Although it was prominently reported in The Australian, I haven’t seen any blog discussion of the Egyptian government’s belated move to make the carrying out of female genital mutilation by doctors and others a crime attracting real penalties, rather than just the previous symbolic legal ban. Religious authorities in Egypt, both Islamic and Coptic Christian, have also declared the practice to have no justification or basis in sacred scriptures or religious traditions. (FGM is practiced among particular ethnic groups in Africa regardless of religion - so it’s not just something peculiar to Islam, but also practiced by Christians, animists and, in the past, Ethiopian Jews. It’s not possible, as demonstrated here [pdf] to establish a causal link between religion and the prevalence of FGM - and it’s higher among Christians than Muslims in some African nations). To quote part of the article:
Sarah Leah Whitson of US-based rights group Human Rights Watch welcomed the decision but remained cautious.
“We welcome the ban on female genital mutilation but the key issue is if there is going to be an implementation,” she said.
What’s key to that is not just government action, but also education and community campaigns by NGOs and activists within Egypt (and other countries where this vile practice occurs). Such action is more effective than loud denunciations by Westerners, and supporting it through monetary donation is much more effective than writing blog posts, comments or op/eds inspired by the visit to Australia by Ayaan Hirsi Ali which concentrate on bashing political opponents and loudly denouncing Islam.
So I’ve got a challenge for the great humanitarians of the blogosphere - put your money where your mouth is.
For every comment on this post which discusses the issue seriously without turning it into a political football, attributing motives to bloggers or indulging in disputation about religion, politics, culture wars, or clashes of or within civilisations, I will donate two dollars to The Foundation for Women’s Health, Research and Development up to a maximum of two hundred dollars.
My hope in doing so is that that money will make more difference to eradicating FGM in Egypt and other countries than two hundred loud denunciations in Australia would. The Foundation also works to eradicate forced child marriages and fistula. Fistula is an injury which seriously damages women’s health and quality of life, and occurs because of substandard health care, gender inequality and the control of women’s bodies and reproductive health by men through cultural tradition. It occurs in many of the same countries where FGM is practiced, but has no real ability to be connected to religious and political culture wars in the West, so is rarely loudly denounced. But its effects on women’s lives - along with those of forced child marriage - are also lamentable.
Update: Many thanks to Ampersand at Alas! A Blog for linking to this post and encouraging comments, and thus a bigger contribution.
Frist!
Onya, Kim. So will I.
Money will be forwarded to Kim, whose judgement I trust about which comments qualify.
Can I also suggest that if you are curious enough and tough enough, you should read Australian writer Susan Johnson’s memoir A Better Woman to find out more about fistula.
Which I loudly denounce.
What perspective does the memoir come from, PC? Was she a health worker?
Did catch the news last week that Norway has passed legislation that effectively refuses visas to its residents who are suspected of travelling to africa for fgm? (not a commentary on the rightness of western legislative intervention,,,,, just sayin!)
RE Fistulas in developing countries, i’ve looked at that issue a bit when looking at class, childbirth and pelvic floor health, and am really pleased you rasied that as an issue as well!
Nope, closer even than that: she had it herself. And as a white Australian in Melbourne in the 1990s, at that.
Very brave, out-there book.
Moderated!
Was it “Melbourne”?
Not sure to be honest!
Thanks for the info.
Wow, thanks PC i have to read that book now.
Kim, an urrkky post, but as the recent Ayaan Hirsi Ali round of media in OZ made clear, still a long ways to go in seperating fact from fiction and myth, concerning an issue underlayed by politics and propaganda over the last couple of decades.
Firstly though, when you talk of Fistula, you are talking of the increasingly prevalent injury to very young women and girls giving birth in north eastern Africa, through a modern tendency toward much younger marriages that curiously parallels earlier in life FGM.
The birthing process, for many young women in early or mid teens causes internal rupturing of lower abdominal area organs and chronic urinary tract seepage in many cases.
With FGM, am aware I bayed at it in ignorance in a populist way myself once, although I still however consider it fearsomely repugnant. But these days its for slightly different and hopefully less racist reasons.
