Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

dipsydoodle

(42,239 posts)
Tue Jun 17, 2014, 04:32 AM Jun 2014

Female mutilation a means of male power over women-UN rights chief

Source: Reuters



GENEVA (Reuters) - Female genital mutilation, the excision of the clitoris practised widely in African and many Muslim countries, is a means for men to maintain control of women and must be eradicated, U.N. human rights chief Navi Pillay said on Monday.

Even if a current global campaign against the practice - dubbed FGM - continued at its current level of success, it would be 60 years until the total of well over 125 million women and girls now affected was reduced by half, she said.

"FGM is a form of gender-based discrimination and violence. It is a violation of the right (of women and girls) to physical and mental integrity," Pillay told a gathering on the issue at the world body's Human Rights Council.

"As many as 30 million girls are at risk of undergoing it over the next decade, if current trends persist."


Read more: http://af.reuters.com/article/topNews/idAFKBN0ES0HO20140617

24 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Female mutilation a means of male power over women-UN rights chief (Original Post) dipsydoodle Jun 2014 OP
It is pure evil` get the red out Jun 2014 #1
+100000 nt riderinthestorm Jun 2014 #2
Amen leftynyc Jun 2014 #3
I'll add my AMEN to that also Johnyawl Jun 2014 #4
That assumes that its done by men bhikkhu Jun 2014 #5
Women most definitely cooperate with Patriarchy get the red out Jun 2014 #7
They are controlled by the hierarchy. That isn't the same as "cooperating." pnwmom Jun 2014 #13
I agree get the red out Jun 2014 #18
No, it doesn't. Men control the cultures and control the women who carry it out. n/t pnwmom Jun 2014 #12
I'll say more specifically it's control over women johnlucas Jun 2014 #6
An expansive view. I'm going to re-read this several times. Regarding the scarcity mindset: freshwest Jun 2014 #22
And male mutilation (circumcision) is a means of society's power over men. louielouie Jun 2014 #8
you're saying these are equal? CreekDog Jun 2014 #9
No, it is worse as it is being committed by first world societies that should know better. Nobel_Twaddle_III Jun 2014 #15
uh huh CreekDog Jun 2014 #16
and your point would be ??? Nobel_Twaddle_III Jun 2014 #17
Just saying bkkyosemite Jun 2014 #10
Or perhaps since system would not let me revise to this: bkkyosemite Jun 2014 #11
Are men's genitals cut off, with only a small hole left for the passage of urine? pnwmom Jun 2014 #14
It would be equal IF: get the red out Jun 2014 #19
Congrats, you survived a jury. As it should be. arcane1 Jun 2014 #21
Oh. My. Gawd. An anatomically correct corollary is alerted on??!! riderinthestorm Jun 2014 #23
I just saw this get the red out Jun 2014 #24
k&r n/t RainDog Jun 2014 #20

get the red out

(13,459 posts)
1. It is pure evil`
Tue Jun 17, 2014, 08:26 AM
Jun 2014

I refuse to respect any culture that practices this. I consider those cultures that do this to girls beneath contempt.

 

leftynyc

(26,060 posts)
3. Amen
Tue Jun 17, 2014, 09:27 AM
Jun 2014

That there are those who try and minimize this practice citing 'cultural difference' makes me want to punch the wall. ANY culture that accepts this deserves your (and everyone's) contempt.

bhikkhu

(10,708 posts)
5. That assumes that its done by men
Tue Jun 17, 2014, 10:27 AM
Jun 2014

which, from what I've read, is generally not the case; its more older women and mothers who enforce the custom.

I agree that its pure evil, as said upthread, but its not so simply explained.

get the red out

(13,459 posts)
7. Women most definitely cooperate with Patriarchy
Tue Jun 17, 2014, 11:05 AM
Jun 2014

What choice do they have? Because they have been conditioned into believing that their daughters must have parts of their bodies destroyed in order to ensure their virginity and faithfulness to their future husbands simply shows that these women have been conditioned to believe they are nothing but the property of men. They have previously been given no alternative or information.

