Last week I gave birth to my second child – another beautiful daughter.  Like most new mothers, in between the very physical challenge of adjusting back to sleepless nights and the many other wonderful changes wreaked upon the body, I was during a quiet moment filled with a sense of great hope and optimism for her future.

Masai and Kipsigis school girls wait to join an Anti-Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) run in Kenya. Pic: AP (File)

I am thrilled that the opportunities that lie available to my daughters (and I am also blessed to have 2 step-daughters) are vastly more varied than the choices their grandmothers had.  The world has evolved so much, in terms of what women can achieve – even just in the past 40 years.

Yet for all the advancement of women in our nation, the same week that I gave birth, there were calls to allow Australian doctors to perform a form of female genital mutilation (FGM), citing “cultural reasons” as a mantra for tolerating this barbaric practice.

I find it hard to believe that I gave birth to a daughter in an Australia where we would even be entertaining debate about such an issue.  I find it hard to accept that the notion of “cultural tolerance” has a much higher premium in some circles than even basic human rights.

Have we really become so timid about casting a critical eye on the practices of other so-called cultures that we could become apologists for such a pointless, brutal and frankly, entirely sexist practice?  And where are all the traditional feminists on this issue?

New migrants to this nation bring with them a rich cultural background. But I firmly believe we must be vigilant to ensure that, where such an obvious clash occurs between their culture and the ideals we hold dear, then Australian values must prevail.  Pure and simple.

I am an Australian-born child of Greek migrants myself.  I know that in the strong traditional Greek culture that existed in many similar families, girl-children were not always afforded the same educational and social opportunities as male heirs.

That their daughters could complete a degree in law or be elected to the Federal Parliament would not have even entered the minds of many Greek migrant parents in the late 60s or early 70’s. 

Yet these were the opportunities that being born into the “fair go” culture of Australia afforded me. 

These are opportunities that, even if some don’t yet realise it fully, most migrant parents coming to this nation dearly want for their children.  That is why people make the choice to begin a new life here – the opportunities that our way of life presents.

And while we welcome those aspects of any migrant’s culture that enrich our nation, we must categorically reject any aspect that diminishes our existing rights and freedoms. 

That includes not just female genital mutilation – but also honour killings, forced arranged marriages, under-age marriage and any other form of “culture” that is implicitly violent, not to mention entirely sexist in its nature.

I get the harm minimisation argument – but it is so entirely flawed.  Any action that implies tolerance of such a barbaric practice fosters its continuation.  What we need is to assert that such practices are not tolerated in our nation – whether carried out in the name of “tradition”, “culture” or anything else.

Those who chose to live here must obey the rules we have in place – and, whether we have explicit laws outlawing FGM or not (in fact, in the nineties most states did enact specific laws) - as criminal law stands, the violent act of cutting or piercing a young girls clitoris is well and truly child-abuse of a terrible kind.

And as for the excuse proffered for doing so – it’s not medical, nor is it even religious – it’s a “cultural thing”.

Of course, it used to be part of our own western culture that women were strapped into chastity belts and their choices did not extend to even voting, let alone working or being elected to Parliament.  “Traditions” we have rightly abandoned.

Our culture has evolved to recognise the basic human rights of women – and it’s essential that all cultures do.  We should demand nothing less.

While I sympathise with the feminist struggle to have more women on boards and address the pay-gap inequity, the priority of modern feminism must be to ensure that women around the world are not violently subjugated in the name of culture or religion.

Because there is a real chance in today’s culture of political correctness, that western nations will become too afraid of being labelled “intolerant” to voice opposition to such atrocities against women.

As I gaze at the cherubic face of my baby daughter, I can’t help wondering about the other baby girls throughout the world who will not enjoy the freedom and choices that she has as her birthright.

82 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • NoWay says:

      01:28pm | 11/06/10

      Here here. Such a practice has no place in ours or any other civilised culture. It is barbaric, not ‘cultural’, and perpetrators should be prosecuted as child abusers.

    • H of SA says:

      01:28pm | 11/06/10

      In my work I am a mandatory notifier.

      Sophie and I both know that genital mutilation is child abuse in Australia and no one is seriously enteraining the idea.

      Sophie is using fear of a cultural practice which is illegal in Australia to frighten us about immigration.

      I want to put this very plainly to the punch, and I want you to understand this is not the normal hyperbole comments you will get on a blog. I say this with calm and consideration.

      This article is irresponsible and its appearance on the site is the single worst moment in the Punch’s history.

