Malmö University Publications
Operational message
There are currently operational disruptions. Troubleshooting is in progress.
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Genitals and ethnicity: the politics of genital modifications
Malmö högskola, Faculty of Health and Society (HS).ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7625-5873
2010 (English)In: Reproductive health matters, ISSN 0968-8080, E-ISSN 1460-9576, Vol. 18, no 35, p. 29-37Article in journal (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

The discrepancy in societal attitudes toward female genital cosmetic surgery for European women and female genital cutting in primarily African girl children and women raises the following fundamental question. How can it be that extensive genital modifications, including reduction of labial and clitoral tissue, are considered acceptable and perfectly legal in many European countries, while those same societies have legislation making female genital cutting illegal, and the World Health Organization bans even the “pricking” of the female genitals? At present, tensions are obvious as regards the modification of female genitalia, and current legislation and medical practice show inconsistencies in relation to women of different ethnic backgrounds. As regards the right to health, it is questionable both whether genital cosmetic surgery is always free of complications and whether female genital cutting always leads to them. Activists, national policymakers and other stakeholders, including cosmetic genital surgeons, need to be aware of these inconsistencies and find ways to resolve them and adopt non-discriminatory policies. This is not necessarily an issue of either permitting or banning all forms of genital cutting, but about identifying a consistent and coherent stance in which key social values – including protection of children, bodily integrity, bodily autonomy, and equality before the law – are upheld.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2010. Vol. 18, no 35, p. 29-37
Keywords [en]
Female genital mutilation/cutting, genital cosmetic surgery, law and policy, beliefs/norms/values, Western Europe, Africa
National Category
Social Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:mau:diva-5136DOI: 10.1016/S0968-8080(10)35495-4ISI: 000280209500002PubMedID: 20541081Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-77953720819Local ID: 10280OAI: oai:DiVA.org:mau-5136DiVA, id: diva2:1401990
Available from: 2020-02-28 Created: 2020-02-28 Last updated: 2024-02-05Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Johnsdotter, Sara

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Johnsdotter, Sara
By organisation
Faculty of Health and Society (HS)
In the same journal
Reproductive health matters
Social Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 160 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf