Editing Female genital mutilation (section)

==Criticism of opposition==
===Tolerance versus human rights===
[[File:Obioma Nnaemeka.jpg|thumb|upright=0.9|alt=photograph|[[Obioma Nnaemeka]] criticized the renaming of female circumcision to female genital mutilation.{{sfn|Nnaemeka|2005|loc=[https://conifer.rhizome.org/Germinal/wikipedia/20180527025854/https://books.google.com/books?id=XjctVvOzzcQC&pg=PA34 34]{{cbignore}}}}]]

Anthropologists{{who|date=March 2024}} have accused FGM eradicationists of [[cultural imperialism|cultural colonialism]], and have been criticized in turn for their [[moral relativism]] and failure to defend the idea of universal human rights.{{sfn|Silverman|2004|loc=420}} According to critics of the eradicationist position, the [[Reductionism#In science|biological reductionism]] of the opposition to FGM, and the failure to appreciate FGM's cultural context, serves to "[[Othering|other]]" practitioners and undermine their agency—in particular when parents are referred to as "mutilators".{{sfn|Kirby|2005|loc=83}}

Africans who object to the tone of FGM opposition risk appearing to defend the practice. The feminist theorist [[Obioma Nnaemeka]], herself strongly opposed to FGM, argued in 2005 that renaming the practice ''female genital mutilation'' had introduced "a subtext of barbaric African and Muslim cultures and the West's relevance (even indispensability) in purging [it]".{{sfn|Nnaemeka|2005|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XjctVvOzzcQC&pg=PA33 33]}} According to Ugandan law professor [[Sylvia Tamale]], the early Western opposition to FGM stemmed from a Judeo-Christian judgment that African sexual and family practices, including not only FGM but also [[dry sex]], [[polygyny]], [[bride price]] and [[levirate marriage]], required correction. African feminists "take strong exception to the imperialist, racist and dehumanising infantilization of African women", she wrote in 2011.{{sfn|Tamale|2011|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=xSqIrrswbG0C&pg=PA19 19–20]}} Commentators highlight the voyeurism in the treatment of women's bodies as exhibits. Examples include images of women's vulvas after FGM or girls undergoing the procedure.{{sfn|Nnaemeka|2005|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XjctVvOzzcQC&pg=PA30 30–33]}} The 1996 [[#Pulitzer|Pulitzer-prize-winning photographs]] of a 16-year-old Kenyan girl experiencing FGM were published by 12 American newspapers, without her consent either to be photographed or to have the images published.<ref>{{harvnb|Korieh|2005|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XjctVvOzzcQC&pg=PA121 121–122]}}; for the photographs, see {{cite web |title=Stephanie Welsh. The 1996 Pulitzer Prize Winners: Feature Photography |url=http://www.pulitzer.org/works/1996-Feature-Photography |publisher=The Pulitzer Prizes|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151007101527/http://www.pulitzer.org/works/1996-Feature-Photography |archive-date=7 October 2015 |date=1996|url-status=live}}</ref>

The debate has highlighted a tension between anthropology and feminism, with the former's focus on tolerance and the latter's on equal rights for women. According to the anthropologist Christine Walley, a common position in anti-FGM literature has been to present African women as victims of [[false consciousness]] participating in their own oppression, a position promoted by feminists in the 1970s and 1980s, including Fran Hosken, [[Mary Daly]] and Hanny Lightfoot-Klein.{{sfn|Walley|2002|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=t_5a39rTNB8C&pg=PA18 18], 34, 43, [https://books.google.com/books?id=t_5a39rTNB8C&pg=PA60 60]}} It prompted the French Association of Anthropologists to issue a statement in 1981, at the height of the early debates, that "a certain feminism resuscitates (today) the moralistic arrogance of yesterday's colonialism".{{sfn|Bagnol|Mariano|2011|loc=281}}

===Comparison with other procedures{{anchor|comparison}}===
====Cosmetic procedures====
{{See also|Labiaplasty#Criticism}}
Nnaemeka argues that the crucial question, broader than FGM, is why the female body is subjected to so much "abuse and indignity", including in the West.{{sfn|Nnaemeka|2005|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=XjctVvOzzcQC&pg=PA38 38–39]}} Several authors have drawn a parallel between FGM and cosmetic procedures.<ref>{{harvnb|Johnsdotter|Essén|2010|loc=32}}; {{harvnb|Berer|2007|loc=1335}}.</ref> Ronán Conroy of the [[Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland]] wrote in 2006 that cosmetic genital procedures were "driving the advance" of FGM by encouraging women to see natural variations as defects.{{sfn|Conroy|2006}} Anthropologist [[Fadwa El Guindi]] compared FGM to [[Breast augmentation|breast enhancement]], in which the maternal function of the breast becomes secondary to men's sexual pleasure.{{sfn|El Guindi|2007|loc=[https://books.google.com/books?id=8VQxt634pfcC&pg=PA33 33]}} [[Benoîte Groult]], the French feminist, made a similar point in 1975, citing FGM and cosmetic surgery as sexist and patriarchal.{{sfn|Wildenthal|2012|loc=148}} Against this, the medical anthropologist [[Carla Obermeyer]] argued in 1999 that FGM may be conducive to a subject's social well-being in the same way that [[rhinoplasty]] and male circumcision are.<ref>[[Carla Obermeyer|Obermeyer, Carla]]. [http://www.jstor.org/stable/649659 "Female Genital Surgeries: The Known, the Unknown and the Unknowable"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200809185753/https://www.jstor.org/stable/649659 |date=9 August 2020 }}, ''Medical Anthropology Quarterly'', 31(1), 1999, pp. 79–106 (hereafter Obermeyer 1999), 94.</ref> Despite the 2007 ban in Egypt, Egyptian women wanting FGM for their daughters seek ''amalyet tajmeel'' (cosmetic surgery) to remove what they see as excess genital tissue.<ref>Sara Abdel Rahim, [http://timep.org/commentary/midwives-doctors-searching-safer-circumcisions-egypt# "From Midwives to Doctors: Searching for 'Safer' Circumcisions in Egypt?"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170730231539/http://timep.org/commentary/midwives-doctors-searching-safer-circumcisions-egypt |date=30 July 2017 }}, [[The Tahrir Institute for Middle East Policy]], 25 September 2014.</ref>

