According to the World Health Organization, female genital cutting affects millions of girls and women worldwide, particularly on the African continent and in the Middle East. This paper presents a plausible, albeit hypothetical, clinical vignette and then explores the legal landscape as well as the ethical landscape physicians should use to evaluate the adult patient who requests re-infibulation. The principles of non-maleficence, beneficence, justice, and autonomy are considered for guidance, and physician conscientious objection to this procedure is (...) discussed as well. Analyses of law and predominant principles of bioethics fail to yield a clear answer regarding performing female genital cutting or re-infibulation on an adult in the United States. Physicians should consider the patient’s physical, mental, and social health when thinking about female genital cutting and should understand the deep-rooted cultural significance of the practice. (shrink)

The Abagusii are one of the many communities in Kenya that engage in female genital cutting. Locally, the practice is simply known as “circumcision.” Introduced as “female circumcision” to the West, the practice was thought to parallel male circumcision. Both are referred to as tahiri, and both are coming of age rites. However, female circumcision was thought inaccurately to reflect the difference in health outcomes. As presented to the West, FGC results in worse health outcomes (...) for females than circumcision does for males. While male circumcision is credited with lowering HIV transmission, the opposite is true for FGC (UNICEF... (shrink)

In April 2017, Dr. Jumana Nagarwala, at that time an emergency medicine physician at Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit, MI, was arrested and jailed. Together with seven others, she will be among the f...

Feminist studies of female genital cutting (FGC) provide ample evidence that many women exercise effective agency with respect to this practice, both as accommodators and as resisters. The influence of culture on autonomy is ambiguous: women who resist cultural mandates for FGC do not necessarily enjoy greater autonomy than do those women who accommodate the practice, yet it is clear that some social contexts are more conducive to autonomy than others. In this paper, I explore the implications (...) for autonomy theory of these understandings of the relation between culture, FGC, and women’s agency. I review the range of worldwide FGC practices – including “corrective” surgery for “ambiguous genitalia” in Western cultures as well as the various initiation rites observed in some African and Asian cultures – and the diverse cultural rationales for different forms of FGC. I argue that neither latitudinarian, value‐neutral accounts of autonomy nor restrictive, value‐saturated accounts adequately explain women’s agentic position with respect to FGC. I then analyze a number of educational programs that have enhanced women's autonomy, especially by strengthening their introspection, empathy, and imagination. Such programs, which engage women's autonomy skills without exposing them to autonomy‐disabling cultural alienation, promote autonomy‐within‐culture. This understanding of autonomy as socially situated, however, entails neither endorsement of FGC nor resignation to its persistence. (shrink)

Feminist studies of female genital cutting (FGC) provide ample evidence that many women exercise effective agency with respect to this practice, both as accommodators and as resisters. The influence of culture on autonomy is ambiguous: women who resist cultural mandates for FGC do not necessarily enjoy greater autonomy than do those women who accommodate the practice, yet it is clear that some social contexts are more conducive to autonomy than others. In this paper, I explore the implications (...) for autonomy theory of these understandings of the relation between culture, FGC, and women’s agency. I review the range of worldwide FGC practices – including “corrective” surgery for “ambiguous genitalia” in Western cultures as well as the various initiation rites observed in some African and Asian cultures – and the diverse cultural rationales for different forms of FGC. I argue that neither latitudinarian, value‐neutral accounts of autonomy nor restrictive, value‐saturated accounts adequately explain women’s agentic position with respect to FGC. I then analyze a number of educational programs that have enhanced women's autonomy, especially by strengthening their introspection, empathy, and imagination. Such programs, which engage women's autonomy skills without exposing them to autonomy‐disabling cultural alienation, promote autonomy‐within‐culture. This understanding of autonomy as socially situated, however, entails neither endorsement of FGC nor resignation to its persistence. (shrink)

Recent events in the United States and beyond have brought debates over the practice of female genital cutting back into public, academic, and policy discourses.1 In April 2017, Jumana Nagarwala, a Michigan-based emergency medicine physician from a small Shia sect known as the Dawoodi Bohra, was charged with performing female genital mutilation. The procedure is prohibited by federal law and defined as the circumcision, excision, or infibulation of the whole or any part of the (...) class='Hi'>female genitalia under the age of 18. Nagarwala argues that she did not mutilate, but rather performed a variation of a religious ritual, termed Khatna, which involves the nicking... (shrink)

