Female Genital Mutilation Summary

In the “Cultural Rights or Human Rights: The Case of Female Genital Mutilation”, Henriette Dahan Kalev presents different arguments arranged along a spectrum pertaining to the controversial topic of female genital mutilation (referred to as “FGM” from here on). Kalev describes the practice as the following: “There are various forms of the practice, ranging from a partial clitoridectomy to a full excision of the clitoris, labia minora, and majora followed by infibulation (the stitching of the vulva leaving a small opening for urine and menstrual blood)” (339). To indicate why FGM is a point of contention in society, Kalev adds, “The ‘surgery’ is typically performed by a female ‘midwife’, often in unsanitary conditions with no anesthetic. These

Moreover, while Kalev clearly states her disdain towards FGM in the beginning of the article (“…I will present a counterargument demonstrating the need to condemn the practice…) (Kalev, 340), her presentation of other perspectives regarding this ritual are thorough. Even when she is disagreeing with the points that other theorists make, she is critical and thoughtful rather than being outright condescending. In this sense, this article is not only a vehicle for Kalev’s personal views about FGM but also an indicator of how complicated the issue truly is. As an individual who was only vaguely familiar with the concept of FGM prior to reading this piece, not only do I feel more informed about the topic but I am also compelled to learn more about

One thing that constantly bothered me while I was reading the article was the fact that unlike Britain (which was used as a specific example of a Western nation) there is no discussion of any single non-Western nation’s (or rejecting) political process regarding FGM. Additionally, the groups that are most inclined to practice FGM were also given extremely broad descriptions [“…some Asian and North and Central African countries, as well as by immigrant groups (mainly Muslim) in some Western countries as well.”] (Kalev, 339). Considering how vast both the continents of Asia and Africa are and how widely practiced Islam is, it’s difficult to get a sense of where FGM is most prevalent based on the given information. However, to Kalev’s credit, she did make it a point to specify that FGM is not performed in all Muslim communities on account of the fact that it is not discussed in any scripture (Kalev, 340). Even so, I am adamant that this aspect of her article could have greatly benefitted from more distinction, especially when the information is presented to individuals who are uneducated about the