bring myself to spell out the initials in the title: Female Genital Mutilation. In fact, I nearly didn’t write the post, the topic is so abhorrent. But given the facts, and the manner in which this crime has been reported, I felt compelled to write about it.
Just over one week ago, Jumana Nagarwala was jailed in Detroit for practicing female genital mutilation on two, seven-year old girls. Acting Assistant Attorney General Kenneth Blanco said, “The Department of Justice is committed to stopping female genital mutilation in this country, and will use the full power of the law to ensure that no girls suffer such physical and emotional abuse.”
Nagarwala was a 44-year old emergency room physician working at Henry Ford Health System. In protesting her arrest, her attorney, Sharon Thompson, explained the following: “Nagarwala never performed female genital mutilation … The doctor merely wiped off a portion of the mucous membrane from the girls’ clitoris. A small amount was placed on a gauze pad and given to the family for burial. This is part of the culture,” Thompson told the magistrate.
Nagarwala is a member of the Dawoodi Bohra from India, a community that is based locally out of the Anjuman-e-Najmi mosque on Orchard Lake Road in Farmington Hills. It’s the only Dawoodi Bohra mosque in Michigan. At this writing, no one confirmed that her attorney’s description of the procedures she performed was accurate. At a hearing on Monday, she was held without bond while awaiting trial.
In my research I discovered that FGM is practiced by 29 African countries and also ethnic groups in the southern part of the Arabian Peninsula and the Persian Gulf. The Female Genital Mutilation website provides this chart:
Unicef provides the following data from 2016:
According to the data, girls 14 and younger represent 44 million of those who have been cut, with the highest prevalence of FGM among this age in Gambia at 56 per cent, Mauritania 54 per cent and Indonesia where around half of girls aged 11 and younger have undergone the practice. Countries with the highest prevalence among girls and women aged 15 to 49 are Somalia 98 per cent, Guinea 97 per cent and Djibouti 93 per cent.
In most of the countries the majority of girls were cut before reaching their fifth birthdays.
The global figure in the FGM statistical report includes nearly 70 million more girls and women than estimated in 2014.This is due to population growth in some countries and nationally representative data collected by the Government of Indonesia. As more data on the extent of FGM become available the estimate of the total number of girls and women who have undergone the practice increases.
In researching the data regarding the countries that immigrate to the US, I found the following information from Pew Research:
If you compare this chart to the previous chart, you can see that although some countries that immigrate to the US practice FGM with only a small portion of their children, it still occurs, and the numbers in those countries are increasing.
I feel obligated to point out a number of factors that counter such a devastating picture: we don’t know precisely which Muslims are actively practicing FGM in their countries of origin because complete data is hard to collect; we don’t know how many of the immigrants will maintain FGM practices if they immigrate to this country, given its illegality; we don’t know how many Muslim doctors will practice the procedure for the same reasons. There is simply a great deal we don’t know.
Regarding this topic, M. Zuhdi Jasser, at the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, reported on the crime and demanded a full investigation.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, originally from Somali, made the following points on Tucker Carlson’s show on Fox News:
People don’t like talking about the genitals of little girls, but we do have to describe what happens. The clitoris of the little girl is removed, and the labis is sewed shut. This is done to kill the sexual libido… and ensure virginity. Some people say they have religious reasons — it is because of Islam. Some say it is because of cultural reasons. Or a mixture of that. That can never be an excuse to harm girls in that way.
After checking the internet every day for the past week, I have only seen Dr. Jasser and Hirsi Ali speak out publicly against this travesty in Detroit.
Nagarwala’s mosque and the Muslim community in general, to my knowledge, have been silent.
Published in Culture
http://www.webmd.com/sexual-conditions/guide/circumcision
There are a few health benefits to male circumcision; as far as I know, there are none whatsoever with female circumcision. Having said that, IF I had a baby boy, I wouldn’t get him circumcised, but we are talking about two very different things here. I really don’t want this to go to a place where people say, “Well, Jewish people circumcise their boys, why shouldn’t we celebrate when Muslims do it their girls?” It isn’t the same thing. At all.
I’ve encountered this argument before, that it isn’t a religious practice. (Does that mean you wouldn’t challenge it if it were?)
Let’s say it is “just” a cultural practice. One that they feel is important if the girl is to have a good marriage, which they believe is the best thing that can happen to her. Now we’re closer to the American parents arranging for FGM (and MGM as well) on their prepubescent children , because they entertain the non-religious belief currently au courant in our culture: that the child will never be happy if he/she was born in the “wrong” body.
The “sincere belief” I’m referring to is conviction that the procedure is in the best interest of the child, whether for religious or cultural reasons.
Male circumcision is religious for Jews:
The first person commanded to circumcise himself was Abraham, at the age of ninety-nine. G‑d told him , “And I will establish a My covenant between Me and between you and between your seed after you throughout their generations as an everlasting covenant, to be to you for a G‑d and to your seed after you.” Demonstrating his submission to G‑d by marking the physical body with the sign of the covenant, Abraham revealed the intrinsic bond every Jew has with G‑d.