      While I have some sympathy for the Punch in wanting to defend people’s rights to say whatever they like, be it irresponsible or not, I am still deeply sadenned by the lack of editorial responsibility. I will not be reading the punch for the next month as a peacful, and I’m sure not particularly harmful to their revenue - protest. I politely request this post not be censored, but understand if you make this decision. Happy weekend all.

    • Tim says:

      01:59pm | 11/06/10

      Winner Winner Winner!!!!!!

      Yes H of SA,
      you are awarded the new Punch over-reaction comment of the week.
      With a lot of articles about gender this week it was thought that Eric was a shoe in to take out the title but you have completely blown the competition out of the water.

      Congratulations my son and see you in a month.

    • Zeta says:

      02:10pm | 11/06/10

      @ H of SA - Being from South Australia, you might have missed this piece of newspaper crazy: http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/wellbeing/female-circumcision-under-consideration-20100528-wisu.html I think that’s the article the Member for Indi is referencing.

      The practice under consideration was not in strictest terms ‘female genital mutilation’ but a practice called ‘ritual nicking’ which I’m reliably informed by The Beginner’s Guide to Bondage Discipline & Sado-Masochism (2nd edition with foreward by Jeffrey Archer) is no less abhorrent to the sacredness of the feminine.

      Maybe it’s a debate we have to have. I’m sure a lot of African immigrants are all like ‘well thank God I’m not in that genital mutilating country any more, which station is Alan Jones on?’ but a lot might also be ‘where can I get me some genital mutilation done and is it on medicare yet?’

    • The Cricket says:

      03:23pm | 11/06/10

      Tim is right. Sorry H of Sa - that’s a truly ridiculous post and displays great ignorance of the news stories about ritual nicking that Zeta refers to.
      And yet you’ve just whipped out the race card! It’s you who should be ashamed.

    • Jane says:

      04:06pm | 11/06/10

      What a strange mind you have….how is this story suposed to frighten us about immigration? Must be that you just don’t like Sophie and this was the best way you could think of to put a negative spin on it. Make sure your not back before the month is out, I’ll be watching for you.

    • Robert Smissen , rural SA says:

      04:13pm | 11/06/10

      H of SA, please sit down & calmly read the article again please, Sophie I feel has written a rational article. vigilence on the rights of the young & vulnerable is very important. I work with young people & constantly see their rights trampled on by those more powerful than them

    • Matt Stewart says:

      06:59pm | 11/06/10

      H of SA made this an issue of xenophobia, not Sophie.  Sophie could have said “we should keep muslims out because they engage in FGM”, but she didn’t didn’t.  She said FGM is a barbaric and intolerable practice that has no place in Australia.  Anyone that can’t see the difference, and can’t see the importance of what sophie is saying, is blinkered by their own prejudice.

    • adam says:

      01:44pm | 11/06/10

      Is it ‘entirely sexist’, though? Mutilating the genitals of male babies is entirely routine in this country, for some reason.

    • cus says:

      02:17pm | 11/06/10

      word adam.

    • Bon says:

      02:25pm | 11/06/10

      Most baby boys these days are not circumcised, in fact the practice is mostly discouraged - I would hardly say it is routine. Rightly or wrongly it is certainly much more culturally acceptable though.

    • Rob r Charteris says:

      02:43pm | 11/06/10

      adam; No! it’s just that men dont rate a mention when genital mutilation is the dicussion. And Sophie has been completely hypocrital, and as usual made her argument completely one sided. I’m willing to bet she never even gave it a thought. What seems to be more apparent in her article is an under lying anger towards men, the assumption seems that all men are wick and or sexist by nature, where were the mothers of these girls. The saddest thing is, she holds a position of responsibility within the community.

    • Rob r Charteris says:

      04:20pm | 11/06/10

      Bon says:02:25pm; culturally acceptable to who??? the same type of people that find it acceptable to mutilate girls? where does the child have a say?

    • Brando says:

      05:13pm | 11/06/10

      Seriously? Go and ask any circumcised male if they feel they have been mutilated. I’ll say that 99.99% of them will treat you as an idiot for even asking such an dumb question.

      As a member of the “cut” club I’m happy to tell you I’m happy I was done and if I wasn’t done at birth I would have had it done as soon as I was able to.

      Apart from the health benefits, no matter how minor they may be, there is the matter of aesthetics. Certainly most women I’ve had dealings with in these matters prefer “cut” to uncut.

