Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 7-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

A Rose by Any Other Name? Rethinking the Similarities and Differences between Male and Female Genital Cutting

A Rose by Any Other Name? Rethinking the Similarities and Differences between Male and Female... In this article, we offer a critical examination of the tendency to segregate discussion of surgical alterations to the male and female genitals into separate compartments—the first known as circumcision, the second as genital mutilation. We argue that this fundamental problem of definition underlies the considerable controversy surrounding these procedures when carried out on minors, and that it hinders objective discussion of the alleged benefits, harms, and risks. We explore the variable effects of male and female genital surgeries, and we propose a scale of damage for male circumcision to complement the World Health Organization's categorization of female genital mutilation. The origins of the double standard identified are placed in historical perspective, and in a brief conclusion we make a plea for greater gender neutrality in the approach to this contentious issue. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Medical Anthropology Quarterly Wiley

A Rose by Any Other Name? Rethinking the Similarities and Differences between Male and Female Genital Cutting

Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/a-rose-by-any-other-name-rethinking-the-similarities-and-differences-Vqfx3Ejyoy

References (92)

Publisher
Wiley
Copyright
Copyright © 2007 Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company
ISSN
0745-5194
eISSN
1548-1387
DOI
10.1525/maq.2007.21.3.301
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

In this article, we offer a critical examination of the tendency to segregate discussion of surgical alterations to the male and female genitals into separate compartments—the first known as circumcision, the second as genital mutilation. We argue that this fundamental problem of definition underlies the considerable controversy surrounding these procedures when carried out on minors, and that it hinders objective discussion of the alleged benefits, harms, and risks. We explore the variable effects of male and female genital surgeries, and we propose a scale of damage for male circumcision to complement the World Health Organization's categorization of female genital mutilation. The origins of the double standard identified are placed in historical perspective, and in a brief conclusion we make a plea for greater gender neutrality in the approach to this contentious issue.

Journal

Medical Anthropology QuarterlyWiley

Published: Sep 1, 2007

There are no references for this article.