Graph of percentage of FGM in different countries

According to child info.org:

http://www.childinfo.org/fgmc_progress.html

Maps of FGM practice in Africa

From University of Pittsburg's International Women's Reproductive Health Panel:
http://www.wstudies.pitt.edu/blogs/cjo9/international-womens-reproductive-health-panel

informational parts from womenshealth.gov

I believe we referenced this website before, but I just re-read it, and I think it covers the opposition very well. Here are a few parts that I thought were the most relevant:
"Why is FGC practiced?

There are many reasons FGC is practiced, including social, economic, and political reasons. Those who support FGC believe that it will empower their daughters, ensure the girls get married, and protect the family’s good name. In some groups, FGC is performed to show a girl’s growth into womanhood and, as in the Masai community, marks the start of a girl’s sexual debut. It also is performed to keep a woman’s virginity by limiting her sexual behavior. FGC is believed (by those who practice it) to stop a woman’s sexual desire. In some groups, women who are not cut are viewed as dirty and are treated badly. While FGC pre-dates both Christianity and Islam, religion is also used to promote the practice. Some communities believe that in order to be good Muslims, parents must have their daughters cut.

There are also many superstitions about FGC, such as:

• The clitoris will continue to grow as a girl gets older and so it must be removed.
• The external genitalia are unclean and can actually cause the death of an infant during delivery.

FGC is often part of a community’s tradition. Most parents who support FGC believe they are protecting their daughter’s future marriage prospects, and not hurting her. It is seen by parents as part of a girl’s upbringing."

"What are the health problems caused by FGC?

FGC can cause a range of health problems, both short-term and long-term. The kinds of problems that develop depend upon the degree of the cutting, the cleanliness of the tools used to do the cutting, and the health of the girl or woman receiving the cutting. In most countries, FGC is performed in unclean conditions by mainly traditional practitioners who may use scissors, razor blades, or knives. In Egypt, though, up to 90 percent of FGC is performed by a health care professional. Almost every girl or woman who receives FGC experiences pain or bleeding.

Short-term health problems:

• Bleeding or hemorrhaging: If the bleeding is severe, girls can die.
• Infection: The wound can get infected and develop into an abscess (a collection of pus). Girls can get fevers, sepsis (a blood infection), shock, and even die, if the infection is not treated.
• Pain: Girls are routinely cut without first being numbed or having anesthesia. The worst pain tends to occur the day after, when they have to urinate onto the wound.
• Trauma: Girls are held down during the procedure, which can be physically or psychologically traumatic.

Long-term health problems (usually occurs to women with the most severe form of FGC):

• Problems going to the bathroom. In severe cases, women are left with only a small opening for urinating and menstrual bleeding. This can slow or strain the normal flow of urine, which can cause infections.
• Not being able to have sex normally. The most severe form of FGC leaves women with scars that cover most of their vagina. This makes sex very painful. These scars can also develop into bumps (cysts or abscesses) or thickened scars (keloids) that can be uncomfortable.
• Problems with gynecological health. Women who have had FGC sometimes have painful menstruation. They may not be able to pass all of their menstrual blood. They may also have infections over and over again. It can also be hard for a health care professional to examine a woman’s reproductive organs if she has had a more severe form of FGC. Normal tools cannot be used to perform a Pap test or a pelvic exam.
• Increased risk of sexually transmitted infections (STIs), including HIV. People who have no medical training, under unclean conditions, perform most forms of FGC. Many times, one tool is used for several procedures without sterilization. There is a growing concern that these conditions greatly increase the chance of spreading life-threatening infections such as hepatitis and HIV. Also, damage to the female sex organs during FGC can make the tissue more likely to tear during sex, which could also increase risk of STIs or HIV.
• Problems getting pregnant, and problems during pregnancy and labor. Infertility rates among women who have had FGC are as high as 25 to 30 percent and are mostly related to problems with being able to achieve sexual intercourse. The scar that covers the vagina makes this very difficult. Once pregnant, a woman can have drawn out labor, tears, heavy bleeding, and infection during delivery — all causing distress to the infant and the mother. Health care professionals who are unfamiliar with the scar will sometimes recommend a cesarean section. This is not necessary as women will be able to deliver vaginally once the scar is cut open. With rising numbers of young women coming to the United States from countries that practice FGC, U.S. doctors have begun caring for more and more patients who have been cut and facing some of these challenges. Based on a study of 28,000 women in 6 African countries, FGC is related to cesarean section, post-partum hemorrhage, episiotomy, extended hospital stays, the need for infant resuscitation, and death. While about 5 percent of babies born to women without FGC were stillborn or died shortly after delivery, this figure increased to 6.4 percent in babies born to women with FGC.
• Psychological and emotional stress. FGC is typically performed on very young girls. Some may not understand what is being done to them or why. The psychological effects of this painful experience are similar to those of post-traumatic stress disorder. Although very rare, girls and women who have had FGC may have problems sleeping, have more anxiety, and become depressed.

