Advertisement

Attaining International Acknowledgment of Male Genital Mutilation as a Human Rights Violation

  • J. Steven Svoboda

Abstract

One of the greatest challenges facing lawyers and other activists advocating a halt to male “circumcision,” or male genital mutilation, is achieving universal agreement that this practice constitutes a human rights violation. A straightforward reading of numerous human rights treaties demonstrates that circumcision constitutes a violation of numerous international agreements. Acknowledgments of this fact have been recorded by scholars, non-governmental organisations, courts, and the United Nations. To date, neither the United Nations nor any other major, internationally recognised human rights agency or non-governmental organisations has initiated any program to pursue the eradication of male genital mutilation. The organisation to which such a campaign must ultimately be addressed is, of course, the United Nations.

Keywords

Male Circumcision Female Genital Mutilation International Council Bodily Integrity Geneva Convention 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    See: Kellner N. Under the knife: female genital mutilation as child abuse. Journal of Juvenile Law 1993;14:118–32.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lightfoot-Klein H. Similarities in attitudes and misconceptions about male and female sexual mutilations. In: Denniston GC, Milos MF, eds. Sexual Mutilations: A Human Tragedy. New York: Plenum Press. 1997:131–5.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Crowley IP, Kesner KM. Ritual circumcision (Umkhwetha) amongst the Xhosa of the Ciskei. Br J Urol 1990;66:318–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chabukswar YV. A barbaric method of circumcision amongst some of the Arab tribes of Yemen. Indian Medial Gazette 1921;56:48–9.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Taylor JR, Lockwood AP, Taylor AJ. The prepuce: specialized mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision. Br J Urol 1996;77:291–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Goldman R. Circumcision: The Hidden Trauma. Boston: Vanguard Publications. 1997:1–56, 82–123.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Toubia N. Female genital mutilation and the responsibility of reproductive health professionals. Int J Gynecol Obstet 1994;46:127–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Toubia N. Female circumcision as a public health issue. N Eng J Med 1994;312:712–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lightfoot-Klein H. The sexual experience and marital adjustment of genitally circumcised and infibulated females in the Sudan. Journal of Sex Research 1989;26:375–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lightfoot-Klein H. Rites of purification and their effects: some psychological aspects of female genital circumcision and infibulation (pharaonic circumcision) in an Afro-Arab Islamic society (Sudan). Journal of Psychology & Human Sexuality 1990:2:79–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Convention on the Rights of the Child. UN GA resolution 44/25, November 20, 1989, Article 2.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Charter of the United Nations, 26 June 1945, Article 1, paragraph 3.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Charter of the United Nations, 26 June 1945, Article 55(c).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Svoboda JS. Routine infant male circumcision: examining the human rights and constitutional issues. In: Denniston GC, Milos MF, eds. Sexual Mutilations: A Human Tragedy. New York: Plenum Press. 1997:204–15.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chessler A. Justifying the unjustifiable: rite v. wrong. Buffalo Law Review 1997;45:555–612. [here, p. 559.]Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tangwa G. Circumcision: an African point of view. In: Denniston GC, Hodges FM, Milos MF, eds. Male and Female Circumcision: Medical, Legal, and Ethical Considerations in Paediatric Practice. New York and London: Plenum Press. 1999: [IN PRESS].Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lightfoot-Klein H. Similarities in attitudes and misconceptions about male and female sexual mutilations. In: Denniston GC, Milos MF, eds. Sexual Mutilations: A Human Tragedy. New York: Plenum Press. 1997:131–5. [here; p. 131.]Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chessler A. Justifying the unjustifiable: rite v. wrong. Buffalo Law Review 1997;45:555–612. [here, p. 559.]Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lightfoot-Klein H. Similarities in attitudes and misconceptions about male and female sexual mutilations. In: Denniston GC, Milos MF, eds. Sexual Mutilations: A Human Tragedy. New York: Plenum Press. 1997:131–5. [here, p. 131.]Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dirir S. Interview. NOHARMM Health & Human Rights Advocate. July 1997.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cited in: Milos MF, Macris D. Circumcision: a medical or a human rights issue? J Nurse Midwifery 1992:37(2 Suppl):87S–96S.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lightfoot-Klein H. Similarities in attitudes and misconceptions about male and female sexual mutilations. In: Denniston GC, Milos MF, eds. Sexual Mutilations: A Human Tragedy. New York: Plenum Press. 1997:131–5. [here, p. 134.]Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lightfoot-Klein H. Similarities in attitudes and misconceptions about male and female sexual mutilations. In: Denniston GC, Milos MF, eds. Sexual Mutilations: A Human Tragedy. New York: Plenum Press. 1997:131–5.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lightfoot-Klein H. Prisoners of Ritual: An Odyssey into Female Genital Circumcision in Africa. Binghamton, New York: Harrington Park Press Inc. 1989:193.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chessler A. Justifying the unjustifiable: rite v. wrong. Buffalo Law Review 1997;45:555–612. [here, p. 559.]Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chessler A. Justifying the unjustifiable: rite v. wrong. Buffalo Law Review 1997;45:555–642. [here, p. 559.]Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Obiora L. Bridges and barricades: rethinking polemics and intransigence in the campaign against female circumcision. Case Western Reserve Law Review 1997;48:275–378. [here, p. 319.1Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pollis A, Schwab P. Human rights: a western construct with limited applicability. In: Pollis A, Schwab P. Human rights: Cultural and Ideological Perspectives I. New York: Praeger Publishers. 1979:1–18.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Donnelly J. Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 1989:49–106.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hosken F. Stop female genital mutilation: women speak, facts, and actions. Lexington, Massachusetts: Women’s International Network News 1995:95.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Hosken F. Stop female genital mutilation: women speak, facts, and actions. Lexington, Massachusetts: Women’s International Network News 1995:95.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    The Decisions of the 1995 [Amnesty] International Council Meeting. Decision 6: Government Inaction and FGM. London: Amnesty International, 1995:15–17. Amnesty International Index ORG 52/01/95.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    See: Svoboda JS. Routine infant male circumcision: examining the human rights and constitutional issues. In: Denniston GC, Milos MF, eds. Sexual Mutilations: A Human Tragedy. New York: Plenum Press. 1997: 204–15. [here, p. 209.]Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Chessler A. Justifying the unjustifiable: rite v. wrong. Buffalo Law Review 1997;45:555–612.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Price C. Male circumcision: an ethical and legal affront. Bull Med Eth 1997;128:3–9.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Van Bueren G. The international protection of family members’ rights as the 21st century approaches. Human Rights Quarterly 1995;17:732–765. [here, p. 755, n. 122.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Zavales A. The International Human Rights Challenge of Genital Mutilation & the United Nations. Sloatsburg, New York: Ecumenics International Press. 1994.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Amnesty International, Northeast Region. Resolutions Packet, Northeast Region, Boston University, March 14, 1992, Resolution VI: Genital Mutilations of Children and Unconsenting Adults.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Lightfoot-Klein H, Milos MF, Prescott JW. Resolutions on Genital Mutilations of Children. Submitted to the 1992 Western Regional Conference of Amnesty International, USA, San Francisco, CA, 14–16 February 1992.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    The Decisions of the 1997 [Amnesty] International Council Meeting. Decision 6: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM). London: Amnesty International. 1997:76–78. Amnesty International Index ORG 52/02/98.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Amnesty International. 1997 ICM Report-Part IV: Statute of Amnesty International (As amended by the 23rd International Council Meeting, Cape Town, South Africa, 12 to 19 December 1997), Article 19. London: Amnesty International, 1998:126–131. Amnesty International Index POL 20/01/98.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Amnesty International Bermuda. Bodily integrity for both the obligation of Amnesty International to recognize all forms of genital mutilation of males as human rights violations. Hamilton, Bermuda: Amnesty International Bermuda, 1998:20.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Amnesty International Bermuda. Bodily integrity for both the obligation of Amnesty International to recognize all forms of genital mutilation of males as human rights violations. Hamilton, Bermuda: Amnesty International Bermuda, 1998:3.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Amnesty International. Bermuda Resolution A3.6, International Council Meeting, Capetown, South Africa, December 1997 (drafted 8 May 1997), at 38.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Amnesty International Bermuda. Bodily integrity for both: the obligation of Amnesty International to recognize all forms of genital mutilation of males as human rights violations. Hamilton, Bermuda: Amnesty International Bermuda, 1998:21.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Amnesty International Bermuda. Bodily integrity for both the obligation of Amnesty International to recognize all forms of genital mutilation of males as human rights violations. Hamilton, Bermuda: Amnesty International Bermuda, 1998.Google Scholar
  47. 48.
    Amnesty International Bermuda. Bodily integrity for both the obligation of Amnesty International to recognize all forms of genital mutilation of males as human rights violations. Hamilton, Bermuda: Amnesty International Bermuda, 1998:15.Google Scholar
  48. 49.
    Fourth Report on War Crimes in the Former Yugoslavia (Part II): Torture of Prisoners. http://www.haverford.edu/relg/sells/reports/4thB.html, downloaded 30 July 1998.
  49. 50.
    Amnesty International Bermuda. Bodily integrity for both: the obligation of Amnesty International to recognize all forms of genital mutilation of males as human rights violations. Hamilton, Bermuda: Amnesty International Bermuda, 1998:15.Google Scholar
  50. 51.
    Commission of Experts’ Final Report, UN Doc. No. S/1994/674 (1994), Web Site http://uwe.ac.uk/facults/ess/comexpert/I-II.htm, downloaded 16 July 1998, at section IV.
  51. 52.
    Commission of Experts’ Final Report, UN Doc. No. S/1994/674 (1994), Web Site http://uwe.ac.uk/facults/ess/comexpert/I-II.htm, downloaded 16 July 1998, at section II.H.3.