The WHO, American Academy of Pediatrics and other Western medical bodies currently maintain that all medically unnecessary female genital cutting of minors is categorically a human rights violation, while either tolerating or actively endorsing medically unnecessary male genital cutting of minors, especially in the form of penile circumcision. Given that some forms of female genital cutting, such as ritual pricking or nicking of the clitoral hood, are less severe than penile circumcision, yet (...) are often performed within the same families for similar reasons, it may seem that there is an unjust double standard. Against this view, it is sometimes claimed that while female genital cutting has ‘no health benefits’, male genital cutting has at least some. Is that really the case? And if it is the case, can it justify the disparate treatment of children with different sex characteristics when it comes to protecting their genital integrity? I argue that, even if one accepts the health claims that are sometimes raised in this context, they cannot justify such disparate treatment. Rather, children of all sexes and genders have an equal right to bodily autonomy. This includes the right to decide whether their own ‘private’ anatomy should be exposed to surgical risk, much less permanently altered, for reasons they themselves endorse when they are sufficiently mature. (shrink)

Making links between different embodied cultural practices has become increasingly common within the feminist literature on multiculturalism and cultural difference as a means to counter racism and cultural essentialism. The cross-cultural comparison most commonly made in this context is that between ‘African’ practices of female genital cutting (FGC) and ‘western’ body modifications. In this article, I analyse some of the ways in which FGC and other body-altering procedures (such as cosmetic surgery, intersex operations and 19th century American (...) clitoridectomies) are compared within this feminist literature. I identify two main strategies of linking such practices, which I have termed the ‘continuum’ and ‘analogue’ approaches. The continuum approach is employed to imagine FGC alongside other body-altering procedures within a single ‘continuum’, ‘spectrum’ or ‘range’ of cross-cultural body modifications. The analogue approach is used to set up FGC and other body-altering practices as analogous through highlighting cross-cultural similarities, but does not explicitly conceive of them as forming a single continuum. Two key critiques of the continuum and analogue approaches are presented. First, because these models privilege gender and sexuality, they tend to efface the operation of other axes of embodied differentiation, namely race, cultural difference and nation. As such, the continuum and analogue approaches often reproduce problematic relationships between race and gender while failing to address the implicit and problematic role which race, cultural difference and nation continue to play in such models. This erasure of these axes, I contend, is linked to the construction of a ‘western’ empathetic gaze, which is my second key critique. The desire on the part of theorists working in the West to establish cross-cultural ‘empathy’ through models that stress similarity and solidarity conceals the continuing operation of geo-political relations of power and privilege. (shrink)

In his detailed and comprehensive analysis, Brian D. Earp shows clearly that prevailing discourses on female genital cutting have sought to quarantine the practice from male genital cutting, and further demonstrates that none of the various features that are supposed to fully distinguish one set of procedures from the other can logically hold water. The fundamental problem seems to be that the voluntary and official bodies campaigning against FGC, and especially the United Nations and the (...) World Health Organization, show unjustified discrimination and hence inconsistency with respect to gender and culture, but fail to make justified and morally relevant discriminations with respect to age... (shrink)

Herbert, Dilinie This article reports on the experiences of Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting for women living in countries where it is widespread and for those who migrate to Western countries. It explores the attitudes that shape the ongoing practice of FGM/C and the role of female hierarchy in sustaining these customs in practising communities. In particular, it investigates the dialogue between health professionals in Western countries like Australia and women presenting for antenatal care. This includes conversations around (...) de-infibulation. (shrink)

Debates about female genital mutilation/cutting have polarized opinion between those who see it as an abuse of women’s health and human rights, to be ‘eradicated’, and those who may or may not oppose the practice, but see a double standard on the part of western campaigners who fail to challenge other unnecessary surgical interventions — such as male circumcision or cosmetic surgery — in their own communities and cultures. This article interrogates these debates about FGM/c in the (...) context of measures to reduce it in the UK over recent decades. It does not suggest that FGM/c is a legitimate practice, seeing it, rather, as an abuse of women’s and children’s rights that should be combated using a combination of measures. However, it argues that reduction strategies are undermined by inconsistencies in the law and the failure to back up the law with research and education. (shrink)