In some countries where FGC is performed, leaders have tried to lessen the physical problems caused by FGC by asking hospitals and doctors to do the surgery. This “medicalization” of FGC offends the international medical community, and is seen as a way for FGC supporters to continue the practice. Advocates have charged that doctors should not perform FGC, as their profession requires them to “do no harm” to their patients, despite cultural beliefs and practices."

"What is being done about FGC?

These are the most popular approaches used to try to stop the practice of FGC:

• Community meetings. Group meetings may help change thoughts toward FGC. These meetings need to involve entire communities – girls, boys, women, and men – as well as nearby communities which may also practice FGC. The most successful of these meetings provide opportunities for people to discuss their knowledge of FGC, relate it to their situation, and consider other options. Some examples of these kinds of meetings include:
  • Cross-generational conversations (meetings between older and younger members of a village)
  • Male-female discussions
  • Theatre productions
  • Songs
  • Community declarations

• Education. In some regions, education is slowly changing attitudes and influencing the choice to have FGC. Many programs are culturally sensitive and use respected local women to teach other women and girls in their communities about the harmful effects of FGC. Recent research shows that women in these regions are beginning to support the worldwide call to end FGC. Some of the most important research in recent years has been the work done with Islamic scholars to change the perception that FGC is required by the Koran, the Muslim holy book.
  
  Human rights are at the heart of the abandonment of FGC by some communities. When human rights are shown to be in line with local values (for example, parents should do the best for their children and not cause them harm), attitudes toward FGC can change.

• Substitute rituals. In some countries, cultural groups have successfully replaced FGC with a ritual that does not involve cutting the genitals. In this way, the culture preserves its honor and starts new traditions that cause no harm to women. However, as girls are getting cut at younger and younger ages, often in infancy, these other rites of passage become less relevant.

• Changing attitudes. Right now, women are made to feel disloyal to their culture by choosing not to have FGC. This pressure can change if doctors and other health care workers would talk with women about the dangers of FGC and offer other options that don’t involve cutting. Some human rights advocates also suggest that men could help reduce the practice of FGC by openly marrying uncut women. Many human rights organizations are also calling on religious leaders to openly confirm that their religions do not require women to have FGC.

• Laws. The choice to have a procedure with such permanent physical and emotional effects should only be made by an adult woman for herself.
  
  Some suggested legal actions against FGC include:
  • Establish laws prohibiting FGC.
  • Prosecute parents who force FGC on their minor age children.
  • Make health care workers report all cases of FGC.
  • Classify FGC as child abuse and prosecute it as such.
  • Make the criminal consequences of performing FGC more public.

Even if laws are put into place, though, they will likely do little to stop the practice of FGC. Also, in communities where FGC has a lot of support, prosecuting parents will cause extreme controversy.

Eighteen African countries enacted laws or decrees against FGC. Even countries with the highest rates of FGC have recently openly noted the need for banning this practice. Fines and jail sentences are typically minor, but most view any sanctions against FGC as a good start.