References

  1. 1.
    Denniston GC, Milos M. Preface. In: Denniston GC, Milos MF, eds. Sexual Mutilations: A Human Tragedy. New York: Plenum Press 1997:v–vii. [here, p. v.]Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    NOHARMM. Statistics on human genital mutilation. NOHARMM Website, http://www.noharmm.org/HGMstats.htm, downloaded 1 August 1998.
  3. 3.
    NOHARMM. Estimated Worldwide Incidence of Male Circumcision Complications. NOHARMM Website, http://www.noharmm.org/incidenceworld.htm, downloaded 16 September 1998.
  4. 4.
    DeMeo J. The geography of male and female genital mutilation. In: Denniston GC, Milos MF, eds. Sexual Mutilations: A Human Tragedy. New York: Plenum Press 1997:1–11. [here, p. 2.]Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    NOHARMM. Statistics on human genital mutilation. NOHARMM Website, http://www.noharmm.org/HGMstats.htm, downloaded 1 August 1998.
  6. 6.
    DeMeo J. The geography of male and female genital mutilation. In: Denniston GC, Milos MF, eds. Sexual Mutilations: A Human Tragedy. New York: Plenum Press 1997:1–11. [here, p. 4.]Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Prescott JW. Genital pain vs genital pleasure: why the one and not the other? Truth Seeker 1989;1(3):16. [Table l].Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goodman J. Challenging Circumcision: A Jewish perspective on circumcision. In: Denniston GC and Milos MF, eds. Sexual Mutilations: A Human Tragedy. 1997:175–8.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Goodman J. A Jewish perspective on circumcision. In: Denniston GC, Hodges FM, Milos MF, eds Male and Female Circumcision: Medical, Legal, and Ethical Considerations in Paediatric Practice. New York and London: Plenum Press 1999:179–82.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zoossmann-Diskin A. Challenges to circumcision in Israel: The Israeli Association against Genital Mutilation. In: Denniston GC, Hodges FM, Milos MF, eds Male and Female Circumcision: Medical, Legal, and Ethical Considerations in Paediatric Practice. New York and London: Plenum Press. 1999: 343–50.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Goldman R. Questioning Circumcision: A Jewish Perspective. Boston: Vanguard Publications 1998.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pollack M. Redefining the sacred. In: Denniston GC, Milos M, eds Sexual Mutilations: A Human Tragedy. New York: Plenum Press 1997:163–72.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pollack M. Circumcision: a Jewish feminist perspective. In: Weiner K, Moon A, eds. Jewish Women Speak Out: Expanding the Boundaries of Psychology. Seattle: Canopy Press 1995:181.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Aldeeb Abu-Sahlieh SA. Muslims’ genitalia in the hands of the clergy: religious arguments about male and female mutilations. In: Denniston GC, Hodges FM, Milos MF, eds. Male and Female Circumcision: Medical, Legal, and Ethical Considerations in Paediatric Practice. New York and London: Plenum Press 1999:131–71.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Aldeeb Abu-Sahlieh SA. To mutilate in the name of Jehovah or Allah: legitimization of male and female circumcision. Amsterdam: Middle East Research Associates 1994.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    AI-Mahdawi MK. Al-Bayan bil-Qur’an. [The Proof by the Koran].Casablanca: Dar al-afaq al-jadidah. 1990.