There are benefits to compliance, one being that you are not killed or ostracized within your group, even when compliance is easily identified as totally wrong by those outside the system of evil. And the men simply don't dirty their hands with the details of their patriarchal destruction anymore than Dick Cheney got his hands dirty in war by personally dropping bombs in Iraq. To suggest the women are independently making these decisions and have cultural options within the extreme patriarchy where they were, unfortunately born, is to say that no one with power over someone else can ever be blamed for what they make that person do via power structure and limiting their options.

I really don't believe it is complicated. It's fucking evil patriarchy, but not overly complicated, IMO.

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
13. They are controlled by the hierarchy. That isn't the same as "cooperating."
Tue Jun 17, 2014, 05:30 PM
Jun 2014

Cooperation implies equality.

I agree they have no real choice.

 

johnlucas

(1,250 posts)
6. I'll say more specifically it's control over women
Tue Jun 17, 2014, 11:02 AM
Jun 2014

Controlling female sexuality seems to be a big deal with governments.
After all the female is the Master Sex & controls the destiny of the human race by the selections she makes.
If a government can control how a female expresses her sexuality that government can control ALL of her.
And from there that government can direct her to being an obedient baby-making machine that breed boys for the workfields & warfields & breed girls to be future baby-making machines themselves.

I theorize that controlling female sexuality all stems from an ancient famine or drought on Earth.
The few people who survived got desperate to make sure the tribe would not die out & took extreme measures to prevent an Extinction Level Event.
You can repopulate a village quickly with more women & less men.
It doesn't work so well with more men & less women.

Say you got 10 men & 1 woman. 11 people.
Roughly every 9 months the population would grow from 11 to 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19.
That's not counting twins, triplets, & other random multiples.
Add 1 for each multiple.

Turn that to 10 women & 1 man. Same 11 people.
Roughly every 9 months the population would grow from 11 to 21, 31, 41, 51, 61, 71, 81, 91.
That's not counting twins, triplets, & other random multiples.
Add 10 for each multiple.

Look at how those numbers are the mirror of each other. 11, 12, 13, 14 vs. 11, 21, 31, 41.
It's no surprise that women were pushed to have babies & nothing but if faced with an Extinction Level Event.

I believe that an ancient society desperate to survive enforced a method that would guarantee maximum childbirth.
And this method forced the woman into a baby-making ONLY role.
It took their choice away because times were desperate.
After awhile even after survival was assured, the method became habit AKA tradition.
And that's where all the various female control cultural practices came from.
Including this sickening one called Female Genital Mutilation.

Societies that are safer & more sustainable can allow less adherence to the biological role.
That's why American society has loosened some of the rigidity of what men & women are allowed to do.
When women go to the workplace, a field traditionally designed for the male biological role, it can interfere with having babies.
It's hard to be a high-powered career woman AND a high-powered mother at the same time.
Something has to give. One will take a backseat to the other to some degree or another.

Oprah Winfrey is a mogul with worldwide influence & presence.
How many children does she have? ZERO.
Janet Jackson is one of the world's premier entertainers.
How many children does she have? ZERO.
Janet's sister Rebbie Jackson has a great singing voice but did not pursue the music business in any concentrated fashion only dabbling in it like a hobby.
How many children does she have? THREE.

It is often said that as people become wealthier they often have less children.
Poorer people tend to make more babies.
That's why immigration is allowed. The natives ain't making enough babies for the government's needs.
With wealth you can self-indulge. When you're poor, your survival is in peril.
Poor people tend to leave their legacy through their children while wealthy people tend to leave their legacy through their influence.
It's no accident why women are discouraged from self-actualization.

This Female Genital Mutilation is the EXTREME form of what every government does.
Controlling women's sexuality to make them better candidates for making new babies.
The whole thing about marriage is a milder form of it.
When women are loosened up from that expectation, some of them will not have children.
Check to see how much governments are concerned with the Population Replacement Rate.
If not enough women are contributing to the replacement rate, the government imports women who will or force women back into a baby-making role by default.

But that's the whole problem.
The government is only concerned about having MORE babies instead of having BETTER babies.
Most of our existence is only allowed because our labors are used to benefit the elite few.
They don't want to do the heavy lifting so they need a swarm of people willing to do it for them.
Technology isn't good enough quite yet to do without us so they're stuck with us.
While they're stuck, they will continue programming society to have MORE babies to do the grunt work.

