Context
This research paper was written for my Gender in Society (WGSS-125) class. The purpose of the paper was to engage with a pressing, current topic regarding feminism or women’s rights by outlining the problem and providing a solution to the issue. Thus, I wrote my research paper about female genital mutilation practices within the United States in response to the court case that happened in Michigan last year.
Cutting Out Female Genital Cutting; Working to Prevent FGM Practices in America
In an emergency room located near Detroit, Michigan, Dr. Jumana Nagarwala performed female genital mutilation (FGM) surgeries on nine young girls between 2005 and 2017. The guardians of these girls brought their daughters to Dr. Fakhruddin Attar’s office all the way from Michigan, Minnesota, and Illinois. On April 21, 2017, Dr. Nagarwala was charged with nine counts of performing female genital mutilation on minors, an act banned under the congressional Female Genital Mutilation Act of 1996 (Ly). However, in November of 2018, a federal judge in Michigan ruled that Congress’s banning of this horrific act was unconstitutional. Not only did this shock the prosecutors of the case, but many women’s rights activists were outraged by the ruling (Thoet). While the congressional banning of female genital mutilation was ruled unconstitutional, governmental FGM prevention should be enforced due to the widespread occurrence of FGM practices in the U.S. and due to the protection of a woman’s personal autonomy.
In order to understand why the Congressional banning of female genital mutilation was ruled unconstitutional, activists must understand the lens through which the federal judge, Bernard Friedman, viewed this issue. As detailed in his decision, Judge Friedman stated that Congress overstepped its constitutional powers. Judge Friedman saw FGM as “local criminal activity” and, therefore, believed that states must retain the power to determine the fate of female genital mutilation practices within the United States (Thoet). However, Friedman’s decision fails to recognize is that FGM is a widespread practice throughout the nation. In 2014, the Center for Disease Control and Promotion estimated that around 513,000 women in the United States were at risk for FGM or were subjugated into having the procedure, less than a percent living in Michigan (Thoet). This contradicts Judge Friedman’s decision because FGM procedures cannot and should not be viewed as merely “local criminal activity,” as these surgeries happen nationwide. By summarizing this epidemic as just local, Judge Bernard Friedman and others unfactually promote that this procedure is extremely limited.
Another issue with this case ruling is that it presents the lack of autonomy society allows women to have over their own bodies. In “Becoming the Third Wave” by Rebecca Walker, she discusses how as “the misconception of equality between the sexes becomes more ubiquitous, so does the attempt to restrict the boundaries of women’s personal and political power” (Walker). Walker’s mention of how society tries to restrict women’s personal power extends to this case because Friedman’s decision presents the restriction of young girls’ autonomy over their own bodies. As mentioned earlier, many of these young girls are forced to partake in this cultural ritual by their guardians at ages prior to their teenage years (Ly). However, since these young girls are not of age to consent to the procedure, FGM practices violate the basic rights of women to choose what happens to their own bodies. There are four different types of FGM: clitoridectomy (the removal of the clitoris), intermediate infibulation (the removal of as much of the clitoris as possible and the labia minora), total infibulation (the removal of the clitoris, inner labia, and outer labia, in which the vaginal opening is sewn together), and nicking (the use of a needle prick on the clitoris to draw blood). While the procedure varies globally, each procedure is done with the same purpose: limiting and preventing female sexuality (Ali 2-8). Supporters of FGM practices understand that its occurrence and acceptance in the United States allows them to limit and shame young girls from being sexually active. Thus, the passive acceptance of female genital mutilation allows for more societal control over what women can and cannot do with their own bodies. The far-reaching decision of the Detroit judge presents how the power of the states is valued over the autonomy women have over their bodies. The practice of female genital mutilation within the United States further emphasizes the control that society has over the sexuality of young girls and women.
