Female Genital Mutilation: An Islamic Practice?

Female genital mutilation is a practice that has been taking place in Islamic countries in the recent years, and a practice that has been taking place under the guise of the religion of Islam. A horrid, painful, and potentially dangerous practice, female genital mutilation involves the removal of the clitoris hood in the most benign cases, and the clitoris, labia majora, and labia minora in the most severe cases. In Female Genital Mutilation, an article written by an Islamic woman in the Muslim's Women League, the history and practice of female genital mutilation (or FGM, as it is abbreviated) is explained, while any connection female genital mutilation claims to have to the religion of Islam is refuted.

Female genital mutilation is another way for an increasingly patriarchal society (using Western society as its model) to control women, using their sexuality against them and forcing them into positions of submission. The procedure itself has many complications in many cases, including but not limited to infertility, infection, complicated and possibly fatal childbirth, and sexual dysfunction (Muslim Women's League). Frequently carried out with unsafe, unsterilized equipment, the surgery is highly dangerous and likely to cause infection, sometimes infections as serious as HIV. The procedure is typically performed on young girls, infants to pre-adolescents and, in addition to the physical risks and complications, often causes emotion duress and disturbance (Muslim Women's League).

Though the history of such practices predates the Islamic religion, the practice is strongly associated with Islam and often considered, by those outside the culture, to be a major part of the Islamic religion. In reality, the practice is only very loosely associated with Islam (mentioned ambiguously once or twice by the Prophet, which will be discussed further into the paper), and is also performed by many non-Muslims and people of different cultures. In fact, the very act of female genital mutilation tends to violate Islam's basic principles on many levels. However, those that only view Islam from an outside perspective believe the procedure is inherently linked to the Islamic religion because many who fervently support it appear highly religious. Oddly enough, it is often Muslim fundamentalists who are so vehement in anti-woman sentiment.
Those who do support female genital mutilation support it on the grounds that it keeps circumcised women chaste and pure, diminishing their desire for sexual activity. Many Muslim men who are especially misogynistic consider women to have voracious and insatiable sexual appetites, and view this procedure as a way to curb these tendencies, rendering the women meek and submissive. Since purity and control are integral facets of the religion of Islam, the procedure is often justified thusly, citing purity as its main validation. In this way, it can be and often is viewed as a favor to those on whom it is performed, because it helps save them from their "raging sexual drives" and keeps them free from sin.

However, one could argue, as the writer of the article does, that this takes away a woman's right to free will and her right to the choice to be pure. Forced purity, as any type of forced morality, does not allow for true morality because true morality involves choice. If a woman is pure because she can be no other way, is her purity truly a virtue? Or is it rather an unavoidable part of her being that she can take no responsibility for, rendering it irrelevant? In the article, it is said, "In addition, the argument for ensuring chastity with a physically debilitating procedure blatantly violates the premise of individual accountability exemplified in the Qur'an" (Muslim Women's League, 2). It then goes on to cite the Qu'ran, saying,

Whoever chooses to follow the right path, follows it but for his own good; and whoever goes astray, goes but astray to his own hurt; and no bearer of burdens shall be made to bear another's burden (17:15)...and if one weighed down by his load calls upon (another) to help him carry it, nothing thereof may be carried (by that other), even if it be one's near of kin (35:18) (Muslim Women's League, 2).

In citing this verse, the article shows the inherently flawed reasoning and justification behind female genital mutilation. Rather than increasing a woman's morality, it is actually taking away her right to be moral by forcing morality upon her. However, a blind eye is (intentionally?) turned to this criticism by female genital mutilation's proponents. Besides being encouraged as an advocate of chastity and morality, circumcision is encouraged through its aid in helping women find a spouse. It is frequently viewed as an attractive and pleasing feature in a potential wife, especially if the majority of women in a particular social circle or geographic area are circumcised. If many women are circumcised, it becomes the standard, and anything that is noncompliant with the standard is seen as irregular and deviant.

This argument can be a very effective one in convincing women to undergo the procedure. Marriage is a factor many Muslim women must consider deeply when considering undergoing the procedure. Anything that would make a Muslim woman more likely to be married off she is often encouraged to do, as marriage leads to independence from family, and often, financial gain. As stated in the article, "This has tremendous significance in terms of the desirability of a young woman for marriage which provides a major means for achieving economic strength and independence; thus, being unsuitable for marriage further worsens a woman's ability to prosper" (Muslim Women's League, 1). Because it is difficult for women to acquire financial security on their own, they are often forced into marriage in order to become stable and successful. The system is set up against them, leaving them helpless and dependent on men, who create the very system that is keeping them separate and weak. It is a vicious circle in which marriage becomes simply another tool that misogynistic men use to control and manipulate women.

There is brief, unclear mention of circumcision by the Prophet that is pointed out in the article. The article cites a typical rebuttal to Muslims who are anti-mutilation, a hadith that mentions circumcision without condemning it. "Um Atiyyat al-Ansariyyah said: A woman used to perform circumcision in Medina. The Prophet (pbuh) said to her: Do not cut too severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for a husband." (Women's Muslim League, 3). However, in examining how Mernissi explicates and verifies or refutes hadiths, this must be taken into consideration in this case.

Firstly, one must examine the historical context, or the qissa, of the hadith. What was going on in the Muslim community at the time that this was said? More specifically, what was transpiring in the Prophet's life? To whom did he say it and why? What were the typical non-Muslim social practices at the time? We also must consider the language more deeply, focusing especially on words that are ambiguous and words having more than one definition. Finally, we must consider the hadith in terms of the whole rather than as a separate entity, and look to its author to find whether or not he is viewed as an accurate source. In this case, we find that though the prophet did not condemn circumcision, he definitely did not insist upon it like many Muslim men have done and do even today. Also, the wording was vague enough that one can argue, as it was argued in the article, where and how exactly this circumcision was being performed. In addition, the article points out that if it was intended to be an important and essential procedure, it would have been explained in further detail at more length.
What has lead Islam to the state it is in today, characterized by extremist and fundamentalist beliefs, and a division between men and women? For one, with no common ground and nowhere to meet in the middle, Islamic countries become divided between religious rule and secularism. This contrast leads the religious leaders to become more fundamentalist and extreme in an attempt to preserve religion's grasp and control over its people. According to Monshipouri, it is also a reaction to globalization and the global economy. "The globalization and the market expansion of the 1990s have resulted in social exclusion and a growing sense of personal insecurity" (Monshipouri, 53). He goes on to say, "Inasmuch as globalization undercuts the state's welfare functions, it run directly counter to the Muslim world's social ethics of protecting the most powerless" (54). Mernissi, in The Veil and the Male Elite, expresses concern for the increasing Westernization of Islam countries, citing it as a cause for degradation of the Islamic society. She says of the treatment of women today in Islam, "Protecting women from change by veiling them and shutting them out of the world has echoes of closing the community to protect it from the West" (Mernissi, 99).

In a world of increasing globalization, democratization, and Westernization, it is difficult not to be affected by the constant changes and shifts in the social, economic, and political areas. Islam has indeed been affected by these changes is grasping tightly to fundamentalist religion and extremist views to protect themselves from the change. Unfortunately, it is the women who are feeling the brunt of this.

Works Cited

Mernissi, Fatima. The Veil and the Male Elite. Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley, 1987.

Monshipouri, Mahmood. "The West's Modern Encounter with Islam: From Discourse to

Reality." Journal of Church and State. Volume 40. Winter 1998: 51-56.

Muslim Women's League. "Female Genital Mutilation." Women's Muslim League Organization.

January 1999. http://www.mwlusa.org/publications/positionpapers/fgm.html