Female circumcision a good idea? Ask 73 percent of Kurdistani women
PASHQROTAL, Iraqi Kurdistan — Along with her pink pajamas and playful eyes, Delan has an 11-year-old's endearing smile.
She leans against an old stone wall and chats with friends as chickens and geese cluck around her feet. Rocky mountains form a towering backdrop. This is Iraqi Kurdistan, where the people are as tough as their environment.
Sitting on the empty floor of her family's mud brick home in this remote village, Delan's smile quickly fades. She speaks of the day, when she was 6 years old, that an "old woman" came to visit.
"I was in the room playing with my cousin and they called us to come," Delan said. "They cut my cousin. I was very afraid. I was crying and crying. My mother is very fat; I knew if I could run she could not catch me, but she held me too strong. I could not get away. There was a lot of blood from that place. I cried and cried. I hated my mother."
The tradition of female genital mutilation, or FGM, has survived for centuries in this deeply traditional region of northern Iraq. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), FGM is the "partial or total removal of the external female genitalia for non-medical reasons." Unspoken by society and unquestioned by victims, any mention of the subject is considered taboo.
The women from Delan's village say the custom is carried out in village homes with the use of a razor blade. The ritual is performed by female relatives or "older women" of the village. Often there is more than one girl, as with Delan and her cousin, and the same blade is used. Delan said no medicine —antiseptic or anesthetic — was given to her. She was sick for two days, but eventually the bleeding stopped.
A report released June 16 by international rights group Human Rights Watch (HRW), has underscored Kurdistan's legacy of FGM and how caught the region is between its rapid development and an ancient tradition with links to religion and a male-dominated culture.
The HRW report, "They took me and told me nothing," documents the extent of FGM and calls for action from the Kurdish government. The report found that FGM rates were as high as 73 percent among Kurdish women aged 14 and over.
"The tragedy is that FGM is perpetuated by mothers, aunts and other women who love and want the best for their children," the report said. The study added that such women see the practice as necessary for their daughters to grow up as "marriageable" and "respectable" members of society.
One mother quoted in the report said: "It is sunnah ... Everyone is doing this. Of course this is a good thing for my daughter. When someone does something, we all have to do it."
HRW researcher Nadya Khalife said the 31 women interviewed for the report felt it was a religious obligation. Many had no idea of the physical or emotional risks.The alleged religious aspects of FGM are a controversial issue within the Islamic community. Some religious leaders believe it is a cultural custom that predates Islam.
At the release of the HRW report in Erbil, Mullah Omar Chngiyani, a religious leader and host of a religious television program, said that within Islam, circumcision for boys is obligatory while for girls it is optional.
"There is no Koran verse that says, 'circumcise your daughters,'" said Chngiyani, adding that six of his seven daughters and two of his wives had not undergone FGM.
Much of the HRW report was based on a two-year study carried out by the Association for Development Cooperation in Iraq (WADI), released in March.
According to WADI, 42 percent of the mothers interviewed said they had made the choice to perform FGM on their daughters themselves. A further 22 percent were advised by their mother-in-law and 12 percent by their own mothers. Only 2 percent said they were advised by their husbands.
Thomas Van der Osten-Sacken, WADI's head of mission in Iraq since 1991, said victims suffered physical trauma, a range of medical complications. There can also be devastating effects on the relationship between a child and her mother, he said.
"FGM affects almost every aspect of their lives," he said.
As security in Iraqi Kurdistan continues to stabilize, development has brought a new way of thinking.
For the younger generation, increased social freedoms constantly clash with restrictive cultural tradition. Views and expectations of love and sexuality are rapidly changing. This collision is perhaps felt most strongly by victims of FGM.
According to the WADI report, the rate among the younger generation is significantly lower overall, yet still relatively high. Among those below 20, 57 percent had undergone FGM, while for those in their 30s the figures climbed to 74 percent. Nearly 96 percent of women over 80 had undergone FGM.
For a woman, the sexual effects can be devastating and confusing. In medical terms, the report says the removal of the clitoris "impairs normal female sexual response." The practice essentially removes the women's "sexual organ" but leaves her "reproductive organs" intact.
"The result is generally sad and unsatisfactory sex for both marriage partners," Osten-Sacken said. "When we enter a village we will often spend the first two hours bombarded by questions from husbands."
As WADI project coordinator Falah Muradkhan pointed out: "The more you talk about the impact, the more people understand what has been taken from them."
In collaboration with other non-government agencies, WADI prepared a petition to ban FGM that was presented to the government in March 2007. More than half of the 14,000 signatories were men.Despite the reports and petitions, the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) has refused to officially acknowledge the prevalence of FGM.
"This report is false," said Mariwan Naqshbandi, spokesman for Kurdistan's Ministry of Religious Affairs regarding the HRW report. "How can you make a report like this without contacting the Mullahs?"
Naqshbandi said since FGM did not occur in Kurdistan, there was no need for a law or public education on the subject.
"The Mullahs already advise against it," he said. "This is enough."