Additionally, Judge Bernard Friedman does not recognize the amount of emotional and physical trauma his decision will future victims of female genital mutilation. While the practice of male circumcision is common within the United States, the difference between the damage of male circumcision and female circumcision is that FGM is done to prevent sexual activity. As seen throughout an intersection of issues, nonconsensual procedures done on children can cause future emotional trauma. In “The Case of Joan/John” by John Colapinto, the author details the true story of David Reimer, a story of a young boy who was medically constructed and raised as a girl. In this story, Colapinto details the emotional trauma Reimer faced from being forced to have these nonconsensual medical procedures, so much so that he ended up committing suicide due to trauma (Colapinto 9). Regarding female genital mutilation, many survivors of this procedure detail the emotional trauma and physical pain that they feel. The World Health Organization (WHO) stated that there were no health benefits to FGM procedures. While some of the short term effects of FGM include severe pain, bleeding, infection, injury, and shock, some long term effects of the procedure include constant UTIs, cysts, infertility, and childbirth complications. Within Dr. Nagarwala’s case, one of the survivors detailed that after the procedure, she felt extreme pain all the way to her ankles that prevented her from walking (Ali 2-3). The extent to the emotional and physical trauma that a young girl’s body goes through during this procedure emphasizes that the procedure does not benefit anyone and is completely preventable. Due to the physical and emotional wounds caused by FGM practices, female genital mutilation to any extent should be halted and prevented.
In order to prevent this disaster from occurring, women’s advocacy groups and national anti-FGM movements along with state governments must create and promote anti-FGM policies. Out of every state in the United States, only Michigan created and supported holistic legislation that advocates ending FGM (Ali 8). Sadly, this legislation was passed once Dr. Nagarwala’s case went on trial, and thus, did not extend to the charges of the case (Thoet). Michigan’s state policy is ideal for all states because it addresses almost every facet of the complex issue of FGM. Not only does Michigan’s state policy prosecute practitioners as felons, but it also prosecutes the guardians of the survivors of FGM practices who forced them into having the procedure. This policy also prevents vacation cutting, which is when guardians bring their young girls abroad to have the surgery performed. Additionally, the argument of FGM being a “religious” or “cultural” tradition will not protect practitioners in a court of law. Lastly, this policy also budgets money to raising education and awareness of the prevalence of FGM within the United States. While Michigan’s policy to prevent FGM is substantial, there are twenty-two other states within America that do not have legislation protecting girls at risk for FGM procedures (Ali 7-8). In order to address and alleviate this issue within the United States, other states must adopt comprehensive legislation that contains every aspect of Michigan’s new legislation. By adopting policies such as Michigan’s, other states can fight to prevent this atrocity from affecting young girls within the United States.
While Dr. Nagarwala’s case is currently being appealed, female genital mutilation procedures still prevail throughout the United States. In order to take real, comprehensive actions to combat its existence. Women’s rights advocates and state legislatures alike should work towards advocating for legislation modeled after the legislation passed in Michigan. Through education and awareness, Anti-FGM advocates can present why Judge Friedman was wrong, allowing them to work towards a female genital mutilation-free nation.
Works Cited
Ali, Ayan H. “Why We Hesitate to Protect Girls from FGM in the United States.” AHA Foundation, Jan. 2019, https://www.theahafoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/MEDIA-REPORT_AH_RGB_REVISED1.20.pdf.
Colapinto, John. “The Case of Joan/John.” Rolling Stone Magazine, 11 Dec. 1997, pp. 54–97.
Ly, Laura. “Charges Dropped in First Federal Genital Mutilation Case in US.” CNN, Cable News Network, 21 Nov. 2018, www.cnn.com/2018/11/20/us/female-genital-mutilation-case-charges-dropped/index.html.
Thoet, Alison. “Why the U.S. Ban on Female Genital Mutilation Was Ruled Unconstitutional.” PBS, Public Broadcasting Service, 3 Dec. 2018, www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/why-the-u-s-ban-on-female-genital-mutilation-was-ruled-unconstitutional.
Walker, Rebecca. (1992). “Becoming the Third Wave.” Ms. Magazine, vol. 2, pp.39–41. http://www.msmagazine.com/spring2002/BecomingThirdWaveRebeccaWalker.pdf.