Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

I had a chitchat with multi-national friends last weekend. FGM (Female Genital Mutilation) was part of the table topic. The author of the book, which I was reading last night wrote in passing about FGM, which happened to some women in Egypt and some African countries. Well, everyone knows about this. I was touched by the true story self-authored book, but hated their patriarchal system.

When I shared the story to a female colleague (she’s from Egypt), she said that some religious Islamic scholars in her country believe that FGM is a divine/sunni order according to Hadith by Prophet Mohamed and his conversation with umm habiba and ansar’s wives. How true? As we further discussed, she said it is also a common practice in UAE & Oman done secretly. How true? Is it part of 3adat O taqaled that preserves the integrity of the girl? But what kind of integrity is left to the girl after stealing her innocence?

Back to Egypt, there is only a decree by Ministry of Health, but it doesn’t have the power of law.

Be it socio-cultural or religious practices, FGM is a violation against women. It is a crime. If there’s a proposed law for FGM’s medicalization, we should reject it!

Have your say.

Totally agree with what you're saying. Just thinking about it makes me cringe.

I also know the hadith you're talking about. It surely did give some ignorant families and communities a green card to abuse young girls and cut off important parts of thier bodies while they're fully aware of the bad future results of such criminal actions.

There is no integrity left for the girl after such a violation, the only integrity they want to protect is that of the family and it's male members.

I do think it has become a purely cultural thing however, not a religious one.

asc_26 wrote:I had a chitchat with multi-national friends last weekend. FGM (Female Genital Mutilation) was part of the table topic. The author of the book, which I was reading last night wrote in passing about FGM, which happened to some women in Egypt and some African countries. Well, everyone knows about this. I was touched by the true story self-authored book, but hated their patriarchal system.

When I shared the story to a female colleague (she’s from Egypt), she said that some religious Islamic scholars in her country believe that FGM is a divine/sunni order according to Hadith by Prophet Mohamed and his conversation with umm habiba and ansar’s wives. How true? As we further discussed, she said it is also a common practice in UAE & Oman done secretly. How true? Is it part of 3adat O taqaled that preserves the integrity of the girl? But what kind of integrity is left to the girl after stealing her innocence?

Back to Egypt, there is only a decree by Ministry of Health, but it doesn’t have the power of law.

Be it socio-cultural or religious practices, FGM is a violation against women. It is a crime. If there’s a proposed law for FGM’s medicalization, we should reject it!

Have your say.

the above hadith is weak...its more of a cultural thing than islamic, there is no mention of it in Quran or hadith its a pre-Islamic practice. as for it being practiced in UAE that's like decades ago.

FGM is a violation against women. It is a crime. If there’s a proposed law for FGM’s medicalization, we should reject it!

There are cosmetic reasons for female circumcision. Women who are physically capable of making a decision to having their labia shortened or whatnot should be allowed to do so. Circumcision is wrong when it's performed (both on girls *and* boys) on infants/young children who are incapable of making decisions for themselves because they're unable to express preference or consent as they can't talk.

I totally agree regarding FGM.

However, male circumcision it done for various reasons, which are supposed to benefit the patient.
A doctor seeing my son was trying to convince me to get him done on medical grounds.
I said what medical grounds?
He said that there is less chance of contracting an STD.
I said no thanks... I would rather try and teach him to be a responsible person.

valkyrie wrote:There are cosmetic reasons for female circumcision.

FGM is an appalling thing. And you cannot compare genital cosmetic surgery to FGM - yes some 'glamour' models as I will call them, ahve this kind of surgery to make their most private area more beautiful. However, they certainly do not have the entire labia or clitorous removed as is done in FGM.

FGM is performed by people who're not medically trained, very often using razor blades and no anaesthetic. The purpose is to mutilate the s.e.x organs so the woman has no pleaasure - basically.

It cannot be compared to male circumcision.

I'm sorry but if cutting off an infant female's prepuce is 'female genital mutilation' than cutting off an infant male's prepuce is 'male genital mutilation'. The later probably has more functional implications, the only reason why the former is considered more ing to our western sensibilities is because white people typically don't do it (it is btw a myth that female circumcision eliminates any s.e.xual response, it just reduces it, as does male circumcision). Both s.e.xually violate non-consenting individuals in an irreversible way.

FGM is performed by people who're not medically trained, very often using razor blades and no anaesthetic.

Err, okay, forgetting for a moment that male circumcision is usually carried out without anesthesia according to this source, do you really think it would be okay for parents to chop off their daughters clitoral hoods provided they did it when they were infants and used anesthesia?

Female circumcision is a social/cultural practice and not a religious one.

This is based on the fact that the majority of mulslim women aren't circumcised and that non-muslim women in certain cultures are circumcised - it is a cultural phenomenon that has migrated into muslim communities and does not originate from the religion (unlike male circumcision which is a religious duty).