Female genital cutting (FGC) is generally understood as a gendered harm, abusive cultural practice and human rights violation. By contrast, male genital cutting (MGC) is held to be minimally invasive, an expression of religious identity and a legitimate parental choice. Yet scholars increasingly problematize this dichotomy, arguing that male and female genital cutting can occasion comparable levels of harm. In 2015 this academic critique received judicial endorsement, with Sir James Munby's acknowledgement that (...) all genital cutting can cause ‘significant harm’. This article investigates the harm occasioned by MGC. It is informed by a Freedom of Information (FoI) study which provides some empirical evidence of the nature and frequency of physical harm caused by MGC in U.K. hospitals. While acknowledging the challenges and limitations of FoI research, we outline important lessons that this preliminary study contains for medical ethics, law and policy. It provides some empirical evidence to support claims regarding the risks which accompany the procedure and the obligation of health professionals to disclose them, and reveals the paucity of measures in place to ensure that harms are recorded, disclosed and monitored. (shrink)

Female genital alteration is any cutting, removal or destruction of any part of the external female genitalia. Various FGA practices are common throughout the world. While most frequent in Africa and Asia, transglobal migration has brought ritual FGA to Western nations. All forms of FGA are generally considered undesirable for medical and ethical reasons when performed on minors. One ritual FGA procedure is the vulvar nick. This is a small laceration to the vulva that does not (...) cause morphological changes. Besides being performed as a primary ritual procedure it has been proposed as a substitute for more extensive forms of FGA. Measures advocated or taken to reduce the burden of FGA can be punitive or non-punitive. Even if it is unethical to perform VN, we argue that it also is unethical to attempt to suppress it through punishment. First, punishment of VN is likely to cause more harm than good overall, even to those ostensibly being protected. Second, punishment is likely to exceed legitimate retributive ends. We do not argue in favor of performing VN. Rather, we argue that non-punitive strategies such as education and harm reduction should be employed. (shrink)

According to the logic of the gendered modernity/tradition binary, women in traditional societies are oppressed and women in modern societies liberated. While the binary valorizes modern women, it potentially erases gendered oppression in the West and undermines feminist movements on behalf of Western women. Using U.S. newspaper text, I ask whether female genital cutting is used to define women in modern societies as liberated. I find that speakers use FGC to both uphold and challenge the gendered modernity/ (...) tradition binary. Speakers use FGC to denigrate non-Western cultures and trivialize the oppressions that U.S. women typically encounter, but also to make feminist arguments on behalf of women everywhere. I argue that in addition to examining how culturally imperialist logics are reproduced, theorists interested in feminist postcolonialism should turn to the distribution of such logics, emphasizing the who, where, when, and how of reinscription of and resistance to such narratives. (shrink)

People in liberal societies tend to feel a little uncomfortable talking about male genital cutting, but generally do not think it is morally abhorrent. But female genital cutting is widely consider...

Purpose: The sensitization which this discussion engenders, has the objective of instituting an ever more formidable resilience in the advocacy against female genital mutilation (FGM) around the globe. Methodology: Besides the expository, analytic and evaluative character of this work, a particular effort is made to unveil the political and epistemological trappings that undergird the condemnable, but on-going practice of female genital mutilation in different parts of the world, especially in the continent of Africa. Findings: Some people (...) point out that the word "cutting" is less judgmental and relates better to terms used in many local languages. However, many women's health and human rights organizations use the word "mutilation," not only to describe the practice, but also to point out the violation of women's human rights. Unique Contribution to theory, practice and policy (recommendation): Ritual circumcision of young males and females is a practice seen in many cultures across the world, including sub-Saharan and North Africa, the Muslim Middle East, the Jewish diaspora, Aboriginal Australia, the Pacific Islands, Southeast Asia, etc. This work discuses female circumcision as “female genital mutilation” and rejects the view proposed by some that its practice is culturally and ethically relative. All three terms, female genital cutting (FGC), female circumcision, or female genital mutilation (FGM) describe the procedure that cuts away part or all of the external female genitalia and are used to describe the same thing, that is, mutilation. Some people fear that parents may resent the implication that they are "mutilating" their daughters by participating in this largely cultural event, and so reject the term FGM in favour of FGC. (shrink)

