A: The American Academy of Pediatricians’ statement on female genital mutilation (FGM). The AAP now, shockingly, advocates “the ritual nick” as a compromise position between that of Western civilization, which safeguards girls from such barbarism, and that of the Third World, largely but not exclusively Muslim, communities, that practice such barbarism on girls.
It’s called losing out civilization, one nick at a time.
From the AAP statement (which, in calling female genital mutilation (FGM) female genital cutting (FGC) is already neutralizing the practice):
Most forms of FGC are decidedly harmful, and pediatricians should declineto perform them, even in the absence of any legal constraints.However, the ritual nick suggested by some pediatricians isnot physically harmful and is much less extensive than routinenewborn male genital cutting. There is reason to believe thatoffering such a compromise may build trust between hospitalsand immigrant communities, save some girls from undergoing disfiguringand life-threatening procedures in their native countries, andplay a role in the eventual eradication of FGC.
When the door opens a little, it only tends to open more, not to slam shut.
It might bemore effective if federal and state laws enabled pediatriciansto reach out to families by offering a ritual nick as a possiblecompromise to avoid greater harm. Efforts should be made to use all available educational andcounseling resources to dissuade parents from seeking a ritual genital procedure for their daughter. For circumstances in whichan infant, child, or adolescent seems to be at risk ofFGC,the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that its memberseducate and counsel the family about the detrimental healtheffects of FGC. Parents should be reminded that performing FGCis illegal and constitutes child abuse in the United States.
But a little nick wouldn’t hurt …
Oh, for a General Napier to make the simple case that we just don’t do that, that our culture doesn’t permit such misogynous brutality. As Mark Steyn recounted in “America Alone,” when Hindu leaders in India complained to Napier about the British ban on suttee, the Hindu custom on burning widows alive on their husbands’ funeral pyres, Napier is said to have replied:
You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will folllow ours.
Gen. Sir Charles James Napier, 1782-1853
Have PoliticalMavens.com delivered to your inbox in a daily digest by clicking here