Artifact 6
Will Ross

Reflective Tag

While controversial in its own right, male circumcision has proven hygienic benefits that set it apart from FGM. FGM is a useless procedure yet thanks in part to a lack of law enforcement and a culture resistant to change it continues to result in significant side effects and sometimes death due to improper procedure, untrained purveyors, and unsterile instruments. Only through concerted and dedicated attempts to educate the areas with the highest prevalence of FGM can we successfully end this abhorrent practice.

Artifact 6

Male circumcision and its counterpart female genital mutilation refer to specific surgical operations that alter the appearance of specific parts of the reproductive system in both sexes. Circumcision is considered to be the oldest elective surgical procedure, dating back to the times of the Egyptians.

For the Egyptians, male circumcision was seen as a right of passage, a spiritual operation that endowed the patient with greater intellect, but the Egyptians did have an understanding of the hygiene, which played a role in the prevalence of circumcision and its subsequent spread throughout the Arab peninsula. Male circumcision is also featured in not only the Egyptian Book of the Dead but also in the Hebrew bible, the latter of which is responsible for the universal adoption of circumcision within the Jewish community. Although not directly mentioned within the Quran, circumcision is considered to be an essential aspect of the religion and almost all Muslim men are circumcised. This is most likely due to the circumcision of Abraham, who is mentioned repeatedly in the Qu’ran.

Despite research that shows circumcision plays a significant role in reducing STI and STD infection rates, there is a disparity between North American and European countries regarding the prevalence of the procedure. While nearly 79% of males in the United States are circumcised, just 15.8% of British males can say the same. This dates back to the adoption of public healthcare in Britain and the cost-effective reasons behind Britain’s decision to abstain from covering circumcisions. This stems from the ethical debate over whether neonatal circumcision takes the choice away from an infant before they themselves can decide what to do to their own body, with non-religious elective circumcision banned in South Africa and Sweden. Yet there is strong evidence to promote circumcision in African males as a cost-cutting procedure with a recent 2012 study concluding that a $1.5 billion investment in circumcisions in Africa would yield a savings of nearly $16 billion due to the reduction in HIV/AIDS contraction rates that foreskin removal would give way to.

A much more controversial issue is female genital mutilation. With absolutely NO know benefits, it is considered one of the worst medical procedures and is confined almost entirely to the Middle East and Africa. There are three types of FGM. Type I consists of the removal of the clitoris and clitoral hood. Type II consists of Type I plus the removal of the labia minora. Type III consists of Type II but the labia majora is then sewn together, leaving only one small hole for both urine and menstrual discharge.

Despite the passage of laws in many countries where it is common, the most recently being Nigeria, FGM is deeply rooted in both cultural and spiritual traditions. This has led to a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t”-esque situation where its illegality forces practitioners to turn to untrained professionals in non-sterile environments instead of clinics where at the very least semi-professional facilities could be had. Yet the complications associated with it are so severe and the lack of any benefit make it hard to rationalize its legality on solely that basis. The real way any lasting change will come is with increased education of women in the rural settings where it is still performed at a near-universal proportion.