The two provocative essays in this issue of the Hastings Center Report should stimulate debate not only about female genital cutting, fetal dexamethasone, and clitoral reduction surgery, but also about our fierce commitment to particular cultural norms about the body. Under what conditions may adults irreversibly modify a child's body because they think the change is in her best interest? Certainly, parents who opt for female genital cutting or for surgical reduction of an enlarged (...) clitoris in a girl with congenital adrenal hyperplasia want to make choices that will contribute to their child's potential happiness. If cutting in Africa—or mitigating CAH symptoms here—upholds a girl's gender identity, which will translate into a fulfilled life as an adult, some argue that a parent's refusal to abide by social prescriptions does the child a serious disservice. (shrink)

One popular strategy of opposition to practices of female genital cutting (FCG) is rooted in the global feminist movement. Arguing that women’s rights are human rights, global feminists contend that practices of FGC are a culturally specific manifestation of gender-based oppression that violates a number of rights. Many African feminists resist a women’s rights approach. They argue that by focusing on gender as the primary axis of oppression affecting the African communities where FGC occurs, a women’s rights (...) approach has misrepresented African women as passive victims who need to be rescued from African men and has obscured the role of certain international institutions that have perpetuated the oppression of African women. In this paper, I defend these critiques by arguing that the use of a women’s rights framework to combat practices of female genital cutting among African communities has often been practically ineffective and morally inappropriate. (shrink)

Two fragments of the Lydiaca attributed to Xanthus of Lydia preserve a curious claim that a king of Lydia was the first person to make eunuchs of women. In an attempt to make sense of these passages, it has been suggested that εὐνουχίζειν here refers not to castration, but rather to female genital cutting. If correct, this would provide our first evidence of this practice in Lydian culture or indeed anywhere in Anatolia. However, the assumption that what (...) Xanthus describes somehow related to real practices is highly questionable. Instead, we should re-contextualize this story in terms of other fifth-century representations of luxury and eunuchs and in terms of Xanthus’ own exemplary portraits of other Lydian kings. (shrink)

Public opinion in recent years has soured on multiculturalism, due in large part to fears of radical Islam. In Multiculturalism without Culture, Anne Phillips contends that critics misrepresent culture as the explanation of everything individuals from minority and non-Western groups do. She puts forward a defense of multiculturalism that dispenses with notions of culture, instead placing individuals themselves at its core. Multiculturalism has been blamed for encouraging the oppression of women--forced marriages, female genital cutting, school girls wearing (...) the hijab. Many critics opportunistically deploy gender equality to justify the retreat from multiculturalism, hijacking the equality agenda to perpetuate cultural stereotypes. Phillips informs her argument with the feminist insistence on recognizing women as agents, and defends her position using an unusually broad range of literature, including political theory, philosophy, feminist theory, law, and anthropology. She argues that critics and proponents alike exaggerate the unity, distinctness, and intractability of cultures, thereby encouraging a perception of men and women as dupes constrained by cultural dictates. Opponents of multiculturalism may think the argument against accommodating cultural difference is over and won, but they are wrong. Phillips believes multiculturalism still has an important role to play in achieving greater social equality. In this book, she offers a new way of addressing dilemmas of justice and equality in multiethnic, multicultural societies, intervening at this critical moment when so many Western countries are poised to abandon multiculturalism. (shrink)

:This essay investigates the relationships among scripts, schemata, and social norms. The authors examine how social norms are triggered by particular schemata and are grounded in scripts. Just as schemata are embedded in a network, so too are social norms, and they can be primed through spreading activation. Moreover, the expectations that allow a social norm’s existence are inherently grounded in particular scripts and schemata. Using interventions that have targeted gender norms, open defecation, female genital cutting, and (...) other collective issues as examples, the authors argue that ignoring the cognitive underpinnings of a social norm can hamper the effectiveness of behavioral interventions. (shrink)

When the benefits of surgery do not outweigh the harms or where they do not clearly do so, surgical interventions become morally contested. Cutting to the Core examines a number of such surgeries, including infant male circumcision and cutting the genitals of female children, the separation of conjoined twins, surgical sex assignment of intersex children and the surgical re-assignment of transsexuals, limb and face transplantation, cosmetic surgery, and placebo surgery.