I remember reading an anthropology textbook claiming that many women in these traditional cultures regard FGM as a form or initiation into woman hood and sisterhood, a shared experience like male circumcision in certain aboriginal communities at adolescence that defines one’s identity within a peergroup and as a member of an exclusive value-laden gender category. The FGM process must resonate deeply with many women in these cultures, since the process, including in its worst forms is persisted with vehemently, against international pressure, to “purify” the girls.
To this writer, the above resonates distantly with a story told him over a brew one day by his late mum, about how she was not allowed the use of public loos, for “hygenic” reasons. Her mum would even “hover” her or her kid sister above the ‘loo if the need was too great to avoid postponment, to avoid contact.
I supose the point am trying to make in my clumsy oafish male way is that, like many Aussie women these African women also have a very fierce if ( to us ) misguided notion of personal pride and standards, to the point of performing rituals we find appalling relating to sisterly self-respect. We don’t “get” it, anymore than we “got” Sheik Hillaly when he expressed his horror at what many older conservative cultures regard as our neglect for our daughters in the lazy, secular West in encouraging them to dress skimpily in the presence of exploitative males, like “meat left out for cats” ( Pavlov’s for example? ). Ok, so we think such Fred Nile-like fuddy- duddery is nonsense, but the other view is more “generational” than malicious, perhaps?
The problem seems that FGM and early arranged marriages occur at a younger age than once was considered normal. As these regions have become closer to poverty, conservative ways have become more reasonable to despairing mindsets trying to make sense of life made conservative by harsh living conditions.
BTW, another example of older rituals out of touch with modernity would be the habit of giving armalite automatics to young lads in place of spears, as part of their manhood inductions.
Had the West taken more of interest in these places after ww2 when our reputations were still good and they were more physically amenable to change, things could have been different.
Now they think the west is evil, life is crook and retreat into a gloomy gnostic sort of “known”, no matter how painful it is or how silly we tell them it is.
One minor quibble Kim - won’t you be putting your money where their mouths are?
I wish I hadn’t asked that.
Gummo, either you are not as nice a man as I thought you were, or you need to give that one a bit more thought.
On the loosely related issue of Pelvic floor prolaspse in the west, this website, and particularly the blog, looks at the whole medicalisation P F Prolapse and natural alternatives to surgery. Interesting gynacological feminism.
Um, not really. I’m female, straight, non-exploitative and semi-vegetarian.
And a mixed metaphor is a terrible thing.
Feel somewhat simile abt this too.
Knew my illiteration would not fall on deaf ears.
Also am semi vegetative.
BTW think that a cat what types littorally is something wonderous, two.
BTW none wot knows me would not accuse me of being exploiterive.
Sigh. Took a risk and you WERE out there. Missed the fin.
bit silly, moi.
Good job. CNN has ads at the moment about fistula, which is the only reason I’d even heard of it before this. And as I’m heading to Egypt in November I was looking for something related to support. Can’t get into the Foundation website for the mo, though.
BTW, the Oz article says female circumcision goes “back to the time of the pharaohs” but there’s only one possible reference to to it from that time and the interpretation is very much disputed.
Don’t underestimate the power of ‘I went through this, so you will too’ either. Unfortunately many girls endure this becaues their mothers or grandmothers went through it as well. Education is making some headway against the practice, but there is still a long way to go to eradicate this.
The issue wasn’t entirely ignored in Ozblogistan. I wrote a piece about it last Friday. See link.
The geographical spread of FGM through Africa suggests that the practice originated in Egypt. And while its true that there is only one reference to support it being done in pharaonic times, there is no alternative evidence to suggest the practice started later.
As for the current situation; with 97% of all Egyptian women undergoing the practice it will take a lot more than legal change to repress it.
What Mindy said - but the same effect applies to male genital mutilation (let’s call it what it really is, FFS, not “circumcision”).
I don’t want to derail the thread - the degree of mutilation involved and the consequent pain and health risks are usually greater for women than men - but we do need to be prepared for accusations of hypocrisy from proponents of FGM while we continue to give religions a pass on MGM.
What DD said, particularly
Believe me i hear what you say about male circumcision, and our son didnt have the proceedure precisely because of the issue of choice, mutilation etc etc. However there is an increasing body of knowledge that demonstrably indicates the circumcised men have a lower prevalence of hiv transmission and infection, and it is now strongly being advocated by health professionals such as the UN and WHO as a public health strategy in areas with high sexually transmitted infection rates, such as Africa.
