I know this might be a "weird" or maybe uncomfortable topic for some people, but it was something we covered in my anthropology course. We discussed the practice of female genital mutilation, and if it was a human rights issue, or an issue of freedom of religion. My class is mainly one of women (because it is an anthropology of women course) but there are a few men as well-- one of them raised an interesting point. Why is male circumcision a non-issue in this country, yet female circumcision is seen as a barbaric and unnecessary bodily modification. The argument was made that the same thing could be said about males in this country. It did cause a little argument in the class because some said that the process was much less painful for boys, it was generally not something they could remember, and that it was truly unnecessary for girls.
Well, I found an article today that deals with this exact argument, and it has to do the human rights issues surrounding boys and the rights they have over their bodies. Link
I think this is relevant because should the government have a say in this issue? Or is this up to the parents to decide? Is this a first amendment rights violation?
No comments:
Post a Comment