Less population doesn't HAVE to be bad if each member of that population gets all of what he/she needs & what he/she wants.
That's one of the defining issues humanity has to deal with for the next few millenia (if we don't kill ourselves before then).
The existence of leisure time is a step forward for humanity.
We don't have to constantly hunt for food & worry about constant danger.
We can sleep & relax & unwind.

Your grandmother or great-grandmother was probably known for having a bunch of kids while your generation & the generations beyond you may have only one or none.
I know this story applies to me. 3 generations back 5 to 10 kids as a common rule.
My generation? Only child.

To stop Female Genital Mutilation, you have to get those societies off of the scarcity mindset.
Basic needs must become abundant. People must be allowed to have the OPTION to become more self-actualized.
Get past the lowest rung on Maslow's Hierarchy & those societies will improve.

It's a stupid relic of a desperate past.
John Lucas

freshwest

(53,661 posts)
22. An expansive view. I'm going to re-read this several times. Regarding the scarcity mindset:
Wed Jun 18, 2014, 08:39 PM
Jun 2014

Have you read or listened to David Korten's words on this matter?

His is an argument against heirarchical societal structure and some of his works stress an inverse pyramid in which each individual, free to express one's self would expontentially help the world if unleashed.

Although you have worked this all out on your own!

The Great Turning: From Empire to Earth Community


by David C. Korten

Nathan's review - Sep 08, 13

Korten uses the metaphors of "empire" and "earth community" to signify the essential choice we must make as human beings between relationships based on power (dominance/hierarchy/violence) and those based on partnership (democracy/community/stewardship/). And now, as we reach the global limits of ecological sustainability, it is just as critical that this relationship extend to all living creatures and the living systems that support them. After 5000 years of Empire, our only real hope is to turn towards a form of community that embraces all the inhabitants of this earth and lives in wise and respectful relation to the global biosphere that sustains life. We, as humans, must return to earth.

With broad strokes, Korten traces the path of 5000 years of empire, it's origins and development, in order to show us that this mode of being has been a choice and not a historic inevitability. The scope of this book is vast, but the perspective is necessary to expand our consciousness beyond the mind colonized by empire. There is a different way to live. The sweep of history gives way to the most critical issues of our time, and Korten provides us a vision of how our own moment can and must begin the transformation from empire to earth community.

I personally believe that Korten has put his finger on the heart of the matter, and this is a timely and necessary book. Read it and then begin to find ways to live on earth together with the rest.


http://www.goodreads.com/review/show/129571119

I expressed myself somewhat as you did, on this and religion, ideology and other constructs that people use to explain such situations without taking into account the physical aspects. I termed that 'materialism' but I don't mean it in the modern sense as a complaint about the consumer culture:

Agreed, even if not proven in this. The ISIS and Boko Harum actions aren't about religion, either.

In Ukraine, India, and so many other countries, the terrorism is about money and territory.

Religious, political and ideological explanations follow actions that could have been made sans any of those excuses. They are justifications for the acts and encouragement for warriors at a shallow thinking level, but they know deep down what they will get in the end even if they don't admit it to themselves.

They will get more 'stuff' and say they deserved it and those they slaughter or oppress didn't deserve possession. I now see sexism and racism and all of it in that lens now.

I know non-believers and believers who made their decisions according to a view of the market place, be it marriage, jobs, party, then add on religion or political reasons to say they are beyond reproach after taking their pure materialist approach to all of those matters.

The 'because of religion' crowd, both supporters or detractors of religion, are dismissing intended, if not admitted, real world consequences underlying the words that seek to obscure the acts. This is where the focus needs to be and not the words that are being used to justify or demonize their acts.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/1218136141#post22

Your post also reminds me of a post including the book I may have referred you to already:

The First Feminist President, Barack Obama


by Mandy Van Deven - March 23, 2009



On January 20th the first self-identified feminist was named President of the United States of America. Just two days after taking office, Barack Obama performed his first presidential act of solidarity with women around the world by repealing the Global Gag Rule. Established in 1984 by President Reagan, the Global Gag Rule denies aid to international groups "which perform or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning." The Global Gag Rule has come to be seen as a litmus test of the current US President's stance on women's rights, though it is just one aspect of the complicated story of the impact of American reproductive rights policy in countries around the globe. [17]




After witnessing the impact of President Bush's reinstatement of the Global Gag Rule, Michelle Goldberg, journalist, author, and long-time critic of the Bush Administration's policies on sexual and reproductive health, decided that a book about the global battle for reproductive justice was long overdue. So she wrote The Means of Reproduction: Sex, Power, and the Future of the World. [17]

The cover art depicting a woman holding the Earth on her shoulders is more than appropriate for this deeply-researched, historically-informed examination: fifty years worth of research about four continents has convinced Goldberg that women's oppression is at the crux of many of the world's most intractable challenges. She illustrates how US policies act as a catalyst for or an impediment to women's rights worldwide, and puts forth a convincing argument that women's liberation worldwide is key to solving some of our most daunting problems. "Underlying diverse conflicts - demography, natural resources, human rights, and religious mores - is the question of who controls the means of reproduction," she writes. "Women's intimate lives have become inextricably tied to global forces."

http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2009/03/23/controlling-means-reproduction-an-interview-with-michelle-goldberg/

The war on women is not just a war on women, but on men, too. Men who don't support women's rights are sealing their own fate. But that's what division always does.

Not just an American problem. It is about global control and reducing all of mankind to commodities.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/110212801#op

I really appreciate your support of women in this thread. And no hate, just guiding to the real source of the problem.


CreekDog

(46,192 posts)
16. uh huh
Tue Jun 17, 2014, 11:42 PM
Jun 2014
Nobel_Twaddle_III (95 posts)
5. Unfortunately my ignore list is growing over this

And that is too bad, because when these posters are not behaving this way, I will miss out on their post.
I wish we could treat each other with the dignity and respect each of us deserves.
Until then my ignore list grows.
Maybe when the “all men are evil, especially the white ones” threads die down, I can revisit the ignore list.


nice strawman.

Nobel_Twaddle_III

(323 posts)
17. and your point would be ???
Wed Jun 18, 2014, 12:28 AM
Jun 2014

I left my opinion in a respectful manner.
Unlike the 3 post currently below me.

One blathers about health benefits of mutilating boys.

No child should be mutilated, DAH !

When first world societies still mutilate boys, I do think it worse. Not because they are boys, but because first world society should know better.

So while you are off to help girls on the other side of the planet, and good for you, please take a moment and think about what we do here.

bkkyosemite

(5,792 posts)
10. Just saying
Tue Jun 17, 2014, 04:14 PM
Jun 2014

louielouie.....castration or penis mutilation is in more keeping with a comparison. How would that feel.

bkkyosemite

(5,792 posts)
11. Or perhaps since system would not let me revise to this:
Tue Jun 17, 2014, 04:19 PM
Jun 2014

louielouie.....castration or cutting off penis is in more keeping with a comparison. How would that feel. You don't have a clue of the pain involved in this mutilation of young girls. All the men in these countries need to be castrated. (didn't remember my password but had to reset just to say this)

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
14. Are men's genitals cut off, with only a small hole left for the passage of urine?
Tue Jun 17, 2014, 05:33 PM
Jun 2014

It isn't comparable at all. The procedure in women has a significant risk of death and a high risk of complications during childbirth. And it has zero health benefits. It increases the chance of disease rather than reducing it.

get the red out

(13,459 posts)
19. It would be equal IF:
Wed Jun 18, 2014, 08:24 AM
Jun 2014

If their penises were brutally hacked off with a piece of broken glass and many of them bled to death. Then it would be equal to FGM.

 

arcane1

(38,613 posts)
21. Congrats, you survived a jury. As it should be.
Wed Jun 18, 2014, 07:48 PM
Jun 2014

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

No comments added by alerter

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed Jun 18, 2014, 04:37 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I agree with the post that was alerted.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Alerter has a "point".
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No comments were provided by the alerter, to this factual statement written in response to an absurd post? That smells.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Truth can be brutal.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Seems like a valid response to his statement. Mutilation is horrific nightmare.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

get the red out

(13,459 posts)
24. I just saw this
Thu Jun 19, 2014, 05:32 AM
Jun 2014

I never imagined I would be alerted in something that I presumed was common knowledge. Learn something every day about what offends people. I believe in truth no matter how much we might wish we didn't have to know it.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Female mutilation a means...