Just sayin’
Btw, the Director of the WHO Aids program, who is interviewed for this story on ABC radio is Dr Kevin De Cock. I kid you not.
In the past, male circumcision was defended as halving your risk of cancer of the glans of the penis - from 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 20,000. The 1991 Australian Law Reform Commission report on circumcision (which led ultimately to State governments around the country outlawing the practice of FGM) noted that a lot of foreskin associated health risks could be eliminated by teaching boys good willy hygeine. Similarly here, we have this last word:
I’ve got no problem with the idea of adult male circumcision as an AIDS preventive - as long as it’s not used as an excuse to avoid more effective measures.
Might be an idea to get of the subject of male genital cutting now - this thread is being commented on elsewhere by less than disinterested lurkers.
PC - yes, that comment was regrettable. The sexual innuendo wasn’t intended (hence the second sentence) but really I should have just ditched it.
Well i hope they are contributing their $2 dollars not just their 2 cents worth. You shouldnt have told me this though gummo, ’cause i’m inclined to get all paranoid about my dyslexic spelling and not post for a while.
Both FGM and MGM are all about sexual pleasure denial and intercourse for propagation only, I would suggest. It is a very nasty form of physical abuse, predominantly against children.
The Egyptian government has been most brave.
sc… I heard De Cock and was quite staggered by his name and more by his crazy suggestion. Even if these scientific claims are correct, the conclusion is absurd.
When the religious community ran out of excuses for MGM they came up with the hygiene issue. This looks like advanced work in more of the same.
So it is all about De Cock.
and here was me thinking it as about the exponentially more fearsome problem of fmg.
It took an awfully long time for someone , in this case Joe, to point things in the right direction, so to speak.
Now I will complete the job commenced by Joe.
As a male, I am eminently qualified to tell this assembled multitude that male circumcision does not interfere remotely in a male ability to orgasm often and orgasm intensely.
How am I able to tell you this??
Yes, DD and Sublime Cowgirl, the difference between a lamb and a tiger could not begin to sum up emphatically enough the difference between the two forms, the merely cosmetic male version and the repressive and fearful and sometimes life-threatening female version.
A better equivalent would be a comparison with castration.
Let’s forget “roundheads and cavaliers” and get back on track.
Tu coque?
Don’t underestimate the power of ‘I went through this, so you will too’ either.
That’s so desparately sad. How about “I went through this, so I will do everything in my power to make sure you and others do not have to do so in the future”?
Please note: I’m not in any way at all denouncing the poor mothers and grandmothers who have that attitude. Changing a culture, whether from within or without, is hugely difficult; it’s just so tragic that FGM is so established. But then “treating women like shit” is certainly one of those cultural things that needs hard work to shift.
Hmm, this sort of thread seems to attract a lot less comments than those which are characterised by:
Pity!
Come on, folks!
Unfortunately that’s very true.
The link from the organisation campaigning to end fistula is explicit about the relationship between patriarchal cultures and negative health outcomes in reproductive health:
http://www.endfistula.org/empowering_women.htm
SC,
The good thing is that while they’re posting on it elsewhere, they’re not adding to Kim’s expenses.
Is that a good thing? Or just a thing?
It’s a bad thing, because the expenses go to actually combatting FGM.
LP, where your 2 cents becomes $2. Cant beat that for value. And ‘wot Paul said’, there is no equivalence between FGM and circumcision.
Excellent post Kim and thank you for you efforts in providing a decent, sensible discourse on this issue.
Kim, are there some good documented examples of the practice being eradicated from communities? What tactics worked there?
With out wishing to pre-empt Kim, Rob, the NGO to whom donations are being directed outlines its strategies here:
http://www.forwarduk.org.uk/about/achievements
And jo posted some links on a previous thread about Ayaan Hirsi Ali and FGM which Kim excerpted here:
http://larvatusprodeo.net/2007/06/04/ayaan-hirsi-ali-and-the-fgm-debate/
I think i may have been too ambiguous earlier.