      On a more serious note you have to look at the motivation. Male and female circumcision are done for completely different reasons

    • xela says:

      11:14pm | 11/06/10

      H of SA, mmmmm’.

    • Camden Luxford says:

      02:33am | 12/06/10

      Not too mention the fact that FGM, I believe, robs women of all sexual sensation, thus depriving them of a large part of their sexuality.  Male circumcision does not.

    • Eric says:

      08:40am | 12/06/10

      That’s not what is being proposed currently, Camden. Some doctors are suggesting a minor ritual incision which is less intrusive than male circumcision.

      However, such a ‘little nick’ is considered unacceptable, while the circumcision of baby boys is quite legal and uncontroversial. Therein lies the double standard.

    • coldsnacks says:

      11:53am | 14/06/10

      Eric: You cannot get a male child circumcised in a NSW public hospital. Still “uncontroversial”?

      I too am part of the “cut” club. And unlike FGM, which deals with the clitoris and labia, the foreskin is not a sensory part. It’s there to protect the glans from when humans ran through the bush starkers.

      @Camden Luxford: The problem with male circumcision and sensation comes from the glans being desensitised.

      That all said, male circumcision is actually a religious practice from the Abrahamic religions. FGM is not.

    • Bon says:

      01:11pm | 14/06/10

      Rob I didn’t say I agree with it - I don’t agree with any form of circumcision.  But you cannot deny that male circumcision is much more socially acceptable in this country. It is becoming less so with time, but people still have their baby sons circumcised for no reason other than they want to, or the father wants his son to look the same as him downstairs.  The same people who would most likely be disgusted by the practice of female circumcision. There are also many doctors who believe all boys should be circumcised for health reasons, because they believe it prevents anything from Hepatitis to HIV.

    • Frank says:

      01:45pm | 11/06/10

      H of SA - says “Sophie is using fear of a cultural practice which is illegal in Australia to frighten us about immigration”
      Sohie says “I am an Australian-born child of Greek migrants myself”

    • fuzzy says:

      01:46pm | 11/06/10

      ‘Primum non nocere’ or ‘do no harm’ is a precept of medical ethics held in the same regard as the Hippocratic Oath. No matter how small or insignificant a ‘pin-prick’ may be it holds no medical benefit. I’m no fan of ‘slippery slope’ arguments but it’s disappointing to see such an important tenet go out the window in the name of ‘inclusiveness’.

    • Renuka says:

      01:51pm | 11/06/10

      H of SA, you miss the point - the article was not against immigration, it explicitly welcomes the cultural diversity immigration affords.

      It merely states that immigrants need to abide by the laws of their adopted homeland, and this is absolutely logical.

      I would never dream of walking around Saudi Arabia or conservative areas in Malaysia in shorts (as a female) because I respect their cultural norms. This issue isn’t just about cultural norms, it’s about the LAW. We should not shy away from criticism in a misguided attempt to be ‘sensitive’.

      Refraining from speaking out when someone does something wrong is cowardice, not cultural sensitivity.

    • Raider says:

      01:51pm | 11/06/10

      Hopefully those sentiments are shared with regards to male circumcision, which is performed purely for religious reasons (the medical reasons are just excuses to justify it). I wonder why for girls it is called ‘mutilation’ but for boys it is called ‘circumcision’, doesn’t make much sense to me. The same argument applies for boys as it does for girls: it is a barbaric practice that should be made illegal as it involves removing a normal and healthy part of the human body.

    • Razor says:

      05:15pm | 11/06/10

      So, you are saying that paedatric uroligists who recommend circumsions for young boys who have had chronic infections of the foreskin and urinary tract infections are liars?

      Big call.

    • Mrs Skippytron says:

      06:14pm | 11/06/10

      Don’t think Raider actually said that, Razor.  Read his comment again.

      And I think they do actually call it female circumcision in those countries that practise it?

      If anything, we should do away the use of the euphemism of ‘circumcision’ for ALL cases of genital mutilation - slicing off a part of a childs’ anatomy, whetever their gender, is mutilation.  If it does need to be done for legitimate medical reasons then it is ‘surgery’, isn’t it?

    • Zeta says:

      01:52pm | 11/06/10

      If there is one thing white rich men have become very good at in the 20th and 21st Centuries it’s bombing the living hell out of third world nations.