I understand there are varying practices in terms of the extent of female circumcision and I have read muslim scholars who only advocate only the lesser form of circumcission and not the more radical clitorectomy - which they, and I, find barbaric and unjustifiable. However, at heart, it is a cultural thing that is not a requirement of any religion.

Cheers,
Shafique

duplicate

Valkyrie, I think you're misinformed over the male version. Cut men actually have more hightened sensitivity, than those who aren't. You can't really compare the two, as basically with men all you're doing is taking away excess skin in effect. With women it's different, here are some facts:

Female genital mutilation (FGM), often referred to as 'female circumcision', comprises all procedures involving partial or total removal of the external female genitalia or other injury to the female genital organs whether for cultural, religious or other non-therapeutic reasons. There are different types of female genital mutilation known to be practised today. They include:

Type I - excision of the prepuce, with or without excision of part or all of the clitoris;
Type II - excision of the clitoris with partial or total excision of the labia minora;
Type III - excision of part or all of the external genitalia and stitching/narrowing of the vaginal opening (infibulation);
Type IV - pricking, piercing or incising of the clitoris and/or labia; stretching of the clitoris and/or labia; cauterization by burning of the clitoris and surrounding tissue;
scraping of tissue surrounding the vaginal orifice (angurya cuts) or cutting of the vagina (gishiri cuts);
introduction of corrosive substances or herbs into the vagina to cause bleeding or for the purpose of tightening or narrowing it; and any other procedure that falls under the definition given above.
The most common type of female genital mutilation is excision of the clitoris and the labia minora, accounting for up to 80% of all cases; the most extreme form is infibulation, which constitutes about 15% of all procedures.

Health consequences of FGM

The immediate and long-term health consequences of female genital mutilation vary according to the type and severity of the procedure performed.

Immediate complications include severe pain, shock, haemorrhage, urine retention, ulceration of the genital region and injury to adjacent tissue. Haemorrhage and infection can cause death.

More recently, concern has arisen about possible transmission of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) due to the use of one instrument in multiple operations, but this has not been the subject of detailed research.

Long-term consequences include cysts and abscesses, keloid scar formation, damage to the urethra resulting in urinary incontinence, dyspareunia (painful sexual intercourse) and sexual dysfunction and difficulties with childbirth.

Psychosexual and psychological health: Genital mutilation may leave a lasting mark on the life and mind of the woman who has undergone it. In the longer term, women may suffer feelings of incompleteness, anxiety and depression.

<Valkyrie, I think you're misinformed over the male version. Cut men actually have more hightened sensitivity, than those who aren't.>

err.. no, circumcision reduces se.xual pleasure for men.

Circumcision radically desensitizes the penis. The rich nerve network and all the nerve receptors in the foreskin are severed. The loss of the protective foreskin obviously desensitizes the glans. Since the membrane covering the glans is now exposed and subjected to constant abrasion, it becomes desensitized, dry and tough. The nerve endings in the glans, which in the intact penis are just beneath the surface of the mucous membrane, are now out of sexual function.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Re ... asp?ID=237

http://www.noharmm.org/snip.htm illustrations of penises


<You can't really compare the two, as basically with men all you're doing is taking away excess skin in effect.>

Male foreskins cover the glans of the penis which is the important erogenous organ in males...thats why the comparison makes perfect sense.

<The most common type of female genital mutilation is excision of the clitoris and the labia minora, accounting for up to 80% of all cases; the most extreme form is infibulation, which constitutes about 15% of all procedures.>

What you're describing is a more extreme type of female genital mutilation, there are also more extreme types of male genital mutilation practiced in the same areas that do those types of things; it doesn't mean that the more common milder type is acceptable.

http://josh.bakehorn.net/circ.html scroll down for pictures of genital mutilation - pictures of penises

Chocoholic wrote:The purpose is to mutilate the s.e.x organs so the woman has no pleaasure - basically.

Choc, I think it is a myth. Cutting the clitoris increase women’s sexual desire, because the brain is the main site of sexual desires. As per research, circumcised women have difficulty in reaching sexual satisfaction with their husbands, and they have the tendency to find their satisfaction outside marriage.

shafique wrote:I understand there are varying practices in terms of the extent of female circumcision and I have read muslim scholars who only advocate only the lesser form of circumcission and not the more radical clitorectomy - which they, and I, find barbaric and unjustifiable. However, at heart, it is a cultural thing that is not a requirement of any religion.

Whatever form it is, lesser or more, it is still FGM.

FGM is part of the patriarchal system intended to veil the mind of women by hiding physical exploitation beneath a false religious happiness. Thus, changing the socio-cultural system into a divine law.