Circumcision of a male child was recently ruled illegal by a court in Germany on the grounds that it violates the child's rights to bodily integrity and self-determination. This paper begins by challenging the applicability of these rights to the circumcision debate. It argues that, rather than a sweeping appeal to rights, a moral analysis of the practice of circumcision will require a careful examination of the interests of the child. I consider three of these interests in some detail. The (...) first is the interest in avoiding a moderate decrease in expected future sexual pleasure. I argue that even if such a decrease were to occur, it is not wholly unreasonable to think that this might actually be a good thing for the child. Second, I consider the interest in self-determination. I argue that this interest is not as strong as it might appear because the adult's circumcision decision is subject to a variety of biases and a significant lack of information. Finally, I consider the child's interest in avoiding the future costs of adult circumcision. I argue that this interest becomes much stronger in the religious case because the child is quite likely to choose to become circumcised as an adult. The likelihood of the child choosing circumcision in the religious case also reduces the extent to which infant circumcision violates his interest in self-determination. I conclude that male infant circumcision falls within the prerogative of parental decision-making in the secular case and even more clearly so in the religious case. Finally, I distinguish male circumcision from female genital cutting in several important respects and argue that we can coherently hold that male circumcision is permissible without also endorsing all forms of female genital cutting. (shrink)

In the last two decades, genital transplants have emerged as another type of quality‐of‐life transplants. Successful allogenic transplantations of the uterus, ovary, testicle, and penis have all been reported. Yet, there is no discussion of clitoris transplantation in the medical literature, mass media, and everywhere else I searched. This surgery could be used for cisgender women who have a clitoral injury or disease or who have undergone female genital cutting. I examine the gender norms regarding sexuality (...) and reproduction to show how they shape surgical advancements. My point in this paper is not to take a normative position on status of current genital transplantations. Rather, I highlight that their existence is due, at least in part, because they align with dominant gender norms: penis and testicle transplantations reinforce the importance of men's virility and the existence of “normal” male genitalia, whereas uterus and ovary transplantations uphold the conflation of women and reproduction and the strong valuing of women's fertility. That medical advances reflect cultural values is not a new claim. What is new in this paper is the discussion of how sexism norms—regarding the invisibility of the clitoris and the devaluing of women's sexual pleasure— has engendered various types of genital transplants, but not clitoris transplantation. (shrink)

When the benefits of surgery do not outweigh the harms or where they do not clearly do so, surgical interventions become morally contested. Cutting to the Core examines a number of such surgeries, including infant male circumcision and cutting the genitals of female children, the separation of conjoined twins, surgical sex assignment of intersex children and the surgical re-assignment of transsexuals, limb and face transplantation, cosmetic surgery, and placebo surgery.

Globalizing Feminist Bioethics is a collection of new essays on the topic of international bioethics that developed out of the Third World Congress of the International Association of Bioethics in 1996. Rosemarie Tong is the primary editor of this collection, in which she, Gwen Anderson, and Aida Santos look at such international issues as female genital cutting, fatal daughter syndrome, use of reproductive technologies, male responsibility, pediatrics, breast cancer, pregnancy, and drug testing.

This quarter’s issue of the Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal is unusual, because it hosts a symposium focused Brian Earp’s provocative and groundbreaking article, “Between Moral Relativism and Moral Hypocrisy: Reframing the Debate on ‘FGM.’” Along with Earp’s article, we are presenting critical responses by Richard Shweder, Robert Darby, and Jamie Nelson. Earp tackles the ethics of female genital cutting or “mutilation”. This is a difficult topic that brings on board gender inequity, the integrity of the body, (...) the value of cultural traditions, sexuality, colonialism, ethnocentrism, and other fraught axes of reflection. Earp argues against the common view that all... (shrink)

The view that we must respect cultural traditions is a welcome change from the past, when colonial powers ridiculed native customs and often sought to eradicate them. Nevertheless, it is reasonable to ask whether there is a limit to tolerance of a ritual that has been designated a “harmful traditional practice” by the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the United Nations Population Fund, and the recently created agency, UN Women. The article “Seven Things To Know (...) About Female Genital Surgeries in Africa,” by the Public Policy Advisory Network on Female Genital Surgeries in Africa, contends that a need exists for more balanced critical thinking and open debate about what the authors choose to call “female genital surgery.” No one can reasonably quarrel with the call for accurate information in descriptions of the methods and consequences of female genital cutting. The network's own discussion of the facts is highly questionable, however. (shrink)

