Tuesday, May 29, 2007

More Traditions

CANADIAN CHILD AT RISK OF GENITAL MUTILATION

This was the header on a recent email from the United Church to congregations. It outlined the specific case of a woman, originally from Guinea, and her two children who will soon be deported to her country of origin. As a child this mother underwent what is sometimes called female circumcision but is described as female mutilation by opponents. It is often a painful and inhumane ritual which can leave women emotionally and physically scarred for life. In some cases those who are subject to this mutilation of their sexual organs die. The practice is illegal in Canada.

The woman who may be deported is convinced that her daughter will be mutilated if they return to her homeland, even though she is opposed to it.

The United Church and other groups have protested the deportation.

Obviously we don't know the bigger picture of this particular case. It is another reminder that customs and traditions from other cultures are not congruent with practices and sensibilities in Canada. The United Church and Senator Lois Wilson, a former moderator of the UCC, also spoke out against the introduction of Sharia law in Ontario, a form of law which is practiced in many Islamic nations because of concerns about the violation of women's rights.

It is a delicate balance between customs and rituals which are imbued with religious significance and our commitments to human rights.

2 comments:

Beanie's Appa said...

Can you condemn African female circumcision while North America condones male circumcision? I know they aren't equivalent, but they have similarities, both are essentially the removal of sexual tissue, the differences are the degree of harm done and gender of the victim.

Many men do become emotionally disturbed when they find out what they are missing is not just a flap of useless skin, and almost never would pose any threat to his life.

Boys also face the risk of death from circumcision, albeit much smaller here than there (Africa has a problem with spreading HIV through unsterilized traditional circumcision tools, both male and female), and yet it is not illegal in Canada or USA.

The difference? Male circumcision has a strong hold in our culture, having religious significance to people born here, whereas female circumcision does not.

Feels like trying to remove the spec in someone else's eye while there is a log in your own eye.

If every woman has a right to grow up without anyone cutting parts of her sexual organ off, then every man should have the same right, too.

David Mundy said...

I don't recall defending male circumcision, only commenting on the fact that some Jewish families have chosen not -- I repeat not -- to have their boys circumcised.

Do some research. The process by which boys are circumcised, particulary in a hospital setting is physically safe, whatever arguments are made about the psychological impact.

Female genital mutilation is invasive, often unsanitary and brutal. Read some accounts written by those who have undergone it and you will understand.

It appears that male circumcision is an important issue for you, and I have no argument with that concern. Please read what I have actually said a little more carefully so that you get the context.

Shalom.