I think there are large distinctions between male and female ‘circumcision’, and the motivations behind it ( while conceeding there are indeed some overlaps with ‘body and sexual politics’).
What i was meaning to convey is that in the 90’s when i had ma little calves, the prevaling thinking of doctors and my peers was that circumcision for boys was unnecessarily invasive, with little medical benefit justifying the practice. At the moment, it seems that the pendulum is swinging back a little toward understanding that it is not merely a cultural or religious practice but, to be fair has demonstrable health benefits in certain contexts.
Though I’m wondering, could it be argued that the WHO pro-circumcision health policy actually recognises the reality of multiple sexual partners, and is thus a ( cost vs benefit) harm minimisation policy, whereas culturally prescribed FGM is perhaps more akin to a zero tolerance approach to female sexuality? Just thinking aloud i guess…
“the merely cosmetic male version and the repressive and fearful and sometimes life-threatening female version.
A better equivalent would be a comparison with castration..”
Not a good comparison at all, paul walter.
FGM is much more about maintaining the capacity for reproduction, while diminishing/ending sex for pleasure with the, similarly, unneeded surgery.
SC,
The pendulum may be swinging back, but not (I think) so far as to convince medicos that circumcision of male infants is acceptable (at least on medical grounds). Infants are difficult to anaesthetise, so the procedure is going to be either risky or painful. Either way, still off-topic (not that the lurkers seem to be excited by it - they’ve since moved on to other things).
I don’t know if this counts as a relevant comment, but I discovered today that I had made an addition error in my charitable donations last financial year and have $300 left over. Coming upon this thread immediately afterwards I decided that $100 should go to the foundation you’ve linked to. So Kim you’ve raised up to $500 for the cause with this one thread between yourself, PC and me, at least if we hit the 100 relevant comments.
Its annoying though. I suspect I will be in a lower tax bracket this financial year than last, so won’t be able to get Howard to contribute as much of our money where his booster’s mouths are.
I don’t know if all this MGM talk constitutes derailment, but I’d like to add to the chorus of “there ain’t no equivalence”.
Given FGM is as SC says (part of) “a zero tolerance approach to female sexuality”, and as joe2 says it’s about “maintaining the capacity for reproduction, while diminishing/ending sex for pleasure with the” there can be no male equivalent. The male orgasm being kind of crucial to conception, the female being, well, surplus to requirements.
Decadent, even.
MGM can be justified on health grounds - although keeping things clean under the bonnet achieves most health outcomes well, the deal with AIDS (and other blood-borne STDs?) transmission is different. The skin of the foreskin, head and shaft are different at a cellular level, the former being more prone to splitting and therefore more permeable than the latter two. At least that’s how I remember it.
This is not to say I’m a fan of it - hygiene and condoms are preferable - but the worst thing about it seems to me to be the denial of choice and the pain of the procedure, which can at least be argued to be justified by the benefits. One of which I’ve heard to be an actual heightening of sensation, so there’s another possible upside.
Whereas there is nothing but downside to FGM, and so I loudly denounce it.
Stephen L, I’m not sure if the donations, because the NGO is based in the UK, would be tax deductible here. Does anyone know of an equivalent Australian organisation?
Really?
Private foreign aid isn’t tax deductible? That’s odd to me - the govt could just add it to the total they contribute and come up looking roses. I guess the problem’s with accountability and such - wouldn’t want to be signing off on deductions for contributions to an AQ hedge.
Maybe it is, FDB. I’m really not sure!
From the UNICEF publication cited (p.17):
So religion (both Christianity, Islam and the others) is a motivator.
And why would you care about virginity etc.? Religion.
In those countries where data exists females of no religion are less likely to suffer FCM/C (p.34).
There is obviously a correlation and people use religion to justify the practice, but is there causation?
Or a pretext - the thing, then, Martin, is to convince people that religion doesn’t justify the practice. That’s why statements from Islamic and Christian authorities are useful.
One would assume that they’d be far more likely to be urban, educated and middle class.
Kim - spare us the holier than thou donning of a mantle of light and wisdom. Just donate the $200.
No $2 for that comment, Atticus.
Onya, Dr Cat!
Surely it can’t be too hard to get to a hundred comments without sledging Islam, attacking people and making political points!
