When the MPs are ashamed!
von Avin Ibrahim Fattah
Female genital cutting (FGC), also known as female genital mutilation (FGM) refers to all procedures to remove the most sensitive external female genital organs for cultural reasons. As a result, she will never be familiar with that feeling which the removed part gives her.
All the factors behind this norm intended to restrain her and today it is carried out for taking possession of female. It is practiced in the name of a religious norm for upholding (purity and virtue) of the feminine, even though, clerics are in divergence upon it.
The differences in female genital cutting of the past from now are: - Those of past who devised the norm were ignorant about the fact that despite killing the female sexual desire, it will have health risks in terms of both psychological and physical aspects. At that time the humane sciences were not so developed as today's, those who allow this practice and even carry out know the fact pretty well, yet they insist on maintaining and pursuing the norm.
- When the humane sciences were not as developed as those of today, the authorities of that time were not aware of the principles of human rights, social justice and the equality between men and women. That is to say, if the norm emerged in gloomy circumstances of the past, nowadays practicing of the norm is a crime in a deliberate manner because a normal human is forcibly disabled.
The German Wadi organization issued a survey regarding female genital cutting on 792008 in Hawlati newspaper and republished on 1592008 in Rudaw newspaper indicating that generally 62 percent of women face female genital cutting in Kurdistan and in some areas the rate hits 100 percent.
Both newspapers hold true that the proposed law for banning female genital mutilation has kept untouched in the Kurdistan region parliament for almost one year. Citing from a Kurdish lawmaker, the male lawmakers are embarrassed to discuss the law! That is, the Kurdistan region parliament, the only legislative source in the region, is embarrassed to criminalize the physical disabling of more than half of the society (women). They bear resemblance to those living thousands years ago. (If the female sexual desire machine is not quelled, woman turns to a defiant monster!) They are convinced that if a female lives as a normal human being, she will be a risk to herself and her society too.
Kurdistan region parliament believes that the Kurdish women deserve to be disabled, that is why it mutely legitimizes physical disabling of women.
From the sociological perspective, gender divisions establish the personal identity of individuals, any change in the identity will emerge a deep fear, and thus, humans react to the opposite in the most violent way. That is to say, they resort to violence for fearing of losing identity. For instance, when a boy imitates a girl in his behavior, he seems to odd and disgusting, and the social power will make him be a (man) either through mocking or killing him, the opposite holds true for women, namely, extreme fear of losing the identity makes the conditions look odd and disgusting, hence the violence resembles a mechanism for self defense.
In other words, this (embarrassment) of the men in the parliament about this issue is not that of passive (feminine) embarrassment , they are terrified of the notion that women no longer accept the identity of being an instrument for pleasure, and this will put the identity of (man) at risk. Woman seeks to depict her new gender and humane identity, therefore; she is confronted with the most violent means. The aggression lies in our culture when embarrassment is the weapon for women to survive in the society, whereas it is turned to be a weapon for eradicating one of her rights.
If this is not the case, had the men in parliament known shame, they would not have been embarrassed of the law for criminalizing the physical disabling of the little girls. They should have been embarrassed when Kurds were called women murderers in the developed countries.
© Kurdistani Nwe, 28.10.2008