      It’s so easy now, it’s like ordering a pizza. You just pick up the phone set into your rich mahogany board room table, I reckon you probably need to dial 5, in Hebrew numerology it’s the number of God, which would suit the egotists who sit in those board rooms. A stern General picks up the phone on the other end - and you probably don’t even have to give him anything as complicated as co-ordinates really. Just a name. Hence Iraq, which didn’t have weapons of mass destruction, it was probably just a bad line and they meant to say Iran.

      “Oh hey, General McDeath? I’ll get two quarter kilotonne daisy cutters on a training camp in Western Pakistan, uh, a couple of drone launched Hellfires into the Caucus Mountains, about 12 assassinations in South America and could you hook me up with a few packs of White Phosphorus? Just dump ‘em anywhere.”

      And then after you’ve ordered, and you’re sitting around smoking your cigar with a a glass of single malt whiskey aged in an oak sherry barrel from the Napoleonic Wars you can make up your reason for doing it. The way we justify to ourselves the reasons why eat junk food.

      “Well, they had weapons of mass destruction. Or they had indicated they had weapons of destruction, or they wanted them. And you know, they’re Muslims. That’s always bad news. They de-stabilised the region. They harboured terrorists. And we need that oil. Because all of ours is leaking into the Florida quays.”

      It’s the political equivalent of leaving the drive through, gnawing on a Big Mac and saying ‘I don’t have time to get anything healthy.’

      And when these guys aren’t bombing people they’re threatening to bomb people. Whole soverign nations keeping their little brown heads down in case they get blown off by the shockwave of a 300lb bomb. We threaten the guys who’re trying to pull their people up out of poverty. We threaten the guys whose neighbours rattle their rusty sabres. We threaten people who think differently and pray differently to us.

      And I imagine outside that board room is some young guy who probably compiles the list of countries and all the bad things they can do every day. ‘Well, these guys hired a Russian nuclear physicist last week’, ‘And these guys? Developing delivery methods for Anthrax.’ ‘This guy? Dips his enemies in acid before executing them.’ ‘These guys just worship an angry God calling for Jihad.’

      And through all these years, all these psychopaths we’ve elected to high office with their vague reasons for wars and bombings and ‘peacekeeping missions’  - no one ever walked into the board room and said:

      ‘These guys mutilate women’s genitals.’ Or if they did, no one picked up the phone.

      “Because there is a real chance in today’s culture of political correctness, that western nations will become too afraid of being labelled “intolerant” to voice opposition to such atrocities against women.” Sophie Mirabella says. ‘Tolerance’? We bomb people for being different. We assassinate democratically elected leaders on ideological whims. We manipulate the media to stir up hatred for entire cultures and you’re worried that just saying ‘no’ to genital mutilation might be considered ‘intolerant’? There isn’t a combination of exclamation and question marks long enough to articulate the sheer insanity of that statement. What’s scariest is that it’s true.

      One day highly evolved beings are going to find our fossilised planet and they’re going to scratch their giant gray heads with wonder, at why we bombed countries into dust on the basis of unfounded rumours yet in Africa, they found women with their genitals mauled so they couldn’t ever enjoy sexual intercourse and no one did anything about it.

    • Press says:

      11:00pm | 11/06/10

      Zeta, sit down, be quiet, talk a slow breath, then ring your doctor and ask for help. You’ve got the bloody pills muddled. Yet again. You goose.

    • John says:

      01:59pm | 11/06/10

      I agree with the general thrust of the article and I too was surprised to hear that some of the medical profession were considering carrying out the barabrig practice of female genital mutilation.  I do wonder though why there is not such a debate about the equally barbaric practice of male circumcision, there is a real double standard on this issue.

    • Razor says:

      05:20pm | 11/06/10

      John, male circumsion is not equally barbaric as female circumsions.  The different like trimming your finger nail and pulling the finger nail out.

      I am circumcised and don’t have a problem with it and certainly can’t tell that it reduces my sexual pleasure.  You may be interested to know that I didn’t get my son circumcised due to the cultural pressure against these days.

    • Dan says:

      02:56pm | 12/06/10

      Do I agree with circumcision?  No.  I don’t see the point unless there’s a valid medical reason.  However, to say that circumcision is on a par with FGM is a strawman argument.  FGM can involve anything from partial removal of the prepuce and clitoris to the removal of the clitoris and labia minora, plus having the labia majora sewn together to cover the urethra and vagina.  How is the removal of the foreskin similar to the almost complete removal of the external genitalia.  As misguided as the reasons for circumcision can be, FGM is practiced purely and simply to subjugate women and girls.  To deprive them of the sexual pleasure.  To make sure that they’re ‘pure’ for their wedding day.