• Research. There is ongoing research into the physical and psychological effects of FGC. A number of advocacy groups hope to bring FGC out into the open to discuss the harmful effects of this procedure. Ongoing research is needed to review the many different kinds of interventions that take place to stop FGC. Since there are many differences among the communities where FGC takes place, what works to stop FGC in one community may not work in another."

http://www.womenshealth.gov/publications/our-publications/fact-sheet/female-genital-cutting.cfm#f

Child Consent

Hana: I was curious to see if the United States upheld its standard of letting people decide what happens to their body when it came to medical decisions. According to the American Medical Association Journal of Ethics in their article "Learning to Decide: Involving Children in their Health Care Decisions" they suggest talking with the child. The decision making process usually only involves the doctor and the parents, but now they suggest talking with the pediatric patient as well. The AMA suggests always giving the child full information about the progress of the disease, treatment, and test results. Depending on the age of the child depends on the level of involvement they can get, for example if the child is very young the child should get to decide small things, like where the shot goes. To older, the child's opinion should be considered but is not the final decision. I do not know how long this has been the opinion, but this article is from ten years ago (2003), which makes me believe it is fairly recent. However, having child consent or informing a child is still a trend, opinion, idea, or option circulating the American medical field, which is not present in the practice FGM. This can be seen through one of the first videos where the woman said that if she had known why she was circumcised she would not have done it, or let her daughters get it done. 
Being able to make your own choices is a key theme. But what if someone chooses to go through FGM  because it is part of their culture? 
http://virtualmentor.ama-assn.org/2003/08/pfor3-0308.html

List of Countries that have criminalized FGM

Below is a list of countries that have criminalized or banned the practice of FGM and the year that the ccountry enacted the policy.

African Nations:
Benin (2003)
Burkina Faso (1996)
Central African Republic (1966)
Chad (2003)
Côte d'Ivoire (1998)
Djibouti (1994)
Egypt (2008)
Eritrea (2007)
Ethiopia (2004)
Ghana (1994)
Guinea (1965, 2000)
Kenya (2001)
Mauritania (2005)
Niger (2003)
Senegal (1999)
South Africa (2005)
Tanzania (1998)
Togo (1998)
Nigeria (multiple states, 1999-2002)

Industrialized Nations:
Australia (6 of 8 states, 1994-97)
Belgium (2000)
Canada (1997)
Cyprus (2003)
Denmark (2003)
Italy (2005)
New Zealand (1995)
Norway (1995)
Spain (2003)
Sweden (1982, 1998)
United Kingdom (1985)
United States (Federal law, 1996; 17 of 50 states, 1994-2006)

The penalty of practicing FGM can range from a monetary fee to a life in prison depending on the country.

Criminalizing FGM

“Many governments in Africa and elsewhere have taken steps to eliminate the practice of FGM in their countries. These steps include laws criminalizing FGM, education and outreach programs, and the use of civil remedies and administrative regulations to prevent the practice.

African Nations

 Eighteen countries—Benin, Burkina Faso, Central African Republic, Chad, Côte d’Ivoire, Djibouti, Egypt, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Mauritania, Niger, Senegal, South Africa, Tanzania, and Togo—have enacted laws criminalizing FGM. The penalties range from a minimum of three months to a maximum of life in prison. Several countries also impose monetary fines.

There have been reports of prosecutions or arrests in cases involving FGM in several African countries, including Burkina Faso, Egypt, Ghana, Senegal, and Sierra Leone.

Industrialized Nations

 Twelve industrialized countries that receive immigrants from countries where FGM is practiced—Australia, Belgium, Canada, Cyprus, Denmark, Italy, New Zealand, Norway, Spain, Sweden, United Kingdom, and United States—have passed laws criminalizing the practice. In Australia, six out of eight states have passed laws against FGM. In the United States, the federal government and 17 states have criminalized the practice.

 

One country—France—has relied on existing criminal legislation to prosecute both practitioners of FGM and parents procuring the service for their daughters.”

However, even though it is illegal, It is estimated that about 100 - 140 million women worldwide have undergone FGM, with an additional three million girls and women undergoing the procedure every year. FGM is prevalent in about 28 African countries and among a few minority groups in Asia. Among the women who have been circumcise about 15% of them have undergone the worst type; infibulation.

