After reading this, one is probably thinking, “Somebody should do something. Why is this allowed? What parents would allow their child to go through this?” The answer is quite simple. FGM and MGM are primarily cultural practices. It defines members of these cultures, which have many justifications. In these societies, a girl cannot be considered to be an adult or woman until she ahs undergone this procedure. She cannot marry without it and is referred to as “unclean”. She is considered a danger and “…ultimately fatal to a man if her clitoris touches her penis…” (FGM Network) It is a common belief that a woman’s clitoris is deadly to touch and if it is touched by a man during intercourse or by the baby during birth, it will prove immediately fatal to them. More justifications are “… [It brings] family honor, cleanliness, insurance of virginity and faithfulness to the husband.” (Schroeder, 1994, p. 739-740) A boy is not considered a man until he is circumcised. During the 19th Century, their rationalization for these types of mutilations is that it is the cure for masturbation. (Lightfoot-Klein, 1998, p. 289) In the case of males, “…apprehensions about masturbation were endangered by a widespread assumption that the loss of semen endangered the brain and nervous system…Since loss of semen was considered a real danger to males, then it followed that nocturnal emissions were equally hazardous. To solve both of these problems, a whole array of mechanical and medical advances were constructed.” (Lightfoot-Klein, 1998, p. 291) Circumcision was one of the advances. They believed that masturbation was very injudicious to the health of both males and females. “‘Hopeless insanity’ was one of the many consequences of masturbation and that the child of a masturbator was liable to hereditary insanity.” (Jones, 1889, p. 170-171) These justifications for mutilation are all part of their customs.

Not too long ago, there was much talk about the United Nations, the United States and international agencies, such as World Health Organization (WHO) and UNICEF, and whether or not they have a right or the authority to demand a ban on female and male circumcisions. It is not difficult to see why so many people can be outraged by FGM and MGM. Those who campaign against it attack the practice as “…brutal, a violation of human rights and the dignity to men and women.” (Living Marxism, 1994, p. 5) By the looks of it, it is hard to disagree. Everyone is quick to say, “This is wrong. We cannot allow this to persist. This is barbaric!” Morally, I believe this type of procedure should not be allowed. However, who am I to say that this is wrong, for the simple fact that I am not from their countries and I do not share their same customs? How can one say that this is immoral when we, people living in the United States, are unfamiliar with the values of the societies where male and female circumcisions are practiced? Why should these agencies impose on a ban when they advocate from afar? These people who are part of these campaigns have no say in whether or not these techniques should be banned, due to the fact that they do not share the same customs. They cannot rela

Some topics in this essay:
FGM Network, African Islamic, FGM MGM, Living Marxism, Mitzvah Jewish, African Nigerian, Human Rights, Middle East, United Nations, Middle Eastern, fgm mgm, female circumcision, fgm network, male circumcision, ellis 1998, united nations, girls boys, female male, violation human rights, culture imagine, nigerian cultures, world health organization, female male genital, living marxism 1994, male genital mutilation,