The decision of the German regional court in Cologne on 26 June 2012 to prohibit the circumcision of minors is important insofar as it recognises the qualitative similarities between the practice and other prohibited invasive rites, such as female genital cutting. However, recognition of similarity poses serious questions with regard to liberal public policy, specifically with regard to the exceptionalist treatment demanded by certain circumcising groups. In this paper, I seek to advance egalitarian means of dealing with (...) invasive rites which take seriously cultural diversity, minimise harm and place responsibility for the burdens and consequences of beliefs upon those who promote practices. (shrink)

This article explores Sylvia Wynter’s analysis of gender as a category differentially applied across the global color line and María Lugones’ account of the coloniality of gender. While Wynter’s and Lugones’s work offer consequential insights for queer, trans, and intersex studies and activism, they have deliberately engaged these particular discourses and histories of struggle in limited ways. Wynter analyzes the contradictions of Western feminists’ organizing against female genital cutting in Africa, but she does not link her conclusions (...) to their ramifications for activism against genital cutting on children deemed intersex. Lugones uses the existence of intersex people as a turning point in her critique of Aníbal Quijano when developing her concept of the coloniality of gender, but she does not go further to connect global intersex activism and decolonial feminist struggles. This article explores the work of Wynter and Lugones for their compatibility with trans and intersex studies and activism, and the places where their work can be furthered through insights from trans and intersex studies. It concludes that to move beyond the coloniality of gender requires trans and intersex liberation and that trans and intersex liberation must be understood in a broader decolonial feminist framework. (shrink)

Basing normative judgment and policy on a rich empirical account of the issue at hand is usually a good idea. But doing nothing and awaiting further evidence can sometimes itself be bad judgment. This is the case with female genital cutting. We already know what is needed to define the conditions under which female genital cutting is morally unacceptable and that we can legitimately act on this knowledge.

In this paper, we argue that providers who conscientiously refuse to provide legal and professionally accepted medical care are not always morally required to refer their patients to willing providers. Indeed, we will argue that refusing to refer is morally admirable in certain instances. In making the case, we show that belief in a sweeping moral duty to refer depends on an implicit assumption that the procedures sanctioned by legal and professional norms are ethically permissible. Focusing on examples of (...) class='Hi'>female genital cutting, clitoridectomy and ‘normalizing’ surgery for children with intersex traits, we argue that this assumption is untenable and that providers are not morally required to refer when refusing to perform genuinely unethical procedures. The fact that acceptance of our thesis would force us to face the challenge of distinguishing between ethical and unethical medical practices is a virtue. This is the central task of medical ethics, and we must confront it rather than evade it. There are no data in this work. (shrink)

In this chapter, Talbott explains the development of women’s rights as a response to the cultural universal of paternalistically justified patriarchal norms that severely limit opportunities for women. Talbott uses evolutionary psychology to explain why norms that severely limit opportunities for women are cultural universals and to show how it is possible to question even culturally universal justifications from the moral standpoint. Talbott uses the evidence of violence against women and the examples of footbinding and female genital (...) class='Hi'>cutting to explain how social enforcement can make oppressive norms stable and can even motivate voluntary compliance with them. Talbott also explains how certain kinds of paternalist justifications for patriarchal norms can be self-reinforcing. Talbott explains how the development of women’s rights fits the model of the extension of rights to white, male property owners, then to white male non-property-owners, then to males in other racial and ethnic groups. In each case, the extension of rights is a guarantee of a sphere of autonomy, in a sense to be explained in the next chapter. Talbott gives the example of the Senegalese organization Tostan as a model of how to advocate universal human rights, and thus autonomy, without being a moral imperialist. Talbott concludes with an explanation of why cultural relativism about internal norms is too wishy-washy. (shrink)

Female genital mutilation/cutting is a multifaceted, culturally entrenched issue. In response to the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ resources dealing with the issue of FGM/C, this paper explores what resources sexual ethics can provide Catholic hospitals facing this issue, specifically with regards to the request for reinfibulation. FGM/C ought not to be treated as a univocal medical practice; rather, in natural law evaluations of the act, the practice of reinfibulation ought to be separately acknowledged. Reinfibulation cannot (...) be properly considered a mutilation in the same way that other types of FGM/C are. Thus reinfibulation should be performed in Catholic hospitals for those women who request it, as part of delivering culturally competent care, justifiable through the principle of material cooperation. (shrink)

