Talk:Female genital mutilation: Difference between revisions
Update Gender and Sexuality in Chinese Literature assignment details |
→Health Benefits: new section |
||
Line 111: | Line 111: | ||
Source about Russia's first trial on FGM: "''Zarema filed criminal charges, and the doctor who allegedly performed the operation is now on trial in a court in Magas. Proceedings against pediatric gynecologist Izanya Nalgiyeva began in December 2019 and have now restarted after being suspended because of coronavirus lockdown measures. Nalgiyeva is being tried for actual bodily harm, which means she could face a fine but not a prison sentence.''" [https://www.dw.com/en/russia-female-genital-mutilation/a-54134124] [[Special:Contributions/2A02:2F01:5EFF:FFFF:0:0:50C:DD10|2A02:2F01:5EFF:FFFF:0:0:50C:DD10]] ([[User talk:2A02:2F01:5EFF:FFFF:0:0:50C:DD10|talk]]) 22:05, 28 November 2020 (UTC) |
Source about Russia's first trial on FGM: "''Zarema filed criminal charges, and the doctor who allegedly performed the operation is now on trial in a court in Magas. Proceedings against pediatric gynecologist Izanya Nalgiyeva began in December 2019 and have now restarted after being suspended because of coronavirus lockdown measures. Nalgiyeva is being tried for actual bodily harm, which means she could face a fine but not a prison sentence.''" [https://www.dw.com/en/russia-female-genital-mutilation/a-54134124] [[Special:Contributions/2A02:2F01:5EFF:FFFF:0:0:50C:DD10|2A02:2F01:5EFF:FFFF:0:0:50C:DD10]] ([[User talk:2A02:2F01:5EFF:FFFF:0:0:50C:DD10|talk]]) 22:05, 28 November 2020 (UTC) |
||
== Health Benefits == |
|||
The claim that female genital mutilation has no health benefits does not appear to be supported by the medical literature. For example, some academic sources have noted in journals such as Medical Anthropology Quarterly and Journal of Medical Ethics benefits such as: "...lower risk of vaginal cancer and AIDS, less nervous anxiety, fewer infections “from microbes gathering under the head of the clitoris” [and] protection against herpes and genital ulcers’" |
|||
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17937251/ |
|||
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348321843_Male_or_Female_Genital_Cutting_Why_'Health_Benefits'_Are_Morally_Irrelevant |
|||
It makes sense that if you cut off tissue, you will lower your risk of getting cancer in that area, and similarly, that you will be less likely to get infections. |
|||
Similarly, some studies have noted a reduction of risk in HIV: |
|||
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265824402_Female_Circumcision_and_HIV_Infection_in_Tanzania_for_Better_or_for_Worse |
|||
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17642409/ |
|||
https://quillette.com/2017/08/15/female-genital-mutilation-health-benefits-problem-medicalizing-morality/ |
|||
This is not to minimize the harm of FGM as it is a severe bioethical violation and human rights abuse but it is inaccurate to claim that the practice has no health benefit, as any removal of body parts could be considered 'beneficial' in terms of health. As said earlier, tissue that has been excised can no longer host a cancer, become infected, or pose any other problem to its erstwhile owner. But as the bioethicist Eike-Henner Kluge has noted, if this logic were accepted more generally, “all sorts of medical conditions would be implicated” and we would find ourselves “operating non-stop on just about every part of the human body.” |
|||
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1336952/ |
|||
[[User:Dashoopa|Dashoopa]] ([[User talk:Dashoopa|talk]]) 19:06, 23 March 2021 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:06, 23 March 2021
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Female genital mutilation article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17Auto-archiving period: 60 days |
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which is a contentious topic. Please consult the procedures and edit carefully. |
The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to gender-related disputes or controversies or people associated with them, which is a contentious topic. Please consult the procedures and edit carefully. |
The subject of this article is controversial and content may be in dispute. When updating the article, be bold, but not reckless. Feel free to try to improve the article, but don't take it personally if your changes are reversed; instead, come here to the talk page to discuss them. Content must be written from a neutral point of view. Include citations when adding content and consider tagging or removing unsourced information. |
This article has been viewed enough times in a single week to appear in the Top 25 Report. The week in which this happened:
|
This article is written in Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
Female genital mutilation is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on February 6, 2015. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Female genital mutilation.
|
This article has previously been nominated to be moved.
|
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Female genital mutilation article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17Auto-archiving period: 60 days |
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 4 January 2019 and 17 April 2019. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): KPeprah112 (article contribs).
Toolbox |
---|
Rooted in
Hi, the lede states that "The practice is rooted in gender inequality, attempts to control women's sexuality, and ideas about purity, modesty and beauty", but I can't find that treated in the article; iow., that sentence does not seem to do any job re summarizing the article. Surely there must be something in the sources? T 88.89.219.99 (talk) 02:49, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- The entire article and its sources are pretty much the source for that sentence. SarahSV (talk) 03:11, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
- Hi, thx for your answer. Maybe I'm taking "summarizing" too literally ...? The ideas of purity etc. occur several places is the article, but if you read it looking for gender inequality or control of sexuality, you never get to the "ah, there it is"-point; iow, it might have been made more explicit. What made me ask the question was actually that the article describes mainly women as those who uphold the practice and value of it. To a literal mind (...) that would seem as if women attempt to control women's sexuality, etc. To me, that seems a bit muddled, somehow; or at least it makes the article open to such a "literal reading", and I suspect that wasn't the intention. But anyhow, that's just me; if things are considered ok as-is, then fine by me. Just thought I'd mention it. T 88.89.219.99 (talk) 03:51, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
Female Genital mutilation
How many countries still practice this exercise? How many different religions require this? 67.234.7.138 (talk) 21:44, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
People's Personal Experience
Have you thought about looking at more research on how women feel about what happened to them? How they felt when it happened, after, and years after? Heather98psu (talk) 17:02, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
- That is not really suitable for an encyclopedic article. Something might be added if there were a very reliable source that drew certain conclusions from research into people's personal experiences, but simply listing some examples would be original research due to cherry picking. Johnuniq (talk) 00:18, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Somalia on the map (FGM is banned)
The constitution of Somalia bans FGM.[1] It is possible to prosecute FGM under general provision of the law, so Somalia should be light green on the map (general criminal provision that might be used to prosecute FGM); here is a link about an (attempted) prosecution (problem with the prosecution was lack of cooperation from parents, not lack of legislative means). According to source: "Somalia does not have a law against FGM, but a senior CID officer interviewed in the film warned parents that it was still illegal. Legal experts say prosecutions could be brought under the Penal Code, which makes it an offence to cause hurt to another."[2] 2A02:2F01:5EFF:FFFF:0:0:50C:DD10 (talk) 21:45, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
Russia
Russia should also be light green on the map:
Source about Russia's first trial on FGM: "Zarema filed criminal charges, and the doctor who allegedly performed the operation is now on trial in a court in Magas. Proceedings against pediatric gynecologist Izanya Nalgiyeva began in December 2019 and have now restarted after being suspended because of coronavirus lockdown measures. Nalgiyeva is being tried for actual bodily harm, which means she could face a fine but not a prison sentence." [3] 2A02:2F01:5EFF:FFFF:0:0:50C:DD10 (talk) 22:05, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
Health Benefits
The claim that female genital mutilation has no health benefits does not appear to be supported by the medical literature. For example, some academic sources have noted in journals such as Medical Anthropology Quarterly and Journal of Medical Ethics benefits such as: "...lower risk of vaginal cancer and AIDS, less nervous anxiety, fewer infections “from microbes gathering under the head of the clitoris” [and] protection against herpes and genital ulcers’"
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17937251/ https://www.researchgate.net/publication/348321843_Male_or_Female_Genital_Cutting_Why_'Health_Benefits'_Are_Morally_Irrelevant
It makes sense that if you cut off tissue, you will lower your risk of getting cancer in that area, and similarly, that you will be less likely to get infections.
Similarly, some studies have noted a reduction of risk in HIV:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265824402_Female_Circumcision_and_HIV_Infection_in_Tanzania_for_Better_or_for_Worse https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17642409/ https://quillette.com/2017/08/15/female-genital-mutilation-health-benefits-problem-medicalizing-morality/
This is not to minimize the harm of FGM as it is a severe bioethical violation and human rights abuse but it is inaccurate to claim that the practice has no health benefit, as any removal of body parts could be considered 'beneficial' in terms of health. As said earlier, tissue that has been excised can no longer host a cancer, become infected, or pose any other problem to its erstwhile owner. But as the bioethicist Eike-Henner Kluge has noted, if this logic were accepted more generally, “all sorts of medical conditions would be implicated” and we would find ourselves “operating non-stop on just about every part of the human body.”
- Wikipedia controversial topics
- Pages in the Wikipedia Top 25 Report
- Wikipedia articles that use Canadian English
- Wikipedia featured articles
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page
- Featured articles that have appeared on the main page once
- Old requests for peer review
- FA-Class Anthropology articles
- High-importance Anthropology articles
- FA-Class Ethnic groups articles
- Mid-importance Ethnic groups articles
- WikiProject Ethnic groups articles
- FA-Class Feminism articles
- Mid-importance Feminism articles
- WikiProject Feminism articles
- FA-Class Gender studies articles
- Unknown-importance Gender studies articles
- WikiProject Gender studies articles
- FA-Class Human rights articles
- Mid-importance Human rights articles
- WikiProject Human rights articles
- FA-Class medicine articles
- Mid-importance medicine articles
- FA-Class WikiProject Medicine Translation Task Force articles
- High-importance WikiProject Medicine Translation Task Force articles
- WikiProject Medicine Translation Task Force articles
- All WikiProject Medicine articles
- FA-Class Sexology and sexuality articles
- Mid-importance Sexology and sexuality articles
- WikiProject Sexology and sexuality articles
- FA-Class Women's History articles
- Mid-importance Women's History articles
- All WikiProject Women-related pages
- WikiProject Women's History articles
- FA-Class sanitation articles
- Low-importance sanitation articles
- WikiProject Sanitation articles
- FA-Class women's health articles
- Top-importance women's health articles
- WikiProject Women's Health articles