Religious views on female genital cutting

Religious views on female genital cutting have often been highly critical, although the medical phenomenon appears to be concentrated in Islamic areas, and not in Jewish or Christian regions. Evidence suggests that female genital cutting might be a cultural relic from pre-monotheistic African tribal religions, given that the practice is mentioned as far back as 163 BC. Muslim scholars have often been divided on whether it should be considered as a non-religious traditional custom, or whether it should be specifically condemned by religious authorities.

Girls in Ancient Egypt

The traditional cultural practice of FGC predates both Islam and Christianity. A Greek papyrus from 163 B.C. mentions girls in Egypt undergoing circumcision and it is widely accepted to have originated in Egypt and the Nile valley at the time of the Pharaohs. Evidence from mummies have shown both Type I and Type III FGC present.[1] (Note that the earliest evidence of male circumcision is also from Ancient Egypt.) Amnesty International says that the prevalence of the practice of FGC is unknown, and that the procedure is now only practiced by some Muslims and Animists.[2]

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services states that the custom of FGC "cuts across religions and is practiced by Muslims, Christians, Jews and followers of indigenous religions."

Traditional African cleanliness

Medical justifications offered by cultural tradition are regarded by scientists and doctors as unsubstantiated. Some African societies consider FGC part of maintaining cleanliness as it removes secreting parts of the genitalia. Vaginal secretions, in reality, play a critical part in maintaining female health. Some Bambara and Dogon believe that babies die if they touch the clitoris during birth.[4] In some areas of Africa, there exists the belief that a newborn child has elements of both sexes. In the male body the foreskin of the penis is considered to be the female element. In the female body the clitoris is considered to be the male element. Hence when the adolescent is reaching puberty, these elements are removed to make the indication of sex clearer.[4]

In years past, western doctors advocating or performing these procedures sometimes claimed that girls of all ages would otherwise engage in excessive masturbation and be "polluted" by the activity, which was referred to as "self-abuse".[5]

C.F. McDonald wrote in a 1958 paper titled "Circumcision of the Female"[6] "If the male needs circumcision for cleanliness and hygiene, why not the female? I have operated on perhaps 40 patients who needed this attention." The author describes symptoms as "irritation, scratching, irritability, masturbation, frequency and urgency," and in adults, smegmaliths causing "dyspareunia and frigidity." The author then reported that a two-year-old was no longer masturbating so frequently after the procedure. Of adult women, the author stated that "for the first time in their lives, sex ambition became normally satisfied." Justification of the procedure on hygienic grounds, or to reduce masturbation, has since declined. The view that masturbation is a cause of mental and physical illness has dissipated since the mid-20th century.[7]

Clitorecdomy in its less invasive form, removal of the prepuce alone, is also called a hoodectomy. It is often an elective surgery undertaken by mature consenting adults. Some doctors[8] and other advocators[9] believe that the hoodectomy form of FGC can help to increase and improve sexual sensitivity and sexual pleasure in cases where the hood of the clitoris is too tight. A study done in 1959 by Rathmann et al. states that 87.5% of women saw an improvement in sexual pleasure following a hoodectomy FGC,[10] with 75% in a study by Knowles et al.

for more visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_on_female_genital_cutting