Former Kurdish parliamentarian Pakhshan Zangana introduced a draft law banning FGM in 2007. Parliament refused to discuss the law stating the issue was "not widespread enough" to be addressed. Zangana said she believed the issue was too sensitive to mention.
"Our community has a long way to go to discuss issues related to the sexualities of women," she said. "People asked us on the streets: does Parliament not have a more serious issue than circumcision to discuss?"
The information provided to the KRG by its medical advisors seems to be equally disturbing. Dr. Atia al-Salihy, a prominent medical advisor to the government, told HRW she did not believe FGM had negative physical effects.
"Circumcision is nothing," she said in the report, adding that it had no influence on a women's life nor her relationship with her husband.
The HRW report said it would take a legal ban as well as the cooperation of religious leaders, educators and doctors if change is to occur any time soon.
Until that happens, the tradition of FGM seems certain to impact the lives of young girls like Delan.
"If I have daughters I will do the same for them because it is good," Delan said. "It makes me a good girl, a good wife and good for society."
More like this
- Sweden, Denmark and Norway try to stop genital mutilation among immigrants at home and abroad
- How medical opinions on circumcision have shifted over the years
- Ellison to co-sponsor bill to protect circumcision
- Egypt's climate of sexual harassment persists, and police don't seem to care
- Male bisexuality does exist, study finds
Recent Stories
Most Commented
-
30 comments
-
26 comments
-
26 comments
-
21 comments
-
19 comments
Comments (4)
In the name of religious freedom almost any idea gets some credibility.Seems a bit beyond even the acceptance of angels and faithbased folks.
The article does not mention whether the practice is supported by the leaders of other religious faiths.
I'd like to know what the leaders of the Catholics and/or other Christian sects have to say about this.I doubt that many would suggest the "secular government" interefere with any religious freedoms.
If people are serious about stopping female circumcision, they also have to be against male circumcision. Even if you see a fundamental difference, the people that cut girls don't (and they get furious if you call it "mutilation"). There are intelligent, educated, articulate women who will passionately defend it, and as well as using the exact same reasons that are used to defend male circumcision in the US, they will also point to male circumcision itself (as well as labiaplasty and breast operations), as evidence of western hypocrisy regarding female circumcision. The sooner boys are protected from genital mutilation in the west, the sooner those peoples that practice FGM will interpret western objections as something more than cultural imperialism.
Mark Lyndon- Nobody was talking about male circumcision, and it's pretty rude of you to sweep aside this women-specific issue by mentioning male circumcision as if it were in anyway the same thing.
Furthermore, there is a huge difference between ritual male circumcision and the male circumcisions done for non-religious reasons by non-Jews and non-Muslims. Ritual male circumcisions use only a sharp, sterile blade and have virtually zero complications.
They are also conducted by people with extensive training, unlike the modern doctors who have only general experience with circumcision. Modern doctors also use other equipment that unfortunately, very often leads to horrible medical mistakes during non-ritual male circumcision. (I believe that is what you are actually referring to when you talk about male circumcision, however it is important to be specific.)
Until you can point to a ritual male circumcision and find that it involves the removal of the entire head of the penis, then: it does not affect sexual response, often lead to death, difficulties/death during childbirth, or any of the myriad of other problems that occur from FGM.
In reality, FGM is not a religious issue. While some have said that it is Islamic, nobody can find anything within the Quran to support the practice. It is a cultural practice that has been given an emphasis that has led many to think that it is religiously-mandated.
I would recommend people who are interested in this topic to look up the relevant reports from WHO, Amnesty International, and HRW. This article has been a nice starting point, but in my opinion it does not do the issue justice.
We're talking about cutting parts off children's genitals, and I think it's wrong to limit that to one gender. You might see a big difference, but I don't, and neither do the people that cut girls. I think it's pretty rude of you to try to make this an issue about one sex, as if cutting parts off girls' genitals is in anyway different from cutting parts off boys' genitals.
Many forms of female circumcision do less damage than the usual form of male circumcision. Sometimes there's just an incision with nothing actually removed. One form just removes the clitoral hood (the female foreskin), so it's the exact equivalent of cutting off a boy's foreskin. In some countries, female circumcision is performed by doctors in operating theatres with pain relief. Conversely, male circumcision is often performed as a tribal practice. When circumstances are similar, so are outcomes, and 91 boys died of circumcision in just one province of South Africa last year.
Are you aware that the USA also used to practise female circumcision? Fortunately, it never caught on the same way as male circumcision, but there are middle-aged white US American women walking round today with no external clitoris because it was removed. Some of them don't even realise what has been done to them. There are frequent references to the practice in medical literature up until at least 1959. Most of them point out the similarity with male circumcision, and suggest that it should be performed for the same reasons. Blue Cross/Blue Shield had a code for clitoridectomy till 1977.
One victim wrote a book about it:
Robinett, Patricia (2006). "The rape of innocence: One woman's story of female genital mutilation in the USA."
The Quran doesn't mention circumcision of either sex, but lots of people seem convinced that FGC is part of their religion.
Nowadays, it's illegal in the USA even to make an incision on a girl's genitals though, even if no tissue is removed. Why don't boys get the same protection?