According to several sources, little progress is being made in eliminating the cutting of female genitalia. This paper, based on qualitative interviews and observations, explores perceptions of female genital cutting and elimination of the phenomenon in Hargeisa, Somaliland. Two main groups of participants were interviewed: (1) 22 representatives of organisations whose work directly relates to female genital cutting; and (2) 16 individuals representing different groups of society. It was found that there is an increasing use of medical staff and equipment when a girl undergoes the procedure of female genital cutting; the use of terminology is crucial in understanding current perceptions of female genital cutting; religion is both an important barrier and facilitator of elimination; and finally, traditional gender structures are currently being challenged in Hargeisa. The findings of this study suggest that it is important to consider current perceptions on practices of female genital cutting and on abandonment of female genital cutting, in order to gain useful knowledge on the issue of elimination. The study concludes that elimination of female genital cutting is a multifaceted process which is constantly negotiated in a diversity of social settings.
Based on fieldwork that aimed to gather more knowledge on female genital cutting among Kurdish–Norwegians, in this article we report on how research participants would often talk about male circumcision instead. Informed by current scholarship and public discourse on female genital cutting and male circumcision, we identified three themes when analysing how and why the participants would talk about male circumcision rather than female genital cutting: (1) the condemnation of female genital cutting; (2) the acceptability of male circumcision and (3) the questioning of the acceptability of male circumcision. We do not attempt to provide solutions to whether some forms of male circumcision are less, equally or more harmful than some forms of female genital cutting, or whether they are comparable and both should thus either be legitimized or banned. Rather we aim to provide insights into these dilemmas by the use of the concept of ‘mapping controversies’ associated with actor–network theory. We further make use of the slippery slope argument to explore how the research participants’ views shed light on political reluctance to treat female genital cutting and male circumcision in the same way in the Norwegian context. While we are not in a position to say that the views shared are the same in other social groups, or in other countries, we argue that the Norwegian government’s different treatment of female genital cutting and male circumcision changes the meaning of ritual boy circumcision and that this may result in parents deciding not to circumcise their sons.
Based on fieldwork among Kurds in Norway, this article explores how participants described the presence of female genital cutting (FGC) in Kurdistan as a difficult topic to address in public. Perceptions of how FGC should be addressed ranged from acknowledging and directly confronting it to silencing and rejecting it as a Kurdish practice. The participants associated FGC with a "traditional mindset" and perceptions of female sexuality that did not readily fit into new ideologies of women's liberation. Based on literature on how to manage a "difficult" characteristic in national identity construction, we argue that the participants' negotiation of "modern" and "traditional" aspects of national identity is one strategy for dealing with FGC. FGC has the potential for spoiled national identity. However, we find reason to suggest that a condemnation of the practice based on women's liberation may strengthen the aspects of Kurdish national aspirations that are grounded in human rights and gender equality.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.