Joe2 benefitted from the contrasting constructive response of Sublime Cowgirl; a response that added to the sum total of knowedge as to this discussion as well as being diametrically opposed in quality and worth to the one you directed to my comments concerning castration as equivalent to fmg.
Your comments leave me flabbergasted and your response is the second superfluous and innane comment seemingly intended to rile me directed my way by another blogger, today.
The second part of your comments contained a mustard seed of value tho, in acknowledging that female circumcision is primarily intended to suppress women’s sexual pleasure, rather than performorm any health function.
In fact, pharaonic circumcision- the full monty- discourages sexual activity through pain, and is a health threat both short and long term ( a bit like castration!!).
Now, will resume giving up cigarettes, in solitude.
paul, I’d suggest you turn the other cheek. Though I would ask people not to be too harsh in commenting about others’ views, and I’d particularly like to avoid stoushes on this thread.
thread nazi
(and i’m happy to forsake $2 for this comment!)
A buck fifty for the emoticon irony?
Just on the male circumcision/FGM comparison, there are some parallels but:
(a) The impacts of FGM are a lot worse (as pointed out);
(b) The cultural context is different - in that male circumcision only became widely popular among gentiles in the West because of public health/hygiene movements in the 19th and 20th centuries, though obviously some of those contexts were shaped by moral beliefs;
(c) The equivalent for the most common type of FGM would be the surgical removal of at least half the penis.
I’d agree it’s an issue worth discussing, but I’d rather focus here on FGM.
It’s not as if I’m completely indifferent to the topic of male circumcision, ahem. But, as soon as you introduce it into a discussion like this you end up with a (somewhat pointless) argument about which is worse.
Which kind of ignores the possibility of two things being (quite equally) ethically wrong, but incommensurate.
This is the ad I mentioned seeing on CNN:
http://www.endfistula.org/yr_page/video.html
Kim - didn’t we have a to-and-fro a few months ago where I offered to put up a hundred bucks if you could nominate a worthy anti-FGM organisation to receive it? Can’t find it in the LP archives but I’m happy to keep my end of the deal.
I’d like to second Robert’s comment above, does anyone know of any recent successful campaigns to stop FGM? It seems that in Egypt it has long been discouraged officially but the majority of the population has ignored the public education campaigns and official commentary on the topic.
I was just wondering how do you begin to bring a halt to a practice that seems to be so embedded in the culture?
See the links posted in response to Rob’s comment, mick.
Thanks Kim, completely missed them. Always the problem when coming into a thread late.
Now I’ve read those pieces I have to say that the success of community-based approaches to halting FGM is really impressive.
“paul, I’d suggest you turn the other cheek.”
God knows what I did to the other one.
I was just making a point, that I thought was relevant to the discussion and not meant to be “harsh”. Apology to Paul if he took it that way.
There seems to be more heat than light thrown on this subject in this and previous related threads which seem to be serving some agenda other that one that seriously seeks to understand this longstanding, universal practice. There is very little sense conveyed in the posts of why, beyond banalities, FGM occurs in both Western culture and within Western nation states and the more usual suspects of Africa, Egypt, etc. Education campaigns and legal prohibtions on their own are never going to eradicate this in the same way they won’t and (have not anywhere) prostitution, unequal pay, abortion and domestic violence.
Of greater interest and import are the interacting political dynamics of state supported initiatives to combat this and patriarchal power structures and mechanisms which assure the continution of FGM and related cultural practices. The role of economics and of international financial and monetary institutions and of Western imperialism in shaping domestic and gender politics in countries such as Egypt that create outcomes such as ongoing dominant cultural support for such anti-women practices are far more meaningful to investigate, understand, expose and oppose, than the tack taken to date here.
Male circumcision is practiced by a number of cultures, and its development within these cultures seems to have taken place independently from the others. The reason for the practice is varied, but seems to be related to the enhancement of the male experience; be it through improved sexual sensation, or improved hygiene.
On the other hand, the most common reason for FGM is to remove sexually sensitive tissue, thereby robbing women the opportunity to have a sexually pleasurable experience - In other words, it’s designed to be the ultimate chastity belt.