    • pc says:

      02:09pm | 11/06/10

      Hi Frank

      I think H of SA was wondering - in a more direct way -why Sophie was ‘worrying’ about a practice that doesnt occur in Australia, and more, is not even being considered. Why bring it up?

      Well because its code for Keysar Trad and a lot of other quite unattractive men who may or may not support such customs. This is the groundwork for a broader attack on muslims in general, begun under Howard and regularly updated by those such as Cory Bernadi. Cory and his neo toughs are so tough they attack muslim chicks for wearing veils. Its not because they are cowards or racists or @rseholes. Its because they are feminists. Just like the way they want to turn the boats back. Not because they want people to drown or because they dont happen to like people who arrive perfectly legally in order to request asylum. No. How could you even think that? Its because they are humanitarians.

      And congratulations Sophie.

    • Nitzpicker says:

      03:10pm | 11/06/10

      PC how naive you are! , this practice does or did occur in Australia, I went out with a girl who was from English/Scottish decent, white, her and her sister were both circumcised, when they asked, her parents told her they did it under the doctors advice and that it would promote fertility.
      Dont associate criticism of stupid practices and customs with racism. It is about preventing another generation of women from suffering, not only the women this barbaric act has been done to, but their husbands/partners.

    • mags says:

      11:13pm | 11/06/10

      Traditionally this practice is not carried out under medical suopervision and many women in the countries where this atrcity occurs suffer from very serious problems such as severe urinary tract infections and incontinence. Instead of supporting them and heloing them to get medical care their family and community abandon them. The procedure is not just a nicking of the skin, it is a total mutlation of the female genitalia so that the woman will never feel anything associated with the sexual act. If you think circumcised men are mutilated, you’re carzy.

      There was a program on the ABC some time ago about an Australian doctor who has a clinic in Somalia, where this is a common practice on very young girls. She treats hundreds of these women who have no other means of getting the medical help they need to get a real life again.

      If you think this is going on here you are mistaken. The doctors who wan to perform this procedure are doing so to avoid the medical complications which they treat young women here for.

      There is a lot of ignorance about this issue and its health implications. Ms Mirabella is right to bring this barbaric practice out in the open. It is child abuse of the worst kind because the consequences are more than jst a moments discomfort.

    • Russ says:

      02:40pm | 11/06/10

      Sophie seems to have completely missed the reason some doctors were suggesting a lesser form of FGM carried out in Australia - whether intentionally or not.  It was brought up because some parents of African girls are saving their pennies so they can send their girls back to Africa to have the process carried out in much less sanitary (and safe) conditions.  Nowhere does she address that problem.  It’s just a case of let’s ban something because we are the party that believes in the value of the individual and the right to make decisions for yourself, unless we don’t agree.  As for Sophie saying “...while we welcome those aspects of any migrant’s culture that enrich our nation, we must categorically reject any aspect that diminishes our existing rights and freedoms. ”  where were you when John Howard was taking away our rights and freedoms?  Perhaps you were away that day.

    • Eye4anEye says:

      05:09pm | 11/06/10

      Honestly curious here what rights and freedoms was John Howard taking away?

      If your referring to work choices it never went ahead so was never taken/forced upon us.

    • Adam Diver says:

      09:12am | 13/06/10

      I think she did address that isue. From the article above you will find

      “I get the harm minimisation argument – but it is so entirely flawed.  Any action that implies tolerance of such a barbaric practice fosters its continuation.  What we need is to assert that such practices are not tolerated in our nation – whether carried out in the name of “tradition”, “culture” or anything else.”

    • biff says:

      03:22pm | 11/06/10

      Sophie is right to express concern about FGM. And where are those feminists? We’ve had the ‘all cultures are equal’ stupidity dinned into our ears over time but it appears all cultures aren’t equal as some of them are still wedded to an anachronistic practice.

      Of interest is a story from the New York Times dated May 6, 2010 that says the American Academy of Pediatrics is suggesting ‘that American doctors be given permission to perform a ceremonial pinprick or “nick” on girls from these cultures if it would keep their families from sending them overseas for the full circumcision.’ It won’t be long before this gains traction in other Western countries. Why would certain cultures entertain the idea of sending their daughters to countries where FGM is performed? I am sure that “oppression and wanting to live in peace and freedom” are offered as some of the reasons that they left those countries in the first place. Why aren’t they prepared to extend that ‘freedom’ to their daughters? http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/07/health/policy/07cuts.html

    • Tom says:

      03:25pm | 11/06/10

      Talk about low-hanging fruit Sophie…

    • mags says:

      10:53am | 12/06/10

      You would’t think so if you were married to a woman of this culture. Find out more about it before you make such a stupid comment.

