Tuesday, June 10, 2008
Religion of Peace: Thorough debating whether it is right to mutilate children
Islamic law is unclear as to the morality of forcible excision of the clitoris:
After weeks of heated deliberations, the Egyptian parliament on Saturday passed new pieces of legislation that impose relatively harsh legal restrictions on female circumcision and allow women for the first time to register their babies even if the father’s identity is unknown.
One law imposes a sentence of a maximum of two years and a fine of a maximum of $1,000 for performing female genital mutilation. This issue has caused much stir in the people’s assembly, especially among the Muslim Brotherhood, which holds one-fifth of the parliamentary seats. Conservatives maintain that Islam condones the removal of a girl’s clitoris to tame her sexual desires and condemn the amendment as a western import.
Coercive clitoridectomy, which the press in its multiculturalist zeal sanitizes with the delicate, inoffensive, and outrageously inaccurate term "female circumcision," is so widely promoted by Muslim leaders in Egypt that an estimated 70% of girls have been so mutilated. It took great courage for the Egyptian parliament to impose new penalties to deter the practice. The fact that it took great courage -- and "weeks of heated deliberations" -- is outrageous and barbaric.
Western multiculturalists purport to respect Islam. Sure, I understand that it might seem expedient to pretend to respect Islam, but I honestly do not understand how any self-respecting Westerner can actually defend a religion that is widely understood to condone and even mandate the mutilation of children.
11 Comments:
By 
Grumpy Old Man, at
Tue Jun 10, 10:58:00 PM:
Where do you stand on circumcision of boys, especially when the circmcizer sucks the blood from the woun?
By 
, at
Wed Jun 11, 12:38:00 AM:
"...but I honestly do not understand how any self-respecting Westerner can actually defend a religion that is widely understood to condone and even mandate the mutilation of children."
Neither can I.
It is better to have the right enemies than he wrong friends.
By , at
Wed Jun 11, 12:39:00 AM:
"the wrong friends"
Mumblefingers
By TigerHawk, at
Wed Jun 11, 06:46:00 AM:
Grumpy, whatever one thinks about male circumcision (I am ambivalent), clitoridectomy is not analogous to it. "Female circumcision" is a tragic euphamism. The better analogy to clitoridectomy would be the surgical removal of the entire head of the penis.
By Adam Lawson, at
Wed Jun 11, 10:59:00 AM:
Actually, Tigerhawk, even that's not a fully fair analogy because while it may be difficult, it would remain possible for a man to experience some sexual pleasure. This completely and totally removes that option for the victims. They can never experience any sort of pleasure in that way -- which is the point. Sex isn't to be enjoyed for women, because then they might want to have sex*.
In addition to that, the procedure isn't always performed with the highest medical standards. Many girls die, or get infected, or any number of other things.
* Personally, I cannot see how any heterosexual man wouldn't want a woman to like having sex.
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Wed Jun 11, 11:19:00 AM:
Yes, Islam needs updating. The question is: What are you going to do about it? You don't want to piss off the Egyptians. The country is located at Israel's back door.
For a couple of tips on what not to do, see "Don’t Leave Home Without a Cultural Compass" by Michael Slackman in today's New York Times: "There are important lessons for U.S.-Egypt relations to be taken away from trying to understand Egyptian culture."
The article notes: "When Karen P. Hughes, then the under secretary of state for public affairs, told women in Jidda, Saudi Arabia, that they should be able to drive and to 'participate fully' in society in 2005, she was met with hostility from her handpicked audience."
Slackman adds: "It is those kinds of assumptions — that the citizens of foreign countries want to be liberated by America and live like Americans — that can really get under people’s skin."
In reality, only three countries were a serious threat to Israel -- Iraq, Egypt, and Iran. Iraq is no longer a threat. To a large degree, Egypt has been neutralized with friendship and foreign aid. That leaves Iran, which should have been dealt with under Reagan.
You don't want Egypt in the "opponent" column again. Mind you own business unless you are prepared to put on a military uniform and fight when your meddling causes a conflict.
Some big American and other Western banks operate in more than 90 countries without any major problems. Learn from those people.
Permalink for NY Times article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/11/world/middleeast/11egypt.html?ex=1370923200&en=00a1755b28e7a633&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink
By Dawnfire82, at
Wed Jun 11, 11:53:00 AM:
Are you actually suggesting the possibility of war between Egypt and Israel because Americans hate the practice of clitoridectomies?
No 'meddling' was advocated here, anyway. Rather, contempt for barbaric practices was advocated, which ought to be wholly acceptable. After all, they hold many of our practices in open contempt.
"In reality, only three countries were a serious threat to Israel -- Iraq, Egypt, and Iran."
You forgot Syria. In 1973, Syria came very, very close to overrunning Israeli defenses and conquering the entire northern half of the country. At one point, there were only 15 Israeli tanks left operating on the entire northern front.
Also, Iran was not a threat until the 1980s, after the peace treaty with Egypt was signed. The Shah was actually quite friendly (privately) with Israel. They had a mutual enemy in the Iraqis.
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Wed Jun 11, 12:38:00 PM:
This comment has been removed by the author.
By D.E. Cloutier, at
Wed Jun 11, 01:01:00 PM:
No, I didn't forget Syria, DF82. I don't consider Syria a significant threat without the big three. However, that may change if this generation of kinder, gentler Israelis doesn't toughen up. You may have a different opinion.
With respect to the other stuff, I said what I wanted to say. I see no reason to repeat it in different words.
Re: "The Shah was actually quite friendly (privately) with Israel."
I know. One of my best (American) friends married one of his wife's relatives before the revolution.
By the way, you may find this article at Spiegel Online interesting: "Western Democracy Loses Ground to Autocrats."
Link:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,558832,00.html
By , at
Wed Jun 11, 09:44:00 PM:
You know, six months ago I would have agreed with you. But then I read a paper on female circumcision by anthropologist Richard Shweder and several other articles on the subject. If I tell you he's highly critical of the New York Times would you be interested? :-) You can find his webpage here which has PDFs of "When cultures collide" and "What about female genital mutiliation?". Anyway, upon a closer look, it turns out female genital mutilation is not the bugaboo it is always described as in the Western media, and not any worse than male circumcision with respect to its longterm effects on the sexual lives of women who live in a culture where it is accepted. Oddly, or perhaps not surprisingly, the reverse seems to be true when they live in the West. Along those lines, check out Tierneylab's Sexual Consequences of an African Initiation Rite.
Not that I support the practice personally... we recently made the decision not to have my son mutilated in such a fashion.
By Dawnfire82, at
Thu Jun 12, 10:11:00 PM:
"World Setbacks for Democracy Bush's Fault" is what I got from that article. There were contradictions within it, as well, such as complaining about China as a place where democracy has been rolled back (a civilization which has never had democracy...) followed by, on the next page, admiration for Chinese advancements.
I'm not impressed.
"and not any worse than male circumcision with respect to its longterm effects on the sexual lives of women who live in a culture where it is accepted."
Well of course not. They're treated as property to be used in either case.