 (Source)

http://reproductiverights.org/en/document/female-genital-mutilation-fgm-legal-prohibitions-worldwide

For francophones: "Perspectives Psychosociales Et Cliniques Du Piercing"

Hana: As a follow up to the video I posted, here is an article demonstrating the French perception of why people get body modifications (specifically, piercings and tattoos). It is very rare for a French person to get a piercing on their face, or to dramatically change their appearance; therefore, French people either react with disgust or with awe (gaining a connection, respect, and understanding). One explanation for body modification in adolescence is being a right of passage. This generation has moved farther away from spirituality, and gives them an identity. Along those lines, if someone has suffered a great loss, like becoming an orphan, parents divorcing, and it allows them a way to get what was inside to the outside, to help them move on with their lives. "La motivation principale au piercing semble porter sur la recherche de l’individualité, voire de l’identité personnelle." (The main motivation to get a piercing seems to be the search for individuality or personal identity). They can also be used to as an autobiography. Personally, I can relate, when I was in Israel I met a girl from near where I lived, and when we returned to the States, we got piercings together to commemorate the trip and out friendship. The article finishes with the possibility of people becoming addicted to the feeling they get when they get a tattoo or piercing. I have heard this is true, many of my friends say they were planning their next tattoo right after they got their first. Again, I can also relate, because after I got my second earlobe piercing I wanted to get my cartilage pierced, but I waited for a special occasion (going to Israel). 

This article is very interesting, but how does it relate to FGM? My intent was to show what kind of modifications are legal, and the justifications behind them. From what I am understanding, piercings and tattoos are about self expression, and are voluntary. Where, FGM, is perpetuated by culture (the group), but it is (within the culture) for their girls own good and future prospects. FGM helps a girl fit into her nuclear culture, where over tattooing and piercing isolates them from the larger culture, but gives them a subculture to thrive in. However, the main difference (that I find to be the most important) is the matter of choice. Girls do not have the choice of getting a FGM, where I have the choice of getting a tattoo or not. Now, having this emphasis of choice, is this a Western Ideal? Can I keep this ideal and still consider myself a cultural relativist? For right now, I'm going to say it's a Western Ideal, and by not being able to shake this ideal, I cannot claim to be a cultural relativist, and may have found a limit. 

http://piercingoral.wordpress.com/perspectives-psychosociales-et-cliniques-du-piercing/

'Modify' Video

Today I wanted to share a video all about body modifications. I was exteremly happy to find this video on Youtube, I orginally watched it on Netflix, and thought it would be a great way to show people what body modification really is. This video talks about everything from tattoos to body building to dressing in drag as a body modification. This video goes into great detail about why people chose to get body modifications. A the very begining of the video Steve Haworth lists the reasons why he believes people get modified. He says that are asthetic value, sexual enhancement, shock value, and lastly spiritual enhancement.
The thing that crossed my mind while watching this video is that the people in this video all chose to get these body modifications. They wanted for their own reasons to change their bodies. They weren't (for the most part) forced into it culturally. When people talk about FGMs they call it Female Genital Modification/Mutilation... Can we really call it modification if the girls don't have a say in having it done to them? Or, on the otherside of that, should we call all genital modifications mutilations? Many people in the United States go out and modify their genitals by choice, with no cultural reasoning, should this be banned as well if FGMs are banned?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WscuHzmKn40&oref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DWscuHzmKn40&has_verified=1

(This video is an hour long, but I highly encourage you to watch it. Also, parts of this video are rather graphic)

"Belle a en faire peur!" (Beauty that scares!). French Opinion on Body Modifications.

Hana: This week Jenny and I will be focusing on body modifications that are (perhaps not main stream) culturally acceptable. I wanted to get the perspective from another country, and since I'm learning French I choice a French video (I can't say for sure that he's French or Canadian, but I'm assuming French). From what I understood, was he was accepting of people's right to choose to look the way they wanted to look, theorizing people get their inspiration from the media like Star Trek, Lady Gaga, and Avatar. He made an interesting observation that he would not like to be with a woman with the new form of beauty, but a young woman with a small subtly placed tattoo. I thought it was interesting that he would want a partner with a tattoo, that was an ideal; however, his overall message, was that he did not like this new form of beauty, but it was up to the people themselves. This is a common theme, if the people choose to do it, then why not let them do it? But in the case of FGM it is not free will, and the only information we are privileged to says these women regret getting it done. However, in this video I also noticed that he compares it to other cultures, and the one that really got my attention was Chinese foot binding. How is that any different from FGM? It has cultural significance, it is to make the woman more desirable, and the family does not do it to harm their children, but to help them.

What are your thoughts? Questions? Comments?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxQxiHe93Hs

Reflexions about female genital modification Video

For this week's video I picked a reflection video from the point of view of a little girl who had the procedure done. She talks about wishing she hadn't had it and wished that the girls in the family didn't have to suffer because of an old outdated tradition. She mentions in the video that FGMs are a cultural thing in her family that has been going on for generations, even though now many other natives around don’t partake in making their daughters get ‘the cut’.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTYLDew0Tm4

FGM in the United States

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/WorldNews/female-genital-cutting-affecting-young-girls-america/story?id=10859231

In the beginning of this project, I wasn’t sure how prevalent FGM (or FGC) was in the United States, I knew it was illegal (from basic Google searching), but I was not sure it was an issue. In this article it shows that this is still an issue, especially since girls are being sent back to their native country, where they will receive the operation under poor circumstances. US doctors are faced with a hard decision; either deny the surgery and accept the fact the girls will get “vacation-cutting,” or do the surgery illegally. One doctor, Dr. Doug Diekema, proposed that doctors do a “ritual nick” just to spill a little blood to satisfy the parents. The American Academy of Pediatrics at first supported this idea, but after great fuss they changed their mind. Human activists believe this is just enabling mutilation and a terrible tradition, and is not a good solution.

            As for my opinion, I agree with Dr. Diekema, if the girls are going to be cut anyway there should be a safer, cleaner, and better alternative to “vacation-cutting.” Also, this nick is better than getting Infibulations (completely sewing up the vagina). However, I am concerned about whether or not a family that would consider “vacation-cutting” would think “ritual-nicking” would be equivalent. But I do think this is a good start.

            Additionally, after reading this article I realized that in our American tradition we value religion over culture. Part of that is, I think, religion is connected to a higher power, some sort of God, and should be respected. Where culture is agreed upon to be completely man made, and therefore can be argued and changed more easily. Therefore, when we look at FGM opposed to male circumcision in Judaism, there is a difference, people could say but it’s religious, there is spirituality behind it. Personally, I do not see a difference between FGC’s “ritual-nicking” and male circumcision, both are traditional practices that take a little of the genitalia.

            Finally, when researching I am only finding opposition to FGM, which is frustrating because they all say something like everyone pressures me to do this, or the village would shun me, however, the “village” is not getting media attention in order to defend itself. Even if we believe the practice is “brutal,” “against human rights,” or “a crime against humanity,” I want to know why people continue this practice. 

"The Cut" Video

Jenny: This video is about what "the cut" is and shows a little bit about the rituals women goes through before "the cut."In many cultures a girl does not become a woman until she is cut.  In this video a woman who chose not to get the cut speaks of her experiences. A woman who does not get cut are looked down upon. An uncut women is thought to be unclean and untrustworthy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rMCQk-TBHPA

"The Perfect Vagina"

Hana post: This is a bit long, but extremely interesting. Although the documenter has a biased view against female genital modification, she fairly represents the opposing side. Additionally, her conclusion is "love your vagina," however, it is still an option for woman which they are happy to receive. Although I would not opt for this surgery, and probably suggest some psychological therapy before under going the surgery, I don't see why women should not have the option. Additionally, there were men (all be it, not the best of men) that did care, and if it makes a woman more confident. We allow people to inject poison into their faces, get ride of skin above the eye, and remove skin from above the eye, so if it is connected, why not? However, this does not address the question with African immigrants coming to the United States and having their young daughters have FGM. These girls do not have a choice.