    • pc says:

      03:36pm | 11/06/10

      HI Nitzpicker

      You got me. I am naive. Im even blushing for not knowing the “girl who was from English/Scottish decent, white, her and her sister were both circumcised, when they asked, her parents told her they did it under the doctors advice and that it would promote fertility.”

      Do you think Sophie knows her too? Well Sophe, do you know her too? Is that why youve raised the banner of whatever it is your talking about, so high? For that girl the NItzpicker went out with?

    • Tim says:

      04:08pm | 11/06/10

      Ohhh PC,
      i’d check out the link that Zeta posted before commenting again.
      That’s two strikes, one more and i’m afraid we’ll have to ritual nick you.

    • Cat says:

      04:29pm | 11/06/10

      Sorry, I am opposed to all forms of genital mutilation - both male and female. Anyone who believes it is necessary or desirable needs to be educated otherwise.
      If people choose to migrate to another country then they must also abide by the laws and norms of that country. We would after all be required to do that in the countries they come from.
      If parents are saving to return their daughters to their country of origin for FGM to take place then it should be made quite clear that they will need to go with them - and not return. If they do it here then they will need to face court on the most serious assault charges the law can lay down…preferably life. There should be no statute of limitations on such crimes either.  The practice is utterly barbaric and has not place in the 21st C.

    • Zaf says:

      04:49pm | 11/06/10

      for heaven’s sake - if it’s illegal in Australia, and I assume that it is, just make it illegal for Australians to have it done to outside the country as well - and prosecute (and jail) the first lot of parents that are found to have done that to their daughters.  We do it with pedophilia, why not also with this form of child abuse?  The number of girls facing this issue (from a small part of the African migrant communities in Australia) is tiny, but even one girl suffering this needlessly is one girl too many.  Legislating about this makes much more sense than banning the burka for adult women.

    • Razor says:

      05:26pm | 11/06/10

      The message needs to be spread in the cultural communities in Australia that have a history of this practice that anyone who sends their daughter overseas for this practice will be investigated and if sufficent evidence found have their children removed and be charged with child abuse charges.

    • sbl says:

      05:56pm | 11/06/10

      Hearty congratulations, Sophie. I wish you and your new daughter all the best of health.

    • RB says:

      08:07am | 12/06/10

      The practice is abhorrent, and in no way should this be allowed in Australia. I’m tired of ‘cultural tolerance’ excusing abusive behaviours toward children or anyone else for that matter.
      It’s time to establish, no matter from where people come to us in this wonderful country, that they came here to start a new way of life, not keep the old ways in a new country.  Immigration need not be curbed, it should be encouraged. As should promoting the Australian way of life.

    • Dan says:

      05:09am | 13/06/10

      All very well, except that FGM has nothing to do with the Australian way of life. It’s illegal (and rightfully so), but it is neither part of nor against the Australian way of life (whatever that is).

    • Phili Osopher says:

      09:39am | 12/06/10

      HK of SA.  Not reading The PUnch anymore.  I’m suprised you can read, as you certainly can’t think.

    • Rational National says:

      09:44am | 12/06/10

      And why shjouldn’t we be frightened of immigration and unauthorised arrivals who claim to be refugees?  Some of the cultural practices they bring with them are barbaric and it would be wise, before it is too late, to ban anyone from countries who have such belief systems.  This is not xenophobic just realistic.  Before the UNHCR 1967 Protocol, Australia had more say as to the countries from which refugees came from - no we are at the mercy of Clauses which stop us even questioning archaic religions as well as cultural rituals.  Our over tolerance is at the expense of women and good Australian values.  It’s time to wake up as we are just a soft touch for the Refugee and Immigration Industry.

    • James1 says:

      01:10pm | 15/06/10

      It is not realistic, and simply shows to the world how insecure and frightened you are.  I pity you.

    • Dan says:

      04:24am | 16/06/10

      What are these ‘good Australian values’ you talk of? Are they different to good non-Australian values? Is there such a thing? Or are good values automatically Australian and bad values automatically non-Australian?

    • Mother Love says:

      09:47am | 12/06/10

      To H of SA - just nick off!

