![]() ![]() ![]() | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Thursday, April 2, 1998 Published at 21:32 GMT 22:32 UK World: Africa First Lady promotes fight against female circumcision ![]() 'More than 135 million women and girls have experienced some degree of genital mutilation' President Bill Clinton and his wife Hillary - on the final day of their African tour - met human rights campaigners in Senegal and discussed a range of issues including the dangers of female circumcision. The practice involves the removal of external genitalia - the clitoris and labia minora. A more extreme form of female genital mutilation is infibulation: the female has the majority of her genitalia excised leaving the labia majora to be sewn together covering the urethra and the vagina. A small opening is left for urine and menstrual blood to pass. Up until the last century genital surgery was prevalent in the United Kingdom and America. In America the surgery was used to control promiscuity. In England the removal of the clitoris was thought to be a cure for psychological problems. "Especially among the 'secret' Bundo female societies in Sierra Leone, the procedure is seen as a rite of passage from girl to womanhood," she says. In an average Bundo home, the common view held is that the woman needs a husband to survive. Therefore the parents' main concern is making their daughter "worthy" of marriage. Reasons for the practice vary from religious beliefs to ensuring a girl's virginity before marriage and fidelity afterwards. According to Amnesty International estimates: The controversy Rahmat Mohammad quotes Alice Walker: "Female genital mutilation is torture, not a culture." She believes that FGM has entered the human rights arena: "It is an oppression of the girl-child, eroding all the dignity the infant has." The physical effects of FGM are usually shock, haemorrhaging, urinary and menstrual retention, pain and even death. The psychological effects are immeasurable. FGM was slow to reach the international human rights agenda because violence against females in the home or community was considered a private issue and therefore not a credible human rights concern. There were also fears that intervention by western countries in the name of human rights would be perceived as an attack on cultural traditions. "Some people think I did wrong for my daughters in not circumcising them. I thought it was an advantage for them. As I see it these are my children and I do what is best for them". In Mali, the Asompt organisation - the majority of which are women - is opposed to "harmful traditional practices". It believes this practice will end when African women want it to. |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||