Clitoridectomy: Repressive or Empowering?
While doing research on the Sande, a secret society of women in Africa dating back to at least the 1600s, I came across something interesting – the idea that the practice of clitoridectomy could be a source of female bonding and empowerment.
Clitoridectomy is the surgical removal of the clitoris and sometimes parts of the labia as well; also known as female circumcision and female genital mutilation. Not to be confused with infibulation, which is when the vulva is sewn together, leaving only a small opening to pee from, to ensure a girl remains a virgin before marriage (although clitoridectomies are typically preformed with infibulations).
From Susan Sered’s Priestess, Mother, Sacred Sister: Religions Dominated by Women:
According to [Carol] MacCormack, the gender ideology taught by Sande stresses sex distinction (women and men are clearly different), respect for women’s bodies, dependence on fellow women, preserving women’s secret knowledge and power, and a cultural rather than a purely biological understanding of fertility. Sande training stresses their value as women to society. ‘In this institutional setting women dramatically pass on a strong, positive self-image to other women’ (MacCormack 1977, 98).
Sered goes on to explain MacCormack’s interpretation of all this. That the Sande women see a clitoris as being too much like a penis, thus they remove it to make the girl more feminine, to make her “totally female.” This “shared pain and risk of death from infection” also acts as a bonding moment between the newly matured women and their elder counterparts. A sort of support group mentality, if you will.
Now stripping myself of all my biases and beliefs and taking a truly objective view, I can see where they’re coming from. Strictly defining the different genders is something people have been doing for a very long time. Unfortunately, society abhors grey areas because they’re too difficult to govern for. Things need to either be something, or not being something so that rule can be established and carried out. The complexity and codependence of individuals and society on each other has led to many people holding this black and white view on many other things as well, certainly including gender. So these women, who believe that definite femininity equates to fertility and maturity, are in fact trying to secure the success and happiness of their daughters with ritualized clitoridectomy.
Am I saying I’m going to remove my daughter’s clitoris when she hits puberty? Oh hell no. In my personal experience and belief system, a clitoris is no deterrent to fertility or happiness. But different cultures believe differently, and our own culture is certainly no stranger to altering one’s body in order to fit societal ideals of what’s feminine. We’re not even strangers to risking our lives for an ideal of beauty – just check out the numbers on and horror stories of Americans who travel out of country for cheap plastic surgery.
Source: Sered, Susan. Priestess, Mother, Sacred Sister: Religions Dominated by Women. Oxford Universtiy Press US. New York, New York. 1996.
1recorta
wrote on 18 November 2009 at 14:35
I’ve heard about this pov from friends who’ve done research on the ground re: “fgm”, but this sounds like an interesting book!
2Melissa
wrote on 18 November 2009 at 22:15
I read a book in grad school about this (the name of the book is completely escaping me right now, my apologies). It was a collection of oral histories from different generations of women in the village, and a lot of the women were very adamant about how womanly they felt after having the procedure done. This was mostly prevalent with the older generations, but while there were several women who were just as adamantly opposed to the procedure (or putting their daughters through the procedure), there were just as many (if not more) women who were very proud of having experienced it.
3Andrea
wrote on 19 November 2009 at 13:03
I’ve done research into FGM/FGC and although I acknowledge my western perspective, I still don’t support the practice. Putting the health of a girl at risk shouldn’t be a bonding experience. There are many many other ways to create a bond among women that will not lead to infection, birthing problems and painful/unpleasurable sexual experience.
4Helene
wrote on 19 November 2009 at 16:07
I can understand how this surgery can make you more “feminin”. Without a functioning clitoris a woman will be dependent of man, and only an object for penetration. Maybe also a good way to decrease homosexual practise among women.
I don’t want to be feminine, if that means always being a dependent, recieving and passive creature. Its okay if thats what some women prefer, but these operations are DANGEROUS and wrong. Wrong because no parent should have the right to change their childs body, and because human has the right to sexual freedom. Wrong because no human need to fear their sexuality
5freewomyn
wrote on 19 November 2009 at 19:24
Great topic, Manda. I think that this is a tricky subject for Western feminists to unpack.
First of all, there are different types of clitorectomy, but the Western media sensationalizes the issue by focusing on only the most extreme forms.
Secondly, measures by governments to outlaw the practice in many countries have only pushed the practice underground, making it more dangerous.
Third, the concept of clitorectomy can be empowering because in many sociities where it is practiced, there are coming of age ceremonies that accompany the practice. I think it was in Kenya where grassroots women’s groups started a movement to practice “cutting without words,” where the coming of age ceremonies would still be performed without actually cutting the clitoris.
I’d really recommend the book “Cutting the Rose,” by Efua Dorkenoo. She does a good job of providing a very nuanced view of clitorectomies throughout several African countries. It totally changed my point of view.
6Manda
wrote on 20 November 2009 at 5:55
Helene, it’s all in perspective. The typical Western feminist point of view is to celebrate and appreciate our bodies just the way they are. Other cultures have different opinions. Yes, some places where clitoridectomy is practiced it is used as a means of oppression and controlling a woman’s sexuality (in that instance it’s also practiced with infibulation, which is known to make sex always painful for the woman).
But there are other places where that’s not the case. The Sande women (this society spans several African countries) believe that removing the clitoris actually makes them less dependent on men, because they think it makes them less masculine. I highly recommend Sered’s book; it has an excellent section on the Sande and section on their ritual clitoridectomies.
Freewomyn, I’ll definitely check out that book!
7Alan
wrote on 12 December 2009 at 10:25
Super. All we need is another example of how women are women’s worst enemy. Since i take a dim view of anything that smacks of slavery, I recoil from the idea that putting a bag over one’s body and/or having a whole organ removed for psychosocial “traditional” reasons could possibly be of benefit to anyone. As a sentient male, I am programmed to protect and nuture the vessels of human civilisation ( that would be you gals ). Get a frickin’ grip.