1. In society where rape
crimes are relatively high and virginity is deemed as the utmost
importance, do you think that FGM can be one of the possible
ways to prevent young girls from being raped? Why?
Rape exists in all human societies and all societies tend to imagine
they have more of a problem with rape than other societies. Rape is
an issue that can easily generate strong emotions which are blind to
reason. The spectre of rape has been used many times to justify war,
oppression and other barbarities.
I cannot even begin to comprehend what mechanism could be suggested
which would explain how removing a child's clitoris will discourage
rape. Rapists do not rape to cause their victims sexual pleasure.
The motives are to dominate and to inseminate. These motives
will be unaffected by the removal of the clitoris. If genital
mutilation extends to suturing the vulva closed to the extent
that penetration is not possible then this may prevent some rapes,
or possibly turn them into sodomy and/or murder.
Similar logic can be used to suggest the widespread adoption
of suicide to prevent murder or burning down your house to discourage
burglary.
Is this argument used by women or men? I can assure you I have
never come across a woman who would volunteer to have her labia
stitched closed, no matter how fearful she was of being raped.
In the west women's
imagined surgical solutions to the rape problem never involve
stiches to the vulva...
2. FGM is a tradition that has been carried
out for many generations to promote health (i.e. enhance fertility
and reduce masturbation);
ironically, it has also results in unwanted health complications during
childbirth and pregnancy. What is your view on this?
There is no irony here. Genital mutilation or circumcision, of either
sex, has never been about health. Such explanations are retrospective
justifications and have nothing to do with the origin of the practice.
Reducing masturbation has no effect on health. Masturbation
is not a disease or a problem.
3. What is your opinion towards the practice
of FGM?
Genital mutilation is unacceptable under any circumstances. To do it
to children incapable of understanding but capable of suffering is
barbarous and inhumane. To do it pretending it has something to do
with the will of god(s) is blasphemous.
4. Many articles report that FGM is a
torturous practice, however, study shows that most of these
devastating implications of FGM reported in various materials
do not have significant evidence and many of the reports contain
methodological flaws. As an expert in this field, please comment
of this.
I am not an expert in this field. It isn't necessary to show medical
damage to condemn an unnecessary and painful procedure on a child too
young to give informed consent.
5. One of the main purposes of FGM is
to ensure the faithfulness of wives to their husbands. Throughout
all these years of FGM practice, do you think that FGM has
achieved its objectives? How?
Yes, it has achieved many of its objectives. It has reduced women's enjoyment
of sex and so dampened their desire to be unfaithful. However female
sexuality is more than just sexual response, it is also strongly about
choice of partners. Genital mutilation cannot change a woman's ideas
about who she is attracted to or wants to father her children. So ultimately
FGM cannot fully succeed because the woman's largest erogenous zone
and sexual organ is her brain. FGM alone cannot destroy her brain and
her will, that task requires Islam.
The purpose of female genital mutilation is to destroy female
sexuality and desire so that women become more easily manipulated
by their fathers and husbands. It works extremely well. Not only
does it reduce female enjoyment of sex it also creates a dependence
and a love of the abuser, a kind of Stockholm
syndrome. Both male and female victims of circumcision actually
come to support the continuation of the practice and believe
the fairy stories that surround the practices and are used to
justify its continuation.
--
Martin Willett
http://mwillett.org
|