Through illustrating the similarities between embodied practices rooted in different cultural contexts (such as `African' female genital cutting and `Western' cosmetic surgery), feminist theorists seek to reveal the instability of essentialist binaries which distinguish various groups as culturally, ethnically and morally `different'. They also aim to query how the term `culture' is employed differentially on the basis of embodied axes such as race and nation. However, in emphasizing overarching commonalities between practices, feminist cross-cultural comparisons risk collapsing into (...) economies of sameness that elide the complex relations of power through which such practices have been constituted. They can also fix the imagined subjects of these practices in troubling ways. Using the ubiquitous `African' female genital cutting and `Western' cosmetic surgery binary as an example, this article explores the difference it might make to address culturally essentialist constructions of embodied practice with a focus on relationality rather than commonality. As a means to reorient feminist cross-cultural approaches which depend on assertions of similarity or sameness, it argues for the theoretical and pedagogical utility of thinking through relational webs. (shrink)

In this article I analyze both generalized propriety as a boundary marker of Sudanese identity in Cairo, and gendered attitudes toward morality and female genital cutting (FGC) as a fundamental aspect of that boundary. Sudanese have been profoundly affected by the ongoing political crisis in their home country, by the displacement triggered by political and economic collapse, and by their deteriorating legal and social status in Egypt. The dramatic changes in the circumstances of Sudanese residence in Cairo (...) have challenged the cultural norm of gender complementarity as men ‘stay at home’ for want of work while women seek and find new opportunities for themselves. This unstable situation has led Sudanese to place more emphasis on ‘proper’ ways of behaving and being, an assertion that helps define the ethnic boundaries of the Sudanese community in Cairo. I demonstrate the inconsistencies between discourse and reality through ethnographic data while analyzing how Sudanese have found new ways of asserting their identity and resisting the practice of FGC. (shrink)

The migratory flows of recent decades that have exercised Europe as a socio-political and economic entity have produced extensive responses and interventions from European gender scholars. One relatively recent phenomenon in this context is the question of reparative surgical interventions, specifically clitoral reconstruction, in cases where women who have migrated to Europe have experienced female genital cutting. Clitoral reconstruction, which this article begins to explore, is recent in part because the related surgery was only established in the (...) 1990s and is to date only practised in a few European countries, and in part because the research with women who ask for and have undergone such surgery has also only recently begun. This article is therefore an initial attempt to map some of the related terrain and to suggest further work that needs to be done in this increasingly important area. (shrink)

“Philosophy isn’t useful for changing the world,” parents of philosophy students and Karl Marx tell us (at least about non-Marxist philosophy). Cristina Bicchieri’s new book Norms in the Wild provides an impressive antidote against this worry. It stands to change of social practices as Che Guevara’s Guerrilla Warfare stands to political revolutions. Bicchieri combines hands-on advice on how to change social practices with compelling theoretical analyses of social norms. She draws heavily on her influential earlier work on norms, but the (...) book doesn’t presuppose familiarity with it. Many of her examples stem from her work with UNICEF and other NGOs; they include female genital cutting, open defecation, child marriage, and many more. I cannot do full justice to Bicchieri’s rich book here, but will instead focus on three points. 1. Bicchieri offers a detailed and helpful botanization of collective behavior. Purely behavioral definitions of the relevant categories are inadequate. We must look at preferences and beliefs in order to know, e.g., whether something is a social norm. 2. Intentionally changing social norms is a complex process that requires several steps and extensive diagnostics. Simple information campaigns or provision of resources are unlikely to be successful. 3. Trendsetters and scripts often play a crucial role in norm change. Any approach that doesn’t look at psychological mechanisms and variables that are unevenly distributed across the population is inadequate. (shrink)

A collection of some of my previously published papers with an introduction and a new chapter.

Bioethics, Volume 36, Issue 1, Page 54-62, January 2022.