Because the practice has its roots within patriarchal traditions, its elimination is dependent upon the continued promotion of feminism as the norm. There are growing feminist movements within Africa and the Middle East, and in time hopefully FGM - and all violence against women - will be a thing of the past.
Incidentally, according to the WHO, FGM predated Islam.
I guess I’m not allowed to attribute motives to people who aren’t commenting!
But does it count as a comment if I simply donate around $25 of my own to the link above?
That would be fabulous!
Joe 2, You’re right. Having a really “bad hair” day, if blokes are allowed to have these and misconstrued slightly.
Alex is correct in reminding ureaders that fmg precedes Islam.
Also Jinmaro’s comments parallel my feelings also, as to the forces shaping and exercabating the current problem.
“Cultural sensibilites” is argued and it’s sensitive not to comment concerning an “other” position from a privileged standpoint.
But when historical precedents and long term trends are aggravated and reinforced by everything from geopolitics to global warming, you feel less disturbed when as you rebel inwardly against “others” practices and you begin to see from evidence and testimony that these have been warped by immanent through to overt outside influences into something far more severe than they were once were or need to be now.
There is arguably a parallel right in our own backyard in the example of the suffering of our aboriginal people. Aboriginal civilisation has been up-ended and we see the disruption in these peoples in the suffering and dysfunction. No doubt I have to say now that I know that aboriginals do not practice female circumsicion as far as I know; am talking about other damaging altered relational practices within what is now arguably a subculture we owe a duty of care toward.
One digresses.
Comments earlier raised by Robert Merkel and others as to relative successes of campaigns against the practice is the way ahead, and am inclined to start Googling myself to find out what campaigns work and how they differ from others.
Wasn’t Eritrea, or one of the other Horn of Africa countries having some success re the problem?
Have taken onboard Haiku’s comments and their drift.
ΚÏ?Ï?ιε á¼?λÎησον, ΧÏ?ιστὲ á¼?λÎησον, ΚÏ?Ï?ιε á¼?λÎησον.
10 quid donated, Kim - about $23.55 according to Google. Will PM the details.
Mark you may well be right about it not being tax deductible - I wrote that before I had actually followed the link and discovered it was UK based. If anyone can find out I’d appreciate it, as I assume would Kim and Pavlov’s Cat.
I know this is a bit OT, and probably shouldn’t count for the $2, but I’ve been looking to ask about it and this seems a better place than most: Do people know anything about http://www.goodsearch.com?
Its a search engine where half the money from ads goes to charities. However, when I tried to use it a while ago it wouldn’t let me with some message about not being useable by non-Americans. Now it does let me, but says only American charities are allowed. That’s fine by me - plenty of worthy US charities to support, but I can’t seem to find out whether my money is actually going to the cause I support. Requests for info from the site have yielded nothing.
If it is effective it good be a fun thing for LPs to do - collectively vote on a charity for a week and all use it and see how much we can raise for that cause.
Sorry to get back to this point after such a long interruption, but it seems that strategies that succeed in changing community behaviour require the active buy-in from that community - you can’t just do it with top-down punitive actions.
Anybody seeing parallels with indigenous policy here?
Yep!
Hey Kim,
Good on you Kim for doing this!
Spent a bit of time last night reading the annual reports of UK based Forward, and US based Equality Now - both have very abridged versions of their Fin. reports and so is hard to make judgements without seeing more - but it seems that Equality Now - certainly supports many more African based NGO’s directly. Forward supported a couple of programs in Africa and does more work in the UK. The financial reports aren’t very enlightening without seeing more details - but I wasn’t wrapped with overheads compared to grant expenditure in Forward’s Annual Report.
Having worked in NGO’s - there is often big differences between organisations in how they effectively they manage their projects, & how they manage their overheads and wages etc.
Having said all that, I’m donating directly to an NGO in Africa and bypassing the middle-man so to speak. Not that western based NGO’s don’t have a big role to play!! – they are often more effective in getting big grants from US & Euro based foundations, and then administering theses funds to NGO’s in developing countries, who may not have the capacity to get multi-year grants themselves etc and they also help to build up expertise and capacity in these little NGO’s etc….. All good stuff.
