Women's Views on News |
| FGM: double standards need addressing Posted: 24 Mar 2015 06:25 AM PDT
As the Department of Health announces that female genital piercing counts as female genital mutilitation, we have to question the double standards which inform our definitions. The Department of Health (DoH) has said that all women who have ‘intimate piercings’ will be classified as having suffered female genital mutilation (FGM), even if they consented to having it done as an adult. The move follows guidance from the World Health Organization (WHO), whose classification of FGM makes specific reference to both women and girls. According to the WHO, FGM ranges from the partial or total removal of the clitoris, labia or narrowing of the vagina by repositioning the labia to all 'other harmful procedures to the female genitalia for non-medical purposes, for example: pricking, piercing, incising, scraping and cauterization'. This definition is deliberately broad to encompass as wide a range of FGM as possible and affecting women and girls of all ages. However it has caused debate in settings such as the UK where such a broad definition inevitably raises questions about female genital cosmetic surgery and genital piercing as well. The debates around the issue have led to movements such as the group of MPs who recently called for the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003 to be updated to reclassify female genital cosmetic surgery as a criminal offence – the justification being: "We cannot tell communities in Sierra Leone and Somalia to stop a practice which is freely permitted in Harley Street." Given the WHO definition, the UK’s Department of Health has had no option but to declare that female genital piercing also falls squarely into the FGM category. Which leaves us with the question: is the WHO definition too broad to apply to the UK? To answer this question we need to closely examine what it is that differentiates mutilation from modification in our setting. Anatomically, there is little to distinguish FGM from female genital cosmetic surgery, and even in some cases from female genital piercing – especially when using the WHO definition. Some might argue that setting is important – with what we see as mutilation often taking place abroad or in private homes while cosmetic surgery and piercings occur in licensed, regulated establishments. However, while government guidance on the latter procedures exists, compliance is hard to prove, as most genital cosmetic surgery occurs in private healthcare clinics which operate on a profit-making and self-regulating basis. Piercings are also administered on a profit-making basis, and contrary to popular belief, there is no formal minimum qualification needed before a body piercer can operate within a licensed establishment. Local authorities are responsible for ensuring standards are met by body piercers, but the client’s anatomical suitability for genital piercing, the siting of the piercing and any ascertaining of the age of the client is largely left up to the judgment of the provider. This reality calls into question the 'quality' of the genital modification procedures, with standards likely to vary hugely. In contrast, in many countries FGM is increasingly being performed in medicalised settings and by medical professionals, blurring the clear line between medicalised genital modification and FGM. Others argue that the difference between mutilation and modification is the aim of the procedure – for example a London-based piercer interviewed by the BBC said that piercing is "more to do with adornment of the body or the discovery of new sensations" than mutilation. However, this is not exclusively so, with piercing involved in rare cases of infibulations for abstinence using locked labial rings to prevent intercourse conducted on women. In addition, FGM is almost never seen by those who practice it as mutilation; they see it as an act which will ensure that ideals of femininity to do with cleanliness, chastity, modesty and marital fidelity are maintained. Perhaps most importantly, many cite adult consent as being the differentiating factor between mutilation and modification, and many women with genital piercings have insisted on their right and capacity to consent on Twitter and in other media reports. “It undermines the serious nature of FGM to in any way compare it to a consensual body piercing. FGM is often carried out on minors by force and clearly without consent,” said Tattoo and Piercing Industry Union (TIPU) spokesman Marcus Henderson. “Most responsible piercers won’t do any intimate piercings on anyone under the age of 18." Most. Douglas Fox, a sex worker and writer, has even argued that the new rules are an attempt to control women’s bodies. 'In these new rules we again see women treated as being incapable of making choices about what she wants for or how she chooses to use or adorn her body,' he wrote. 