    • Melanie says:

      02:14pm | 12/06/10

      This is the problem with ‘cultural relativism’. There are some things that are a violation of fundamental human rights, regardless of race, religion or culture. This is one of them. I agree circumcision should not be done on boys either, but circumcision and female genital mutilation are very different things and have very different motivations. I can understand some people want to ‘reduce harm’ but condoning an unethical practice can never reduce harm in the long term, no matter what your good intentions. These practices need to be rejected publicly and punished by law so that over time people learn that violent, abusive practices have no place in a modern, civilised society.

    • Anjuli says:

      03:01pm | 12/06/10

      Slowly slowly catchy monkey, isn’t this another inroad into the Australian culture and western way of life. Those who want this will be asking that all road and street sign be in another language next.

    • Robert Smissen , rural SA says:

      12:22am | 13/06/10

      Or we could put a wall around Oz & expel anyone who isn’t a blonde & blue eyed & have guidelines for racial purity. Oh that’s right somebody tried that befoe & it didn’t work.

    • Mon says:

      03:50am | 13/06/10

      I think that Sophie Mirabella completely misses the point here. This issue is not about completely banning the practice. It is about making it safer. At the moment, female circumcision is performed in a home, without anesthetic, in unsanitary conditions, using razor blades or pieces of glass. In other circumstances, girls are sent back to Africa (where conditions are even more appalling) to have the procedure done, and have virtually no access to health care.

      The call from doctors to practice these procedures on women is not about simply catering to their ethnic/religious/social needs. It is about making the whole procedure safer for those concerned.

      Does anyone seriously think that by saying ” female circumcision is banned in this country” is going to stop it happening? Of course not. This being said, the practice does need to cease, but in the meantime, can we not give the women who are subjected to this the opportunity to have it done safely and in a sanitary hospital, as opposed to on a kitchen table or bathroom floor?

    • Syd says:

      07:09pm | 13/06/10

      “It’s all about making it safer”

      A man repeatedly beating his wife/partner is dangerous as it could lead to major injury or death - so ... let’s make it safer by letting him do it in a hospital under supervision (maybe only 4 punches instead of the regular 20).

      If it’s wrong - it’s wrong.  We should never give into other “cultures” when deep down we know how barbaric they are.

    • Mel says:

      09:07pm | 13/06/10

      “In the meantime” will mean forever if we don’t publicly condemn the practice now. Condoning a practice in the name of ‘harm minimisation’ does not reduce harm in the long term. Girls will continue to be butchered in both clinical and non-clinical settings and attitudes will not change. We need to draw a line in the sand and set an example so that eventually they do. That’s real harm minimisation.

    • Mon says:

      04:14am | 14/06/10

      You’re exactly right Syd - it is all about making it safer, because at the moment, female circumcision DOES occur in this country, and simply saying that it is wrong is going to make it go away and stop it from happening. The reality is that this practice is going to take years, if not decades, to eradicate. I do not feel comfortable living in a country that is supposed to be civilized, yet allows young girls to be mutilated in dirty conditions by people who are not qualified to do so simply because we are so concerned with saying it is wrong.

      I am not saying that this practice is not wrong - it unquestionably is. It needs to be eradicated, not only in Australia, but also in African nations where it is much more common and deadly. However, I believe that just because we as a nation think that it is wrong, we should then leave the girls that this happens to to be mutilated on bathroom floors with dirty razor blades, when they could have the procedure done in a hospital by doctors without the risk of significant blood loss or serious infection. No one is going to wake up tomorrow only to discover female circumcision no longer exists.

      The reality also is, that the longer we sit back and refuse to allow girls access to hospitals and medical facilities for this procedure, the more families are going to send their daughters to Africa, with no sanitation or health care, to have this procedure done.

      A middle ground needs to be found. While this practice is being eliminated worldwide, victims need to be considered. It is not a woman’s fault that she is forced to undergo circumcision, and they should not be blamed or be at a disadvantage medically.

    • Bon says:

      01:00pm | 14/06/10

      If the purpose of FGM is to remove all sexual sensation, then somehow I think a little “ritual nick”, which is what was being proposed, is not going to cut it with these people.  Plus having it done in a hospital setting takes away from all the ritual aspect of it.  If the aim is to ban the practice and make it illegal, then allowing it to be performed in a medical setting only serves to legitimise it - there will never be an end.

