Swanson 1

Benjamin Swanson
Mr. McGrath
Period 1
8 December 2013
Female Genital Mutilation
Gebre knew what happened to the girls in her community when they turned twelve. She
knew, and it scared her. Her mother and grandmother had told her that it was a good thing, that it
would make her clean. But she was still scared. On the day of her twelfth birthday, it happened.
A man blindfolded her from behind and stuffed an unwashed rag into her mouth. He pinned all
her limbs down to a table. She could hear her grandmother approaching. She was scared. Then
she felt a pain like she had never experienced before. She screamed. The cloth stifled it and
gagged her. She struggled to escape, but the man kept her firmly pinned. The pain continued. It
was an eternity before it was over. When it finally was, the man released her. She looked down to
see her grandmother padding her with numerous bloody rags. The pain continued.
The story of Gebre is one that is common among countless young girls in Africa. The
situation, though fictional, is derived from numerous true stories from women and girls across
the continent. Female genital mutilation, like what happened to Gebre, is forced on infants and
young girls all over the world, but is most highly concentrated in Africa. The World Health
Organization (WHO) defines female genital mutilation (FGM) as all procedures that involve
partial or total removal of the external female genitalia, or other injury to the female genital
organs for non-medical reasons. It is a crude practice that has been perpetuated for centuries
and must come to an end. Female genital mutilation is executed in many ways, is very
detrimental to womens health, has no legitimate reason to occur, and therefore must be stopped.
Female genital mutilation exists in several forms, none of them beneficial, all harmful.
Please note that the following descriptions are quite graphic, but are necessary to demonstrate the
extent of the damage done to women whom they affect. WHO categorizes female genital

Swanson 2

mutilation techniques into four major types. The first is referred to as a clitoridectomy, in which
the clitoris is altered or entirely removed (Female Genital Mutilation). This is the least
damaging type of FGM, as well as the most common (Reymond). However, to state that it is less
severe than the other types is not saying a great deal. The second type, excision, is more broadly
defined than the first. It includes any procedure in which the clitoris as well as the labia minora
or labia majora are partially or completely removed (Female Genital Mutilation). This is the
second most common variation; Type I and Type II combined account for approximately 85% of
all FGM (Reymond). These two are often confused by the very women whom they are
performed upon, as many women dont know what they should look or feel like naturally. Type
III, infibulation, accounts for the majority of the remaining 15% of FGM. In this surgery, large
parts of the clitoris, labia minora, and labia majora are removed and altered in such a way that
they can be sown together and essentially block the vagina. A small twig is inserted before
sowing shut to create a hole large enough for normal urination and menstruation. However, this
goal is often unsuccessful and can lead to serious infection due to women being unable to do
either of those things properly. The tissue covering the vagina becomes very hard over time, with
doctors breaking multiple scalpels in the attempt to penetrate it decades after the initial
procedure (Reymond). This is without a doubt the most harmful of the major types of female
genital mutilation. There is, however, one final type with the potential to be even worse. Type IV
mutilation encompasses any other procedure harmful to the female genitalia for non-medical
purposes including gishiri cutting, which has an extraordinarily high mortality rate. (Female
Genital Mutilation). While these methods are not as popular as the others, they cannot be
overlooked. Regardless of which procedure has occurred, FGM is always harmful to women.
Genital mutilation can be very damaging to the women it is performed upon. The
procedure itself is very painful and often has complications. There is often no anesthetic used, as

Swanson 3

the surgery is usually performed by a respected woman in the community who may not have had
any previous medical experience (Kristof). Tools often consist of nothing more than an overused
razor, a shard of glass, or other makeshift knife. Unsurprisingly, this leads to complications even
worse than if the girl had had the surgery performed in a hospital. Nearly every woman reports
feeling intense pain during the procedure, and thirteen percent went into shock afterward
(Reymond). Hemorrhaging, urine retention, and infections are very common, especially with the
practice of infibulation. In Kenya, a country in which this type of FGM is common, the rate of
complication for these is 49%, 24%, and 19% respectively. The mortality rate rests at about 4%,
due either to immediate shock and blood loss or tetanus from the tools used. However, these are
just the short term effects of mutilation. Over the long term, many other problems appear related
to the mutilation. Recurring urinary tract infections and bladder infections are some of the most
common caused by infibulation (Female Genital Mutilation). Causing infertility is not
uncommon, with roughly a quarter of all cases of infertility caused in some way by FGM
(Reymond). Even when this does not occur, the children of mutilated women are still not safe.
In Somalia, a country in which infibulation is very commonly practiced, about 15% of infants
delivered are stillborn. 75% of the remaining children experience oxygen deprivation due to the
length of labor- which takes roughly five times longer with infibulated women than those that are
not. There are no benefits to female genital mutilation- only pain.
Proponents of female genital mutilation give a number of reasons why it should be done,
but none of them justify the damage done to women and girls. One oft-mentioned defense of
FGM is that it is a requirement for being a proper Muslim girl. However, most Muslim scholars
and religious leaders refute this, stating that there is no requirement for female circumcision
neither in the Qur'an, the traditional reports (called hadith), nor medical theory (Ahmad).
Indeed, this defense has no support within any Islamic text or established tradition, and it offends

Swanson 4

many Muslims to hear that Islam is being used in defense of such heinous acts. Another common
reason given for FGM is that it promotes cleanliness (Reymond). This is likely due to the fact
that infibulation, often referred to as full circumcision, effectively prevents masturbation and
premarital sex. While infibulation is likely effective in both those goals, the end comes nowhere
near justifying the means. It is also believed by some that mutilation causes a young woman to
never have her conscience troubled by lustful thoughts or sensations or temptations (Female
Circumcision Defense). The idea that altering, removing, or covering up a young girls genitals
makes her more emotionally stable is preposterous to say the least. The most common reason
given for mutilation, however, is simply because it is a good tradition (Reymond). In many
societies affected by FGM, women who are not mutilated are often seen as promiscuous, and are
not able to be married. Women circumcise their children in order to avoid being ousted from
their communities. This is a situation in which a harmful tradition is perpetuated for no real
reason besides that this is [their] culture (Kristof).
However, the claim that it is simply part of the culture is not enough to justify the human
rights infringed by female genital mutilation, and the practice must be ended. Just as foot binding
in China was challenged and ultimately ended by outside influence, so must genital mutilation in
Africa. Both institutions were unabashedly created to subjugate women, and neither should be
defended by traditional culture. It is a violation of several international human rights
conventions, and must be treated as such (Female Genital Mutilation). Opposition to FGM in
Africa and around the world has grown exponentially in the last few decades (Reymond). There
are many organizations such as the World Health Organization, the Program for Appropriate
Technology in Health, and countless others have been increasing efforts to eradicate FGM,
primarily through education of the women who would force it on others. However, even with
these decreasing numbers, there are still between seven and fourteen million women and girls

Swanson 5

worldwide are affected by it (Female Genital Mutilation). The genital mutilation bastions of
Somalia, Guinea, and Egypt must be breached and educated about the harm of FGM- for in this
situation knowledge is certainly power.
Female genital mutilation in any form is still just that- mutilation. It adversely affects
womens health in several ways with the repercussions lasting for their entire lives. It may be
part of African culture, but there are some things that outweigh cultural benefits. Womens health
and young girls basic human rights are undoubtedly among them. Female genital mutilation by
definition has no health benefit whatsoever, nor does it hold any other value to girls whom it is
performed upon. It perpetuates a male-dominated society built on the suppression of women. The
hypocrisy of the males of these societies performing such atrocities on their daughters without
doing anything even remotely similar to their sons is clear. Claiming that the girls enjoy it
because they dont have the ability to resist is simply the final blow to womens rights and any
semblance of equality. The ultimate, twisted goal of this system of maiming is to scare women
into doing what they are told and even believe that it is right. A more equal, more productive
society can only be built once this cruel tradition is annihilated entirely. This topic is often
avoided by developed countries that could help due to its intrinsically vile nature. However, its
time to start thinking less about what is appropriate for audiences and more about what is
actually happening in the world that all mankind shares, and take a stand against this injustice
once and for all.

Swanson 6

Works Cited
Ahmad, Imad-ad-Dean, Ph.D. "FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION: AN ISLAMIC
PERSPECTIVE." Minaret.org. Minaret of Freedom Institute, 2000. Web. 10 Dec. 2013.
"Female Circumcision Defense." Female Circumcision Defense. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Dec. 2013.
http://www.rjgeib.com/thoughts/circumcision/response.html.
"Female Genital Mutilation." WHO. World Health Organization, Feb. 2013. Web. 09 Dec. 2013.
Kristof, Nicholas D. "A Rite of Torture for Girls." Editorial. New York Times 112 May 2011: n.
pag. The New York Times. The New York Times Company, 11 May 2011. Web. 8 Dec.
2013.
Reymond, Laura, Asha Mohamud, and Nancy Ali. "PATH : Female Genital Mutilation The
Facts." PATH.org. Program for Appropriate Technology in Health, n.d. Web. 08 Dec.
2013.