Subject: Re: On interracial relationships, or anything
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 1998 14:09:58 GMT

Angelfly72@aol.com wrote:
(( cuts ))
:  So she is still "useful". But she is cannot experience the true joy of
: being a woman, or having all of her sexual functions available to her. The
: rationale that I heard given at the Pan African conference was that with the
: clitoris in place, a woman's sexual drive and desires would drive her
: attention away from her family. So for the safety and protection of the
: family, a woman (girl, actually since it takes place at the onset of puberty)
: must have her clitoris cut off. This might be a cultural tradition in some
: African societies and this rationale might not make sense to me, but I still
                                       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: call it an oppressive practice in the most vile way. I hope that in the coming
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
: years that the conciousness of the planet will raise so that this will never
: happen to another woman.

If you don't understand it, how can you call it an
oppressive practice?  I can understand your opposition
to it, and I might even support you in your opposition
to it, but I do not think that the case has been 
made that it is oppressive (ie. an instrument of male
domination) either in intent or in effect.  There might
even be some support for the proposition that societies
that do not practice circumcision see more family
breakdown, and more homosexuality.  (I throw that last
bit in because I seem vaguely to remember reading or
hearing somewhere that circumcision  is intended to remove 
the female aspect of the male (the prepuce), and the
male aspect of the female (the clitoris)).  Something
to think about.

:                                                        Angela D. Shortt
: "Winning and losing, both are confusing." Bret "The Hitman" Hart


	 

Contents | Previous | Next