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Taylor JR, Lockwood AP, Taylor AJ. The prepuce: specialized mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision. Br J Urol 1996;77:291–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Winkelmann RK. The erogenous zones: their nerve supply and significance. Proc Mayo Clin 1959:34:39–47.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Winkehann RK. The mucocutaneous end-organ. Arch Dermatol 1957;76:225–35.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bazett HT, McGlone B, Williams RG, Lufkin HM. Depth, distribution, and probable identification in the prepuce of sensory end-organs concerned in sensations of temperature; thermometric conductivity. Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry 1932;27:484–515.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    De Girolano A, Cecio A. Contributo alla conoscenza dell’innervazione sensitiva del prepuzio nell’uomo. Bollettino della Societa Italiana de Biologia Sperimenta1 1968;44:1521–2.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    NOHAMM. Awakenings A Preliminary Poll of Circumcised Men: Revealing the Long-Term Harm and Healing the Wounds of Infant Circumcision. San Francisco: NOHARMM. 1994.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wallerstein E. Circumcision: An American Health Fallacy. New York: Springer. 1980:148.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kaplan G. Complications of circumcision. Urol Clin North Am 1983;10:543–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Goldman R. Circumcision: The Hidden Trauma. Boston: Vanguard Publications. 1997:1–56, 82–123.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cansever G. Psychological effects of circumcision. Br J Med Psycho1 1965;38:321–31.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Richard MPM, Bema1 JF, Brackbill Y. Early behavioral differences: gender or circumcision? Dev Psychobiol 1976;9:89–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Anand KJS, Hickey PR. Pain and its effects in the human neonate and fetus. N Engl J Med 1987;317:1321–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gunnar MR, Malone S, Vance G, Fisch RO. Coping with aversive stimulation in the neonatal period: quiet sleep and plasma cortisol levels during recovery from circumcision. Child Dev 1985;56:824–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Williamson PS, Evans ND. Neonatal cortisol response to circumcision with anesthesia. Clin Pediatr Phila 1986;25:412–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Crowley IP, Kesner KM. Ritual circumcision (Umkhwetha) amongst the Xhosa of the Ciskei. Br J Urol 1990;66:318–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Crowley IP, Kesner KM. Ritual circumcision (Umkhwetha) amongst the Xhosa of the Ciskei. Br J Urol 1990;66:318–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Crowley P, Kesner KM. Ritual circumcision (Umkhwetha) amongst the Xhosa of the Ciskei. Br J Urol 1990;66:318–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Amnesty International Bermuda. Bodily Integrity for Both?: A Proposal for the Removal of Sex/Gender Distinction from the Human Rights violation of Genital Mutilation. Hamilton, Bermuda: Amnesty International Bermuda. 1997:4.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic / Plenum Publishers, New York 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Steven Svoboda

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations