Female Circumcision: Rite Of Passage Or Violation Of

Female Circumcision
The purpose of this paper is to provide anthropological perspectives on female circumcision. But first, it will summarize Althaus’ article “Female Circumcision: Rite of Passage or Violation of Rights?”. This summary will include the main arguments presented in the piece. Next, this paper examines this cultural practice through critical cultural relativism. Power dynamics are examined in this section as well. Once this is done, this piece then incorporates a cultural constructionis analysis of this widely practiced cultural phenomena.
Female Circumcision
In Althaus’ article, she provides in-depth information about female circumcision; a highly controversial cultural ritual that is practiced in at least 28 countries

(Althaus, 130). Althaus focuses predominantly in countries in Africa or a little north of the equator (ibid).
She elucidates three ways of performing female circumcision: clitoridectomy, excision, and infibulation (Althaus, 131). All of these practices pose potential long-term health consequences or even death and reduces sexual pleasure (ibid). But these practices vary to a certain degree of danger, infibulation for example, is much more dangerous than the two former practices (ibid). Clitoridectomy involves amputating part of or all the clitoris (ibid). Excision involves removing the clitoris and the labia minora (ibid). Lastly, infibulation adds on to this practice by scraping away the labia majora to create raw surfaces, which are held intact until they heal (ibid). Once the wounds heal, scar tissues cover the urethra which leaves an opening in the vagina as ‘small as a matchstick’ so that urine or blood can flow (ibid). Though only a fraction (roughly 15%) of female circumcision are infibulations, Althaus points out that this practice is often conducted by doctors with little knowledge and most often without an anesthetic (Althaus, 130-1).
Aforementioned was that this practice was controversial. At this point it may seem that calling it controversial isn’t going far enough. Perhaps discriminatory or sexist seem better ways of defining this explicitly painful practice. Althaus points out early on how this practice creates controversy. She states that some argue that this practice infringes upon human rights and is downright detrimental to women’s health and wellbeing (Althaus, 130). Some activist movements started in the late 1950’s and 60’s which aimed to dismantle this practice, but it wasn’t until 1979 that governments agreed to work together to end the practice (ibid). The author points out that these endeavors made matters worse (for social and economic reasons) and many individuals saw this form of activism as western cultural imperialism (Althaus, 132). In other words, some African women viewed this attempt to stop the practice as an attack on their culture (ibid). This brings into question then why a culture would be motivated to adopt a practice like female circumcision.
Althaus states that female circumcision plays an integral part in the societies that embrace it (Althaus, 131). Women in these societies are viewed as ‘means to their ends’ or in other words, source of labor and child bearers, and to bring sexual pleasure to men (even though 266 out of 300 preferred the sexual pleasures of women without female circumcision) (ibid). Families face social pressures to conform to this cultural value (ibid). These largely patriarchal societies attribute meaning to ‘great last names’, and female circumcision works to maintain or uphold this value because it prevents women from engaging in sexual activities out of marriage (Althaus, 131-2). Althaus points out that some religions even make female circumcision an obligation (Althaus, 130). As she states, this could actually make girls or women want to conform to this practice (Althaus, 132).
It should be relatively clear why some women do not want to have this practice abolished. Aforementioned were methods of eliminating the practice. To build on that, Althaus states that in 1984 the Inter African Committees Against Harmful Traditional Practices (IAC) formed to bring this issue to the attention of African governments (Althaus, 130). This encouraged African American Women’s networks and organizations who focused on issues like reproductive health to encompass this issue (ibid). Althaus argues that some of the approaches taken by these international organizations to end the practice are firstly community education, secondly alternative rituals, and thirdly dramas (Althaus, 132). To briefly iterate these points, these organizations firstly educate the populous about the potential threats of this cultural practice, and provide other ‘initiation rituals’ and lastly in Burkina Faso, the director of a local theater developed a play to illustrate the threats of female circumcision (and the intended audience is for males) (ibid). Althaus concludes that the only way to improve upon or eliminate this cultural practice is by increasing the socioeconomic status of most women which can only occur with the overall improvement in the status of women (Althaus, 133).
Critical Cultural Relativism and Female Circumcision
Now that the main points in Althaus’ article have been laid out, this paper will now conduct a critical cultural relativist analysis of this cultural tradition. It will first define critical cultural relativism to elucidate why in this perspective would this practice be either good or bad.
Barbara Miller teaches us that critical cultural relativism is an alternative view to cultural relativism or absolute cultural relativism (Miller, 23).

Cultural relativism was introduced in the U.S. by Frank Boas in 1887 (ibid). This theory postulates that cultures must be understood in terms of the values and ideas of that specific culture; the underlying objective here was to delegitimize notions of ethnocentrism (the belief that one culture may judge another based on their cultural standards) (Miller, 12-3). Though this theory seems to provide a framework to eliminate a discriminatory belief, it would not allow then, for example, people to attack the events that took place in Germany circa 1930s-40s (Miller, 23). Critical cultural relativism avoids this ‘homogenizing trap’

(ibid).
Critical cultural relativism provides a different view.

It examines questions about cultural practices and why some/all people accept them and whom that might be benefitting or harming (ibid). In other words, it examines the behaviors, consequences, social factors, and above all the power structures in play. In Althaus’ article, she postulates that one reason that female circumcision is used is to increase the sexual pleasure of men (Althaus, 131). Here we can see the strong presence of a patriarchal society. Recall the purpose here is not to actually criticize this practice but rather seek the underlying interests or motivations of implementing it. The strong presence of a patriarchy indicates that women in a way are indeed used as means to serve the interests of men both sexually and also by providing a child. This brings about the winners (men) and the oppressed

(women).
One other power structure that directly affects this sexist dichotomy between male (power) and female (servers of men) is religion. Althaus points out that in some religions, females are required to be circumcised (Althaus, 130). Religious forces for some pose a crucial role in governing behavior. Thus if religion indeed encourages this practice then it almost legitimizes the sexism which takes place. It is a reason for society to continue to maintain male over female dominance. But it also serves as another reason for some women not wanting to have this practice eliminated. Recall, the efforts of several years of activism yielded arguably a stronger value in maintaining (Althaus, 131). Some viewed this practice as a form of cultural imperialism (ibid). Thus, women may feel a religious and moral obligation to conform to this practice. Some religions then serve two purposes, maintaining the sexist divide and brainwashing women to believing they ought to have female circumcision.
The last arguable factor that contributes to the existence of this cultural tendency are the social pressures faced on families. Recall that Althaus argued certain families experience social pressures to conform to circumcision practices because of the very reasons or rational (which are governed by social and political forces) to engage in this process. Such as preventing women from engaging in sexual activities outside of marriage to preserve the value attributed to names (Althaus, 132). As Althaus stated, this could actually as well be a reason for women or girls to conform (Althaus, 131). In all three cases, sexism, religion, and social and family pressure, the choice does not belong to the girls or women.
A Cultural Constructivist Critique of Female Circumcisions
This section provides a cultural constructivist critique of female circumcision practices. According to Miller, cultural constructivism contrasts with biological determinism (Miller, 12). Biological determinism seeks to explain culture and behavior through biological factors like genes and hormones (ibid). Whereas cultural constructivism seeks to maintain that human behaviors and ideas can be explained by the products of culture which shape learning (ibid).
A cultural constructivist critique then of female circumcision would look at firstly the products of culture which shape the learning. Women in these cultures who feel inferior to males and thereby demonstrate it behaviorally (such as acting as a tool for labor and child bearing for a man) shows that it doesn’t have to do with the genetics but rather how they are taught and raised.