I just pay-paled $ 50USD to Tostan - http://www.tostan.org/
Their 2006 Annual Report http://www.tostan.org/2006_annual_report.pdf
The 2005 Equality Now report
http://www.equalitynow.org/reports/annualreport_2005.pdf
moderated (for my own good, probably)
Off-topic and not meant as an offence to those seeking exposure as to the cruelty of fmg and the fact of grotesque African poverty. But must respond to Robert Merkel’s comment re Australian Aboriginal “Emergency” and African FMG programs and possible parallels as to risks and undesirability of “top down”.
It always seems that the best way to get stubborn, traditional and poor peasant societies off side, particularly in times of adversity is to patronise them or force solutions upon them that, though suiting the mores of those imposing, seem foolish to those imposed upon.
Ok, what else is bugging me is the 7.30 Report. Thurs episode carried a segment concerning hobnailed intrusions by “Brownshirt Brough” into a number of recovering Aboriginal communities and the withdrawing of funds for one increasingly self sufficient community because it refused to immediately sign over its control of its community to the federal government.
The people were saddened and perplexed and the crops theyhad planted were withering in the field. But their spokesperson, an Aboriginal woman responsible for a pensioner meals program, who carried a degree of gravitas about her person, made very clear in her quiet way her disapointment and anger at the attitude and the arbitrary removal of funds by the government. In fact the visits to a number of aboriginal communities proved disturbing in the revelation of their oafishness and lack of honesty by politicians and officials with local community members.
But was the above alocal example similar to Kiplingesque patronisation of previous centuries of colonised peopleselsewherein the world and if so, what does that say about the reality of Australian “civilization” and “values”. If African contries or commuities within are treated in the same neo-colonialist way way as the Australian Squattocracy treats Aussie “natives”, what will become of anti-circumcision programs in Africa?
If I can go back to about comment ten:
I doubt it. Wasn’t one of Mighty Mo’s wives 12? Does this sound right to anyone?
Mostly, in sub-saharan africa they are so close to poverty that we say they are poor. Nonetheless they are probably less so than ever before. In Eygpt they are not so poor at all, and certainly less so than they were pretty much any time previously.
No, the inverse. Spears are no longer any use for protection, automatic rifles (very few of which are expensive American ones I suspect) are.
?
Not really. Mostly they are getting richer as quickly as their political classes will allow them to, and migrating to the ‘evil’ west when they can’t.
Attitudes like that won’t help get rid of FGM at all - I think it is much more useful to recognise that ‘poor’ people, and religious people, and conservative fuddy-duddys, are all generally like us, and whilst afraid of what they don’t know, also inherently hopeful and ‘aspirational’. I very strongly suspect that more trade, and increased economic, political and personal freedom would have a significant effect on FGM.
But I do support specific anti-FGM campaigns in the meantime.
Finally, hopefully not breaking the rules, I am appalled that DD even thinks his comment was worth submitting. There is probably a reason why there aren’t any anti-male circumcision charities to speak of.
I’ve paid in 50 quid.
On ya, Rob.
Good stuff, Rob.
Seems to be money well spent, Haiku.
I’d urge folks to contribute to Michael J Totten also. What a journalist. I donated the same amount to him.
Many thanks to Ampersand at Alas! A Blog for linking to this post and encouraging comments, and thus a bigger contribution.
And thanks, Rob, sorry I missed your earlier comment - wasn’t on line all that much for a while.
Hi, I’m hopping over from Alas where I’ve written about the ban a couple times. Your point about penalties is a good one.
I’m scraping the bottom of the barrel for new things to say about this, but I’d love to see more discussion on these internets about women’s economic situation in Africa. I think it’s less instincitively salacious than sexxx or lack thereof, but bettering the situation seems like the only thing that will provide long term freedom for African women on this and other fronts.
FGS is certainly important, and I’m certainly in favor of activism, but it does seem that we give the issue the same kind of attention as we give burkahs because both are symbollically appealing. In a general American discourse way, not pointing fingers at any given discussion all of which are probably individually important, I’d like to see the western lens widen.
Have you decided which NGO to make the donation to?
I ask because I’ve been looking around for a NGO in this area to make a donation to, as well, and if I can benefit by leeching off the research you’ve done then that would be great.