It is a huge pleasure to engage with Prof. Shaw’s careful and close reading of my article. Though almost a decade old, many of the issues are becoming only more relevant as it seems that Roe v Wade will be overruled in the U.S. and travel for abortion will become a sad reality.1 I appreciate how deeply Prof. Shaw interacts with my article and am full of praise for his work, but given the small space allocated here I only focus (...) on our few places of disagreement. (shrink)

ABSTRACT The Universal Draft Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights seeks to provide moral direction to nations and their citizens on a series of bioethical concerns. In articulating principles, it ranks respect for human rights, human dignity and fundamental freedoms ahead of respect for cultural diversity and pluralism. This ranking is controversial because it entails the rejection of the popular theory, conventionalist ethical relativism. If consistently defended, this theory also undercuts other United Nations activities that assume member states and people (...) around the world can reach trans‐cultural judgments having moral authority about health, pollution, aggression, rights, slavery, and so on. To illustrate problems with conventionalist ethical relativism and the importance of rejecting it for reasons of health, human rights, human dignity and fundamental freedoms, the widespread practice of female genital circumcision or cutting is discussed. These surgeries are virtually a test case for conventionalist ethical relativism since they are widely supported within these cultures as religious and health practices and widely condemned outside them, including by the United Nations. (shrink)

Issues of global justice have received increasing attention in academic philosophy in recent years but the gendered dimensions of these issues are often overlooked or treated as peripheral. This groundbreaking collection by Alison Jaggar brings gender to the centre of philosophical debates about global justice. -/- The explorations presented here range far beyond the limited range of issues often thought to constitute feminists’ concerns about global justice, such as female seclusion, genital cutting, and sex trafficking. Instead, established (...) and emerging scholars expose the gendered and racialized aspects of transnational divisions of paid and unpaid labor, class formation, taxation, migration, mental health, the so-called resource curse, and conceptualizations of violence, honor, and consent. Jaggar's introduction explains how these and other feminist investigations of the transnational order raise deep challenges to assumptions about justice that for centuries have underpinned Western political philosophy. -/- Taken together the pieces in this volume present a sustained philosophical engagement with gender and global justice. Gender and Global Justice provides an accessible and original perspective on this important field and looks set to reframe philosophical reflection on global justice. (shrink)

Female genital mutilation is the removal or restructuring of healthy genital tissue. Under natural law, mutilation is an intrinsic evil and a grave violation of human dignity. If mutilation alleviates a threat to a person’s well-being, it may sometimes be permissible, but healthy genitals pose no such threat. The purported social benefits of FGM, such as decreased promiscuity, do not justify the practice, because there is no causal relationship between mutilation and virtue. In terms of autonomy, victims (...) are usually children and unable to consent. Parental rights and the rights of religion do not override children’s inherent rights to physical integrity and safety. Current support for minimal forms of FGM in an attempt to reduce the incidence of severe forms will instead prolong the practice and increase the number of victims. Finally, FGM differs from male circumcision in that it destroys the function and integrity of the organs themselves and promotes profound gender inequality. (shrink)

One of the most challenging issues in cross-cultural bioethics concerns the long-standing socio-cultural practice of female genital circumcision, which is prevalent in many African countries and the Middle East as well as in some Asian and Western countries. It is commonly assumed that FGC, in all its versions, constitutes a gross violation of the universal human rights of health, physical integrity, and individual autonomy and hence should be abolished. This article, however, suggests a mediating approach according to which (...) one form of FGC, the removal of the clitoris foreskin, can be made compatible with the high demands of universal human rights. The argument presupposes the idea that human rights are not absolutist by nature but can be framed in a meaningful, culturally sensitive way. It proposes important limiting conditions that must be met for the practice of FGC to be considered in accordance with the human rights agenda. (shrink)

The Public Policy Advisory Network on Female Genital Surgeries in Africa has written an article expressing concern about the media's inaccurate depiction of this practice and suggesting a more fact‐based approach to reporting on it. I applaud the network for soliciting input from various fields. I cannot agree more that some in the media have misconstrued, exaggerated, and used inflammatory language; words like “torture,” “barbaric,” and “horrific” will likely enrage readers while reinforcing discrimination against women who practice or (...) have undergone genital cutting. The authors also assert that “any genuine public policy debate should be grounded in the best available evidence and begins with fact checking.” Again, I couldn't agree more. My concern is that there is bias in the way some of the data are presented in this article. (shrink)