'It is others making often very judgmental and moral choices about what a woman can or cannot do with her body.' All of the above arguments share a view of the difference between the women who undergo genital piercing/ cosmetic surgery and the women who undergo FGM – i.e. the empowered, autonomous Western woman in control of her body and the unempowered non-Western woman at the mercy of harmful cultural traditions. However, some are unconvinced that there is such a clear difference between those stereotypes. For example, anti-FGM campaigner Leyla Hussein has previously compared labiaplasties to FGM. Writing in Cosmopolitan, she pointed out: 'Considering that we put pressure on girls from a very young age to alter their bodies, I have to wonder if cosmetic surgery is actually a choice, or a result of intense social pressure to conform to this idealised image in order to please men.' In addition, the DoH has claimed that genital piercing is forced upon girls in some communities and studies have also found that over half of women with female genital piercings report using the piercing to reclaim their body after violations such as abuse or non-consensual forced sexual activity. The idea that a woman's consent in all cultures may be informed by societal pressures to look a certain way or by a traumatic experience she has experienced makes the empowered/disempowered dichotomy very problematic. It is to counter this blurring that the WHO has kept its FGM definition broad and the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003 has established legal liability for performing FGM regardless of the consent of the woman involved. But how can a legal or public health definition navigate these dangerous waters of consent versus cultural pressure without resorting to unhelpful double standards between women considered 'empowered' and 'disempowered'? There is no clear answer, but what is clear is that current definitions are getting lost in their own double standards, with genital piercing now defined as a form of FGM and technically criminalised, while the government claims to have no plans to amend the Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003 to include female genital cosmetic surgery. In addition, as Henderson pointed out, the current standards leave us “faced with a situation where men are able to make up their mind and consent to an intimate piercing where women are not.” It is clearly absurd that male consent for genital surgical procedures is considered unproblematic (consider the case for childhood male circumcision as for adult genital piercings) while the female capacity to consent at all ages is called into question, as if only women's consent is blurred by societal pressure. While there is no clear answer to where a person's consent ends and cultural ideals begin, amid the controversy and debate, a working definition of what constitutes genital mutilation does need to be decided upon. Regarding women, it seems that the only common ground everyone agrees upon is that genital alteration for adult women is different to that for underage girls, and that, in the end, may be the only aspect which legislation and public health definitions can be truly clear about. However, in this arena littered with double standards, we cannot make that statement without asking what that means for the circumcision of boys.  |
| Campaign highlights signs of domestic abuse Posted: 24 Mar 2015 04:50 AM PDT
A campaign focussing attention on the signs and symptoms of domestic abuse has been launched by the Welsh government. The "Cross the line" campaign aims to raise awareness of the subtle signs of domestic abuse. Coming only days after the National Assembly for Wales passed landmark legislation to tackle violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence, it asks people to consider where the line between normal behaviour and controlling behaviour is crossed in two different scenarios. Television advertisements started on ITV Wales and S4C on 16 March, and longer, interactive versions of the adverts are being run online. Viewers of the interactive versions can click at the point they feel the behaviour becomes unacceptable. The first scenario sees a man belittling his partner as they sit in a pub. She becomes visibly more upset, and the voice-over invites the audience to judge at which point they think the man has crossed the line between banter and abuse. The second features two friends meeting for dinner in a restaurant. One is distracted by her mobile phone. As her friend witnesses the increasingly frequent contact from the unseen partner, the voice-over again invites the audience to identify where they think the line has been crossed between caring and controlling. Both adverts close with the hashtag #whereistheline and the address of the Live Fear Free website where people can get more information – in English and Welsh – and access the help and support they need. The Minister for Public Services, Leighton Andrews, said: "Domestic abuse comes in many forms and doesn't always result in bruises or broken bones. "Emotional abuse is also domestic abuse and should be seen as such. "The aim of this campaign is to raise awareness of the signs and symptoms of abuse in a relationship, to help victims and their friends and families understand that abuse is not 'normal' behaviour, and to persuade them to get the help and support they need." To view the films, or for more information, visit livefearfree.org.uk. If you think someone you know is in an abusive relationship, the site also outlines some of the typical signs to look out for and suggests how you can help them. You can also call the free, confidential, 24-hour All Wales Domestic Abuse and Sexual Violence Helpline for help or advice: 0808 80 10 800. Don't leave it too late.  |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Women's Views on News To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States | |