[[File:Martha Nussbaum wikipedia 10-10.jpg|thumb|left|alt=photograph|[[Martha Nussbaum]]: a key moral and legal issue with FGM is that it is mostly conducted on children using physical force.]]
Cosmetic procedures such as [[labiaplasty]] and [[clitoral hood reduction]] do fall within the WHO's definition of FGM, which aims to avoid loopholes, but the WHO notes that these elective practices are generally not regarded as FGM.{{efn|WHO 2008: "Some practices, such as genital cosmetic surgery and hymen repair, which are legally accepted in many countries and not generally considered to constitute female genital mutilation, actually fall under the definition used here. It has been considered important, however, to maintain a broad definition of female genital mutilation in order to avoid loopholes that might allow the practice to continue."<ref>[[#WHO2008|WHO 2008]], 28.</ref>}} Some legislation banning FGM, such as in Canada and the United States, covers minors only, but several countries, including Sweden and the United Kingdom, have banned it regardless of consent. Sweden, for example, has banned operations "on the outer female sexual organs with a view to mutilating them or bringing about some other permanent change in them, regardless of whether or not consent has been given for the operation".<ref name=EigeSweden/> Gynaecologist Birgitta Essén and anthropologist Sara Johnsdotter argue that the law seems to distinguish between Western and African genitals, and deems only African women (such as those seeking reinfibulation after childbirth) unfit to make their own decisions.<ref>{{harvnb|Johnsdotter|Essén|2010|loc=33}}; {{harvnb|Essén|Johnsdotter|2004|loc=32}}.</ref>

The philosopher [[Martha Nussbaum]] argues that a key concern with FGM is that it is mostly conducted on children using physical force. The distinction between social pressure and physical force is morally and legally salient, comparable to the distinction between seduction and rape. She argues further that the literacy of women in practising countries is generally poorer than in developed nations, which reduces their ability to make informed choices.{{sfn|Nussbaum|1999|loc=123–124}}<ref>Also see [[Yuli Tamir|Yael Tamir]], [http://new.bostonreview.net/BR21.3/Tamir.html "Hands Off Clitoridectomy"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140808051255/http://new.bostonreview.net/BR21.3/Tamir.html |date=8 August 2014 }}, ''Boston Review'', Summer 1996; [[Martha Nussbaum]], [http://new.bostonreview.net/BR21.5/nussbaum.html "Double Moral Standards?"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140808051257/http://new.bostonreview.net/BR21.5/nussbaum.html |date=8 August 2014 }}, ''Boston Review'', October/November 1996.</ref>

====Analogy to other genital-altering procedures ====
{{Further|Intersex medical interventions|Circumcision|Gender-affirming surgery}}

FGM has been compared to other procedures that [[Genital modification and mutilation|modify the human genitalia]]. [[Conservatism in the United States|Conservatives]] in the United States during the late 2010s and early 2020s have argued that FGM is similar to [[gender-affirming surgery]] for [[transgender]] individuals, which has led to bills being drafted in Republican states equating the two. Criticism of these ideas include the fact that the gender-affirming surgeries are approved by American medical authorities, are rare for minors, and are done after reviews by multiple medical professionals.<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Cariboni |first1=Diana |last2=Bauer |first2=Sydney |date=2022-12-22 |title=US bill equates trans healthcare with 'genital mutilation' |url=https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/5050/female-genital-mutilation-fgm-texas-trans-healthcare/ |access-date=2023-10-14 |website=openDemocracy |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last=Kearns |first=Madeleine |date=October 25, 2022 |title='Gender Affirmation': The New Female Genital Mutilation |url=https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/10/gender-affirmation-the-new-female-genital-mutilation/ |access-date=December 24, 2022 |website=National Review |language=en-US}}</ref> Formerly, FGM was widely referred to as "female circumcision" in the academic literature, but this "was rejected by international medical practitioners because it suggests a fallacious analogy to [[Circumcision|male circumcision]]."{{sfn|Nussbaum|1999|loc=119}} It has been argued that the genital alteration of [[intersex]] infants and children, who are born with anomalies that physicians choose to "fix", is analogous to FGM.<ref>Nancy Ehrenreich, Mark Barr, [http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/crcl/vol40_1/ehrenreich.pdf]{{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170517021052/http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/crcl/vol40_1/ehrenreich.pdf|date=17 May 2017}}<span> "Intersex Surgery, Female Genital Cutting, and the Selective Condemnation of 'Cultural Practices</span>{{' "}}, ''Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review'', 40(1), 2005 (71–140), 74–75.{{pb}}
{{cite news |last1=Gregorio |first1=I. W. |date=26 April 2017 |title=Should Surgeons Perform Irreversible Genital Surgery on Children? |url=http://www.newsweek.com/should-surgeons-perform-irreversible-genital-surgery-children-589353 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200806025114/https://www.newsweek.com/should-surgeons-perform-irreversible-genital-surgery-children-589353 |archive-date=6 August 2020 |access-date=9 April 2018 |work=Newsweek |ref=none}}</ref>