Greetings again, Sidibeh.  I have actually just ordered the Ylva Herlund (and who was the other
lady? Bettina Shell-Duncan I think) book on female "circumcision".  And I can't wait until it gets
here.  And I'm almost wanting to reserve further "opining" on FGM until I read that book.


     I do not know much about the topic, and the questions I do have, I'm almost afraid to ask for
fear of offending someone.  While I see the practice as "harmful", I'd like to know, when did this
become a hot button issue?  I first remember hearing something on NPR, here int he US, I think it
was the late '80s or early 90's?  I can't remember.  We all know that the practice was going on
long before that, so what started the interest and when did it start?


     Regarding the "Harmful affects" of FGM, if there is as much secrecy surrounding the practice
as there seems to be, then how did these "harmful affects" come to be known?  Did women who
underwent the practice speak out and tell people what kind of affects they experienced after the
procedure?


     Or were they "examined"?  Also, unlike what has been previously asserted by Cornelius and
maybe others, it's not just about curbing the sexual appetite of women.  That is surely part of
it, as I've read somewhere that some believe that an uncircumcised woman will be promiscuous or
something like that.  However, I also think that there are other factors that go into it, for
example, the fact that some believe that some parts of the female genitalia are dirty or
unsightly, and need to be removed.


     Also, it's not entirely the "men's fault".  Because women are just a much a part of keeping
this practice alive than men.  


But my main contention is we have to understand from where this practice comes, understand why
it's carried out, and do so in a culturally respectful and sensitive way.  And then we can move
forward and explain why this may be harmful.  And this is where basic education on how women's,
and men's for that matter, bodies work.  However, as certain subjects may be taboo, this also
needs to be done in a culturally sensitive way.  However, it would seem to me that once people
understand how harmful something is, and that there may be other options that could be used in
place of FGM, ti mark such things as rites of passage, etc., then I think most people would
generally, even if slowly, start to change their practices.


     Also, Cornelius mentioned male circumcision.  I'd like to know if the same "rusty knives",
etc., that are so often cited as tools for performing FGM, are used for male circumcision? 
Because you just don't hear about the harmful side affects of male circumcision, and I think, for
the vast majority of men, provided no mistake has happened, they don't suffer any ill or lasting
affects of male circumcision.  Not only this, scientific studies have actually shown that
non-circumcised men have more infections, etc., than circumcised men.  Although I'll have to find
the studies to show htis.


     The long and short of it is, though, that while there may be some benefit to men being
circumcised, I'm not sure that the same can be said for women.  I'd also say that the less
invasive the FGM is, the less harmful the side affects will be, but that goes with any kind of
"medical" or any kind of procedure where the body is "operated on".


Ginny

¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤
To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://listserv.icors.org/archives/gambia-l.html

To Search in the Gambia-L archives, go to: http://listserv.icors.org/SCRIPTS/WA-ICORS.EXE?S1=gambia-l
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]
¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