There are many partnerships into which a person will enter during his or her lifetime. Most of them, at some point, will come to a natural end, or will be broken by one of the parties. The brit milah, ritual circumcision, is a symbol of our partnership with G‑d. Etched in the flesh of our physical bodies, the covenant will never end or be forgotten.
For more
I am in no way saying we should “celebrate” female circumcision. But I met a lawyer once who specialized in circumcision cases. Apparently, there are grown men who mourn their lost foreskins all their lives.
Sorry. I don’t think they are the same. I refuse to accept either one. I assume that cultural reassignment is done at the request of the person to be operated on, with full knowledge of what will be done to his or her body. A five year old child can’t make that kind of decision. And it does make a difference whether it is cultural or religious to me.
Eventually it will come down to a constitutional law case where the argument is: if you allow parents to maim their children’s genitals for secular reasons ( belief in transgenderism) then you can’t deny it to certain racial groups who want to do it for their own secular reasons.
Instead of charging an hourly rate, he only took tips! <rimshot>
I’ll be here all week. Try the veal. And don’t forget to tip your waitress.
Well, that’s easy: parents shouldn’t be able to have doctors maim their children because of a belief in transgenderism.
Based on the reporting, that does not appear to be what the FBI charged her with:
If “the full procedure” means “the clitoris of the little girl is removed, and the labia is is sewed shut,” it does not sound like that happened in this case. It sounds more analogous to circumcision, where a piece of skin is cut off but not the entire organ. Which is good news, at least there’s some hope the victims will heal.
It sounds incredibly painful. I’m not defending it, just trying to get all the facts straight.
I don’t want it to come down to that, either, but I’m afraid it will. I’m still shellshocked by how quickly and completely we lost the SSM argument, in my mind it’s so obvious why a marriage is categorically different from a same-sex relationship as to not even require further explanation, yet now it is the law of the land that both relationships are identical and the only possible reason for thinking otherwise is rank bigotry.
I’ll admit to taking the devil’s advocate role in this thread, but I really do think we need to sharpen our arguments or we will those this debate, too. It’s not enough to assert “It isn’t the same thing. At all,” we need crystal clear arguments to explain why they are different, or we will lose. Again.
I hear what you are saying, and am sympathetic to what you are saying, but I don’t totally agree. First of all, I doubt that is possible to reason with people who support female genital mutilation. It probably isn’t possible to convince them with intellectual arguments, and we don’t necessarily need to. If most Americans refuse to accept FGM and vehemently refuse to accept it, and make it crystal clear that those who practice it are not welcome here, that would be far more effective than intellectual arguments. Some will call it bigotry; I don’t care, and if Trump’s election is any indication, lots of other Americans are also becoming immune to charges of bigotry. Sometimes, we just have to say No, and if we spend too much time and effort arguing the point, we are lending credibility to the other side.
Joseph’s right. We don’t win this battle by leading with our distaste and disgust or the appeal to evident correctness of our preferences. The parallels to circumcision are not wholly disingenuous in some cases and the principle in favor of religious liberty and parental rights is not something I want to trample based on a broad politicized concept like “campus rape” or “hate crime.”
So what is Female Genital Mutilation?
The most comprehensive definition and illustration of the practices I’ve found is in this WHO report.
Let’s admit there are some FGM practices which involve minor ritual scrapings or piercings which are similar to circumcision (or surprisingly popular piercing fads).
Here’s the problem: circumcision is a practice which has been widespread for thousands of years and there are few reports of cultures which engage in level 2, 3, and 4 circumcision. The relatively minor FGM practices analogous to circumcision are, according to most experts, practiced by relatively affluent and educated Muslims and represent a small percentage of the procedures.
The most abhorrent practices are the most widespread and considered the most religiously devout.
This is just one of a set of stone-ageisms the Muslim world will need to deal with.
In our country, we should treat FGM like the suttee or pederasty.
Is this really different from what I am saying? There are a few people about who argue that child abuse is fine. We don’t spend tons of energy sharpening the intellectual arguments we will use with such people.. To do so would be to lend their claims legitimacy. I am confused by your comment; first, you said that we shouldn’t lead with our disgust for the practice, then at the end you say that we should treat FGM with the same disgust with which we regard child sexual abuse. Maybe you are saying that we shouldn’t lead with disgust, but we should be disgusted? I disagree. Nobody leads opposition to sexual abuse with intellectual arguments, and for good reason.
Completely agreed. However, Christians also practice FGM. Ethiopia and Eritrea are Majority Christian countries and a sizable percentage of the Christians there follow the practice.
Thankfully, Christianity can be used to counter this abomination against women. The Orthodox Church, the Catholic Church and Lutherans have very strongly discouraged the practice and encourage it’s abolition. Some Catholics in Ethiopia even started a workshop of sorts to discourage the practice. Muslims are much more of a mixed bag.
It should be noted that FGM is often supported by women who have undergone it. It’s not necessarily men forcing it on women.
The goal is protecting children in the United States. What they do in other countries is not our immediate problem, or do you propose we are somehow morally responsible for every child on the planet? We can find it disgusting, and condemn it, but ultimately it’s not our problem. Once it occurs in our country it is our problem.
“Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs.”
Sir Charles James Napier
Stockholm Syndrome
We shouldn’t.
Yes. There are adult women voluntarily undergoing it, to make themselves more desirable. We can hardly object to that, since it is consensual and since we countenance the mutilations of cosmetic and transgender surgery.
The heart of this controversy is parents’ control over their children. In my state, no procedure can be done on someone under 18 without the parent’s consent–except in treatment of pregnancy, drug abuse, or sexually transmitted disease ( you know: the small stuff!)
Some entity has to have consensual rights over a child’s body during the period where the child is not sui juris by reason of infancy. In our common law tradition, that rôle belonged to the parents or other adult guardian.
What we’re fencing with on this thread is the question of whether that should change–should it , instead, “take a village” to decide questions of a child’s health and education? Or should it be up to the state? (Omega’s school bathroom edict tells you all you need to know about the Dems’ position on the issue.)
Control over the child’s mind, his/her education, also traditionally was exclusively up to the parents to decide, which is why we have, or had, so many schools, most parochial, in our country. I’ll say again: the sine qua non of religious liberty is the right to indoctrinate one’s children.
There are people on the Left who maintain that bringing a child up in fundamentalist Christian religious belief amounts to child abuse. Ironic that those are probably the same people who might defend even awful customs like FGM when practiced by Muslims or any other cultural/ racial minority in our country–and would, very certainly, defend Muslim parents’ right to indoctrinate their own kids in Koranic teachings, including jihad.
Another example of the principle I’ve mentioned recently on the free speech thread: any idea, carried to its extreme, turns into its own exact opposite.
Nooooooo!
What did the leper say to the prostitute?No I won’t think it you can’t make me!Not on message, Henry. Not on message.
It is on MY message, though: this is a cultural practice. As with many of those, it is no doubt an article of faith to some. And the Left will promote and protect the right of immigrants from Africa, religious or not, to continue to practice their own quaint customs. They have to.
H’mmm, and since you mention it, what about suttee? Now we condone assisted suicide, and I read about a doctor who helped his own physically healthy daughter to die because she didn’t want to live with her depression. So if a widow wants to immolate herself, how can we object? From what I’ve read about suttee, not all the women went kicking and screaming; isn’t it true they proudly impressed their handprints on the plaster of the suttee gate on their way to the pyre? I believe their willingness was due to a belief in an afterlife or escape therefrom. The underlying religion is still practiced by many. At any time, it could go nova, as Islam has done after a 9 century nap. In a few years we may find ourselves saying. Well, okay, it’s the woman’s choice, but we draw the line at immolating child brides!
Pulling together another point Joseph made: are we objecting to FGM or childhood FGM. What if adult Muslim women “choose” to have the procedure to ratify the wishes of their co-religionists? Should organizations like the AMA forbid doctors from performing this procedure while permitting them to oversee hormone treatments of young girls in anticipation of performing even more ghastly surgeries which we celebrate on the covers of our magazines?
Anyone who thinks we don’t need to sharpen our arguments against this practice just isn’t looking at the trajectory of contemporary culture.
It is absolutely repugnant. I didn’t realize they actually sewed the labias shut. What the heck????? Not only should this be specifically outlawed, but all Sharia should be outlawed. I don’t know what these immigrants think when they come over, but no we do not accept such practices.
Better yet. Stop immigration from Muslim countries.
Yes, and sex changes should also be prohibited from medical practice. Doctors are routinely proscribed what they can and cannot do.
These medieval Muslims cannot be stopped. They will be aborting the daughters and bringing in brides from the rest of the world who have already undergone FGM. Under Sharia Muslim men can have multiple wives. Under US law they will have a wife from abroad and then the American girls will become concubines.
I appreciate the points you’ve been making, Joseph, and your point is well taken. I will give some thought to sharpening my own arguments. Good job.
Yeah. Except the courts won’t let Trump pause immigration from Muslim countries, despite the clearest possible statutory authorization for doing so. And once people get in here, the 1st Amendment applies to ’em via the 14th. So we can’t just say “we do not accept such practices”.
Thanks for this clarification, Henry! I didn’t know that some Christians practice it, too, which supports the point that it is cultural, not religious (or just religious). In terms of our making decisions regarding immigration and FGM, though, it does complicate the picture.
Are we imagining stuff?
I don’t think people on the Left generally promote and protect FGM.
(One or two nuts is not enough for this hyperventilating to the choir. Please. It’s like the Left saying that the Right wants to give gay people ECT – some few might but it’s a bizarre claim to make. Can’t we discuss [and hopefully oppose] FGM without making it a proxy for politics or the culture wars?)
It’s my belief that they did this because they couild see that life as a widow was going to be CoC awful.
When they weren’t drugged.
Or kicking and screaming.
Which I believe that they often were.
Seriously – again, these are awful things, they deserve to be considered on their own (dis)merits, not shoe horned into some fatuous pablum about the Left or the Right or Judaeo-Christian Civilisation.
Sure thing. But you can be a Hindu without burning widows just like you can be a Catholic without burning Jews and Homosexuals at the stake. It’s up to you.