    • Realist not Racist says:

      09:26am | 14/06/10

      If Australian continues to accept people from countries whose cultulral beliefs accept the practice of mutilation, then these events will continue to happen.  Unfortuinately, the UNHCR Clauses say signatories cannot discriminate against these things.  Time to revoke this archaic document ora change many of its’ Clauses espectially the 1967 Protocol.

    • Dingo_aus says:

      09:54am | 14/06/10

      Well said Sophie.  Good article, you’ve got my full support.  Congratulations on baby #2.

    • Jenni says:

      10:29am | 14/06/10

      Nobody should be allowed to cut pieces off children - male and female alike - for anything other than a damned compelling medical reason! Cultural or religious ‘reasons’ for any kind of genital mutilation are simply not good enough.

    • Gynaecologist says:

      12:16pm | 14/06/10

      Next we’ll be advocating stoning female adulterers with pebbles instead of rocks

    • Ellis says:

      12:42pm | 14/06/10

      There is much good comment here, plus a fair bit of pompous and stupid claptrap, plus some completely disturbed though processes, especially from Zeta. There are no grey areas in this. There must be no female genital mutilation in Australia. There must not even be the sop of “ritual nicking” which will prove to be the thin end of the wedge. It just happens that FGM is a product of a culture which gives us a hell of a lot of other problems too. They sure punch above their weight, but this is one punch they must never, ever land. Well said Sophie. I am a male refugee from Londonistan.

    • Dan says:

      01:36pm | 14/06/10

      To call London Londonstan is not only incredibly offensive and ignorant (would you call NY Jewtown?)  but it pereptruates the myth that FGM is practised by certain religions. It is completely opposed to every religion.


      BTW, Zeta’s post was actually very intelligent.

    • Eric says:

      10:33pm | 14/06/10

      FGM is mostly practiced by Muslims from certain parts of Africa and the Middle East. While not required by Islam, it is associated with that religion.

      Male circumcision is required by Judaism, but I believe it occurs at the age of 14, so there is at least some element of choice for the boy - unlike traditional FGM.

    • Dan says:

      08:45pm | 15/06/10

      Actually Eric, male circumcision in Judaism occurs when the boy is 8 days old, in Islam it occurs when the boy is about 14 years old. Perhaps you could do some research?

      Regarding FGM, it may be associated with Islam by some people, however it has NOTHING to do with it and is also practiced by Christians and other African religions.

    • Brian Ward says:

      12:14pm | 15/06/10

      What is sexist about this story is the assumption that only mutilating girls is wrong. Mutilating the genitals of all children is wrong and unnecessary. The hypocrisy of middle class white women on this issue is staggering.

    • Anna says:

      05:57pm | 27/06/10

      Brian, you obviously have NFU about what Female Genital MUTILATION actually involves - a more appropriate comparison would be male castration.

    • LC says:

      09:04pm | 07/01/11

      The mutilation of genitals of females or males is unacceptable in a so-called “enlightened” western society. If they choose to immigrate to our country they must live by our laws; we are expected to in their countries.

      Those doing the mutilating, as well as parents who send their children to be mutilated should be jailed for up to 15 years with and have all current and future children removed from their custody. Preferably, sex offender status should be sought. Parents who send their kids overseas for the procedure should still be charged, much like how child sex tourists can be charged with an Australian crime over something they’ve done overseas. To help with enforcement, school sex education programs should discuss genital mutilation in a manner which encourages mutilated children to speak up.

      If you’re saving up to send your kid overseas to have his/her genitals cut, save a bit extra so you either pay for a bloody good lawyer or (preferably) go with them and NEVER COME BACK.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Paul Colgan

@paulwiggins @richardkendall that fountain pens yarn is a great social trend story

Paul Colgan

I like how a tip erodes so only you can use it MT “@paulwiggins: BBC News - Why are fountain pen sales rising? http://t.co/0hk2MRtf

Daniel Piotrowski

@apiotrowski I feel your pain #workingtheweekend

Daniel Piotrowski

@apiotrowski You sounded testy at 11. I can only imagine...

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge

Protecting the Barrier Reef is the Fin end of the wedge

When you take on a job like being Environment Minister there’s some hits you can see coming. …

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

ICB: Is white bread the worst thing since sliced bread?

Welcome to this week’s I Call Bullshit column. It’s a regular column that looks at skulduggery…

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref

Sometimes, you’ve just got to stick it to the bloody ref

We are taught early in life that we should not question authority. We must listen to our parents, our…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter