Genital Mutilation Among Iranian Women
Iran is among the countries where female genital mutilation continues to be performed in some geographic regions. Such practices have become accepted as a form of violence against women, acts that sometimes result in death. On Saturday July 11th, Iran’s Sociology Association held a conference titled “The Blade and Tradition” on the subject which was attended by sociologists and psychologist involved with this issue.
According to Rayehe Mozafarian, a researcher, traces of female genital mutilation have been recorded in six provinces of Iran, in Hormozgan, Lorestan, Ilam, Kermanshah, West Azerbaijan and Khuzestan. According to the Iranian KhabarOnline website, Mozafarian has said that in Gheshm Island on the Persian Gulf some 83 percent of women have been recorded to have been circumcised because of gender stereotyping. She ruled out the claims that the practice is declining. “Some people say that the practice is declining in occurrence, but that is not true. We cannot conclusively say whether it is declining or on the rise because little research is conducted on this. What is needed is greater university level research and statistical work on the subject to make a definitive conclusion.”
She had published the results of her research in a book titled The Blade and Tradition, according to which some 83$ of women polled on the Iranian island of Gheshm and 50% of women in Kurdistan province undergo genital mutilation practices.
140 Million Victims Around the World
Female genital mutilation (FGM) is so widespread around the world that a special day has been designated for fighting it (February 6th). According to international statistics, every 10 seconds a women is subjected to this violent act. Some statistics speak of 140 million women around the world who have been victims of genital mutilation. The World Health Organization, WHO, has announced that 2 million women are circumcised around the world every year, a process that removes some or all external female genitalia. The UN has recognized this practice as violence against women, equating it to torture.
Some men believe this practice only takes place in some parts of Africa, but Mozafarian points out that it is in fact performed in many countries of the world. The Middle East is not immune from this violent inhuman act.
Before Iran was added to the list of countries where FGM occurred, many would not believe that Iranian women were victims of the practice. Psychologist Nazi Akbari said that she had met women at international forums who had confessed that they did not know that the practice took place in Iran, adding that the field research carried out in Iran surprised them.
She believes that using the word “circumcision” actually provided some justification to the brutal act because circumcision for men was religiously an acceptable act for men. She prefers to use the term “dismemberment,” a word she felt described the depth of the tragedy.
FGM is Not an Arab Legacy
Many people believe that FGM stems from religious beliefs. Mozafarian differs and says the practice is rooted in tradition and has no roots in religion. Islam, she adds, in no way supports this and the act is not a legacy of Arabs. Neither the Quran nor senior clerics in Islam have advocated or hinted such a practice. Some clerics have actively opposed it, which she believes should be used against the practice.
Speaking to Ghanoon (Law) newspaper, Mozafarian referenced to article 633 of the Islamic Penal Code of Iran which was passed in 2013 and which provided that, “cutting off either side of a woman’s urinal member resulted in half her dowry,” and said that “a person could file a suit against whoever had performed such an act on her but the problem is that most women on whom this is performed are younger than the legal age of 18 and so cannot file a lawsuit in a court of law. Consequently, no such complaints are filed.” According to her, the inability of women to file a legal complaint has launched a debate in some quarters on the subject. But even if legal action was taken against perpetrators, she felt the practice would go underground, rather than disappear, which made her conclude that the law had to deal with the social consequences of a ban and reject unaccepted actions in this regard.
Leave a Reply