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/perfect-vagina/

Also, warning, you will see a surgery and lots of vaginas, however, I encourage you to watch it.
If you have any questions or comments please post below!

Why not just Regulate?

This week we found an online debate source. I personally liked hearing both sides of argument. . This website has counterpoints for four major points to ban FGMs. The counterpoint I really liked is that by banning FGMs all together could cause women to go ahead with practicing FGM in secret and not seeking medical help from a medical professional due to the fact that FGMs are banned. Just by banning something doesn't mean a group of people will break tradition. This has been a prevalent thing throughout history, people continuing doing something that is banned because they believe it is right. The practice of FGM is part of certain cultures, so instead of banning it all together, why not try to regulate it?


I invite you to visit this website and see for yourself.
http://idebate.org/debatabase/debates/moral-religious/house-would-ban-female-genital-mutilation

Video: Against FGM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kNMC65pNsg&feature=endscreen

Definitions:

The World Health Organization (WHO) defines "Female genital mutilation (FGM) includes procedures that intentionally alter or cause injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons. [...]

Procedures

Female genital mutilation is classified into four major types.

• Clitoridectomy: partial or total removal of the clitoris (a small, sensitive and erectile part of the female genitals) and, in very rare cases, only the prepuce (the fold of skin surrounding the clitoris).
• Excision: partial or total removal of the clitoris and the labia minora, with or without excision of the labia majora (the labia are "the lips" that surround the vagina).
• Infibulation: narrowing of the vaginal opening through the creation of a covering seal. The seal is formed by cutting and repositioning the inner, or outer, labia, with or without removal of the clitoris.
• Other: all other harmful procedures to the female genitalia for non-medical purposes, e.g. pricking, piercing, incising, scraping and cauterizing the genital area."

Source:
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en/

"cultual relativity: a concept that cultural norms and values derive their meaning within a specific social context."

Source:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cultural+relativism

Hana: For this I want to find the limits of cultural relativism. In my first cultural anthropology class we discussed this possibility through FGM, but did not come to a definite answer (or at least one that I could completely support). When thinking about FGM I want to say oh yeah, we should totally let these people practice their beliefs and traditions, what right do we have to intrude? When looking at the actual procedures, like Clitoridectomy and Excision, do not sound overly harmful (when done with clean/proper procedures) with cultural relativism. However, I cannot support Infibulation, that is where I find a limit. Then, a new challenge arises, what do we do when these cultures are in the United States? Do they have a right to practice here? Do we (Americans) have a right to set cultural limits?

Jenny: My hopes out of this blog is to not only better educate myself on the topic of FMGs but also to educate others and raise awareness. I am going into this blog with an open mind and as time goes on with more research form a well-educated opinion. Just reading the different types of FGMs I can already say that the third type, infibulation, seems overly dangerous to the women to the point of cruelty. However, I still do not believe that we should ban FGMs completely and prevent people from practicing their beliefs.

Blog Intentions!

FGM (female genital modification/mutilation) is a custom observed in several African countries. This practice has several layers of cultural and traditional meanings that have great significance to the African tribes. However, FGM is a controversial issue because it can be harmful to the female’s health. In this project, we are going to explore the limits of cultural relativism further and discuss whether or not FGM should be legal in the United States.

            In the United States, FGM is illegal, and for the most part thought to be immoral, but this opinion does not consider the people’s tradition. We will research both perspectives. From the current judgment that FGM is cruel and a violation to human rights and should be illegal in the United States, to the view that FGM is part of a people’s culture and that we have customs that are accepted that are similar.

            As for our actions we are going to start a blog. Two times a week we will post videos, photographs, and other media on Wednesday and 1-2 paragraphs by Sundays. We will research on varying topics of FGM traditions in francophone African cultures, how prevalent it is in the United States, and other body modifications accepted in the United States. We will not be committed to one side or the other, as we research the topic our opinions may evolve. The purpose of the blog will be to inform people including us.  
           We are two Antioch College students, Jenny and Hana, we are taking a Culture Conflict class (from the Anthropology department). We would be happy to hear any comments or questions, and will get back to you as soon as we can. Thank you for your time.