rants.

Female Genital Mutilation:
the socialization of a tradition

The mention of the words "Female Genital Mutilation" elicit a wide array of emotions in different people, everything from confusion to understanding to fear to anger and rage. This is because people from different walks of life, different cultures, and different societies view the practice in different ways. For some, the mention of FGM conjures up an image of something akin to the very minor (medically speaking) male circumcision that is commonplace in western society, for others it brings to mind the idea of an outdated practice in existence only in small tribal societies scattered across Africa. Still others are reminded of a terrifying and traumatic experience in their own youth. For the many people that are involved in the movement to stop FGM, the mention of it reminds them that the fact is, FGM is a brutal, disfiguring practice that occurs today, to millions of women all over Africa and the Middle East; a practice that has served for generations and generations to oppress women and keep them under the proverbial thumb of men -- sexually, socially, and psychologically. In this paper we will explore the psychosocial mechanisms surrounding female genital mutilation, for while it is a ‘crime against women’, as many have put it, by and large, it is perpetuated by those very same women. FGM has far more effects than the simple physical alteration of the woman. It has far reaching psychological and physical effects, and irrevocably changes a woman’s life forever. We will explore what it is that FGM does to a woman, and what it is that motivates women to continue this brutal tradition. The following account that a Sudanese woman gives of her youth illustrates this issue all too well:

‘I was infibulated when I was five years old. I remember every bit of it still – the terrible pain and lying tied up for several weeks. It hurt so much that I cried and cried. I could not understand why this was done to me.

‘When I was nearly twelve, my aunts one day examined me. They declared that I was not closed enough. They took me to the midwife who lives a few streets away. When I noticed where they were taking me, I tried to run away, but they held me tight and dragged me into the midwife’s house. I screamed for help and tried to free myself, but I was not strong.

‘They held me down and put a cover over my mouth so I could not scream. Then they cut me again; and this time, the woman who operated on me made sure that I was closed. They carried me home. The pain was terrible. I was tied up and could not move. I could not urinate, and my stomach became all swollen. I was terribly hot one moment, then shaking with cold. This was during the dry season of the sandstorms, when it is hard to breathe. I don’t know how many days I was lying there. Then the midwife came again. I screamed as hard as I could, as I thought she was going to cut me again. Then I lost consciousness.

‘I woke up in a hospital ward. There were moaning women all around me. I was terrified; I did not know where I was. I was in terrible pain; my legs were propped up and my genital area was all swollen and hurt all the time.

‘Later I was told that the infibulation had been cut open to let the urine and the puss out. I was terribly weak, and I did not care anymore. I wanted to die. Why would my mother permit this? What had I done to be so terribly hurt?

‘It is years later now. The doctors told me that I could never have children because of the infection. Therefore, noone will marry me; noone wants a wife who cannot have a child. I sit at home alone and I cry a lot. I look at my mother and my Aunts, and I ask them: ‘Why did you do this terrible thing to me?’ ’

Unfortunately most girls don’t get taken to a hospital; they are just left to die (Hosken, p. 108).

There are several different types of FGM. The first (and less mutilating) form is called clitoridectomy, or Sunna circumcision. While many people equate this to male circumcision, where just the foreskin of the penis is snipped off, the degree of cutting in clitoridectomy is far more anatomically extensive. The male equivalent of clitoridectomy would be the amputation of the penis (Toubia, FGM: A Call for Global Action, p. 9). Clitoridectomy (also called excision) involves the cutting away of most or all of the clitoris, which is the most sexually sensitive part of the female genitalia. It is generally done without any sort of anesthesia, and often in unsterile conditions, using everything from a kitchen knife to a sharp rock to a broken bottle. The operation can have serious physical complications, including things like excess bleeding and infection. Because amputation of the clitoris involves cutting the clitoral artery, hemorrhaging during the healing process is a risk, and (especially with the commonness of unsterile conditions) infection is an even greater risk. The infection can range from a superficial puss, to an ulcerating wound, to septicemia, which can prove to be deadly. The transmission of HIV is a serious issue with FGM as well. It is common for circumcisions to be performed on several girls in succession, without any sterilization of the equipment in between. There can be other complications, such as urine retention, stress, and shock. The complications of clitoridectomy can go on for years, with repeated infections, abscesses, and disfiguring scarification. However, the complications of clitoridectomy pale in comparison to those of the more severe form of FGM, which will be described in the next section, and which will be the primary focus of this paper.

Infibulation is the more (most) severe form of female genital mutilation. Often referred to as Pharaonic circumcision, infibulation is much more severe than clitoridectomy. Not only is the clitoris entirely removed, but the labia minora are completely severed as well, and then the flesh inside the labia majora is scraped away, and several incisions are made in the labia. After this, the labia majora are sealed together, often with several acacia thorns, and the girl’s legs are bound together from knee to hip with bandages. She is made to stay immobile in this manner for anywhere from two to six weeks for the wound to heal. The labia completely seal together, forming a ‘hood’ over the girl’s genitals, leaving only a tiny hole for the exit of urine and menstrual fluids. In most societies that practice FGM, the smaller this hole is the better, as a smaller opening is seen as more ‘pure’ and ‘virginal’, and will command a higher brideprice. It is generally about the size of a matchstick head, and while it may vary, it is usually no larger than the tip of the little finger. When the girl marries, the hole must be made forcibly larger to allow intercourse. This can be done either by the gradual dilation of the opening (by the husband), in which case it may take weeks or months to achieve penetration, or it must be cut open to allow penetration. "The opening is just big enough to allow penetration, which has to take place frequently during the early days and weeks of the marriage to prevent the open wound from closing again. After a while, a new scar forms around the opening." (Hosken, p. 118). As well, the infibulation scar must be cut open to allow childbirth, after which the woman is generally reinfibulated to simulate virginity and offer her husband more sexual pleasure with a ‘tighter’ introit. De- and reinfibulation occurs with each birth, and in societies where ten or 15 births are common, the delicate female genitals are turned into tough scar tissue that "bears more resemblance to cured hide than to human tissue" (Toubia, FGM: A Call for Global Action, p. 15).

The complications of infibulation are more common and more severe than those of clitoridectomy. The same complications arise, but with more frequency. The pain of infibulation, which is usually performed in the absence of anesthesia, is far more severe, and since the raw wound is larger, the risk of infection and stitch abscess is higher. Since the skin is stitched over the urethra, urination becomes much more difficult. During the healing process, urination will remain painful for weeks. Urine retention can result, which can cause very serious problems. Urination will always be difficult, however, since often the opening left is so small that only a drop can come out at a time. Day to day urination takes an average of ten to fifteen minutes at a time, urinating drop by drop, and menstruation often lasts ten days or more.

Long term complications are commonplace and can be quite serious: stones in the urethra and bladder due to obstruction and repeated infections, excessive, disfiguring scar tissue growth, as well as dermoid cysts, which may form on the stitch line. They can range from the size of a pea to as large as a grapefruit. Often girls are embarrassed about this and aren’t comfortable going to relatives with their concerns, and these cysts can cause major problems. Frequent recurrent reproductive tract and pelvic infections follow, of which infertility is a common and devastating result, in societies where "a woman’s reproductive capacity is central to her existence" (Toubia, FGM: A Call for Global Action, p. 15).

As one might imagine, sexual relations would bring no pleasure to a woman who has been infibulated. This, in fact, is the main goal of female genital mutilation: to control the sexuality of women. If a woman gains no pleasure from sex, then (hypothetically) she will remain a virgin until marriage, and will remain faithful to her husband throughout marriage. As Awa Thiam so aptly puts it, "…the aim is to reduce women’s hypersensuality. In any case the result remains the same: to make the young girl essentially a future reproductive and productive element. Hence, her life is taken over and mapped out for her from birth to death by a patriarchal society, which ensures that she is kept in her place at all stages of development" (Thiam, p. 750).

The male body has one ‘organ’, if you will, that encompasses both his sexual and reproductive capacity. The female body, on the other hand, has two separate organs for these purposes. The clitoris has no other purpose than to provide sexual pleasure; it has no reproductive function. The vagina, while minimally capable of sexual response, is primarily a reproductive organ. In removing the clitoris, one is essentially stripping a woman of her sexuality while leaving her reproductive organs intact, proclaiming her to be a useful machine for the production of life, and not worthy of pleasure in her own rite. And if she is infibulated, not only will she not get pleasure out of sex, but most likely she will incur a lot of pain. Most mutilated women avoid sex as often as possible, encouraging their husbands to sleep with them only when they wish to become pregnant (Boddy, p. 686).

It is obvious that FGM causes a lot of physical effects, but I have not yet discussed the psychological effects of FGM, and they are extensive and far-reaching. Most girls who undergo FGM are young, between five and ten years old. This age is decreasing with time, however. In a survey conducted by Edwins Laban Moogi Gwako, 93% of women emphasized this lower age at FGM, arguing that "the younger the girls the easier they were to control, and that those not fully aware of what was going to happen would not be terrified" (Gwako, p. 336). These girls’ bodies are being violated, but they’re too young to realize it at the time. If they were older when these procedures were being performed, and knew what was being done to their bodies (and the repercussions it could have later on), then a lot more of them would resist. This attack, usually by relatives, mothers, aunts, older sisters, and the like, is often made without warning. Women report being "deceived, assaulted, chased, and violently immobilized… they were misinformed and misled… Their ‘consent’ was not ‘informed’ in any sense of the word" (Hosken, p. 130). The experience of being genitally mutilated is traumatic enough in its own rite. But the knowledge not only that your mother and other loved ones permitted this atrocity to be committed against you, but encouraged and participated in it can destroy any bond of trust the girl feels towards her family. She is likely to resent them, and can become withdrawn and untrusting of other women, out of fear of betrayal.

The act of infibulation, with the shaving away of all of the sensitive genital tissue as well as the ‘folding away’ of the vagina, can be seen as a metaphor for the denial of a woman’s sexuality and the "locking up of her reproductive capacity with a chastity belt made of her own flesh" (Toubia, FGM: A Call for Global Action, p. 18). This chastity belt can only be opened by the woman’s husband, who buys the key as well as her entire body and being, with her brideprice. This symbolism cannot be lost on the young woman. It is deeply engrained from childhood that she is a reproductive machine, to be at the disposal of her husband. This control and oppression of women is at the heart of the FGM issue.

The psychological affects of this operation and the issues that follow certainly do not stop there. In Sudan, thousands of women come to the Ob/Gyn clinics with chronic problems related to their circumcision, including general fatigue, loss of sleep, loss of self esteem, feelings of victimization, and depression. They talk of fear about sex, the threat of infertility after infection, and their fears about the state of their genitals, for they have no way of knowing whether or not they are normal (Toubia, FGM: A Call for Global Action, p. 19). The fear of infertility is a very real one for these women. As mentioned earlier, infertility is a common and devastating result of the complications of FGM, and this threat does not end once the initial wound has healed. The infibulation itself, because the genitals cannot be easily cleaned, and because the retention of urine and menstrual fluids is common, is quite prone to infection. This risk rises sharply with the de- and reinfibulation of the woman at the birth of each child. So, she goes throughout her life carrying the fear that she may become infertile, and hence useless to her husband and her society. This fear, as well as the fear and worries about all the possible complications of FGM cause these women a lot of anxiety throughout their lifetimes, and an undue amount of trauma.

In societies where FGM is practiced, it may not be surprising that the discussion of sexuality and reproductive issues is rather taboo, which is why women can have dermoid cysts the size of a tennis ball at their infibulation scar, yet say nothing to family and friends. Not only is it a problem because they are uncomfortable talking about their reproductive/genital problems, but because they don’t know what their genitals should look like. Dermoid cysts cause anxiety, shame, and fear in women who think that their genitals are regrowing in monstrous shapes, or who think that they may have cancer (Toubia, Female Circumcision as a Public Health Issue, p. 713). Other psychological effects result from the physical complications of FGM. Certain complications can result in urinary incontinence, as a result of which women are often ostracized by their communities.

In societies where FGM is practiced, girls are told that they must be circumcised to be married. They are told that no man will marry an uncircumcised woman, and this social pressure makes them feel that if they don’t, they will be ostracized from the community. The obligatory removal of a significant part of a woman’s body instills shame within her about her body. It gives her the message that she is not correct as God made her, that there is something wrong with her, that she is imperfect in some way; and she must be fixed. In fact, many people are made to believe that if a woman’s clitoris touches a man, it can render him impotent, or even kill him, and that if it touches her child’s head during birth, it may kill the child. This reinforces the very strong negative messages that there is something wrong with the female body. It encourages women to have very low self-images and self esteem, and encourages the notion that women are ‘bad’ in some way.

Azazma Bedouin women talk of the common idea that a woman’s prime concern should be for conceiving, and only in conceiving. In their society (as well as most others where FGM is common) only the man initiates the sexual act. A woman who initiates sex would be called an elqe, a term that loosely means promiscuous, similar to the English slang word slut (Kressel, p. 40). In this way, women again are given the message that their sexuality and their bodies are something to be ashamed of, and that they are the property of a man to use as he pleases. In regards to foreplay (which unnecessarily exhausts the man), the Bedouin say that "The good wife relieves her husband of the unnecessary bother and increases her chances of conception" (Kressel, p. 40). So, apparently, foreplay, and seeing to it that the wife enjoys the sex act, is unnecessary and a "bother", and should be skipped.

In societies where FGM is practiced, a woman is seen not only as a reproductive machine, but as property as well; to be passed from her father to her husband, sold for a brideprice. This diminishes the woman’s image of herself as a human being with individual hopes, dreams, and ambitions, to the worth of so much livestock, bought and sold for a price for the master to use however he sees fit.

With the birth of each child, aside from the torture of the birth itself, a woman is reminded of her own terrible pain, and she knows that each of her daughters will have to experience a lifetime of the very same misery (Hosken, p. 119). They are never able to get away from the "little knife", it follows them from childhood to marriage to the birth of each child, when she must relive the same pain. She does this all so that she can be accepted into society and bear children. This is her only goal in life, to bear daughters who will suffer the same fate, and to bear sons who will oppress women and inflict this horror on her descendants.

A commonly cited reason for the necessity of FGM is religion. While FGM is practiced by members of a wide array of religions, by far the most common religion of peoples who practice it is Muslim. Many who practice this mutilation back up their arguments saying that it is required by their religion, however, nowhere in the Koran or the Hadith is there a mention of it. FGM has been around far longer than Islam has been in Africa. It is assumed that when Islam came to Africa, newly converted leaders, in an effort to continue the practice, linked FGM to Islam. Gideon Kressel postulates that "Overwhelmed by the dogma that prescribes denial of the physical self here-and-now, in return for transcendental rewards hereafter, the Muslim woman afflicts herself as she denies her sexuality" (Kressel, p. 43). Kressel is saying that by allowing herself (or her daughters) to be circumcised and stripped of her sexuality, she is denying herself ‘unnecessary’ pleasure in to gain favor with Allah. While this may be the case to some extent, I believe that the fact is that women are told that it is a requirement of their religion to be mutilated. In societies where illiteracy (in women) is more common than not, who are they to question their trusted religious leaders? However, it must be true that FGM is not a requirement of Islam, for there are numerous Islamic societies (for instance, most of the middle east and southeast Asia) that do not practice FGM.

So, if female genital mutilation is such a horrific procedure with such long lasting effects, why does it continue? It is not the men in these societies who perpetuate the practice of FGM, but the women. It is mothers who have the procedure performed on their daughters. Why would they do this to their daughters, knowing what pain it has caused themselves? The simple answer is that they feel that they have no choice. Through the years, the African woman is taught to accept her lot in life, and not to try and change it. The African woman (in this situation) has such a low self image that she feels she (and her daughters, and women in general) deserve nothing more. The societal mechanisms that keep women oppressed and subservient to men make women afraid of their spouses. Their society, their culture, and their religion teach them their ‘place’ (i.e. slave to their husband’s ‘master’) and they dare not defy their husbands for fear of the consequences.

When asked why they circumcise their daughters, women’s overwhelming response is: tradition. They respond that ‘it is their custom’, or ‘it is necessary’… but many will not or cannot give an answer beyond that. This may indicate that they don’t really know why they continue this practice. They have no reason other than custom, and they have been taught all of their lives to follow custom unquestioningly, so they do. They figure that if their parents did it to them, and their parents’ parents before them, then it must have merit, and there must have been a good reason, so that is reason enough to continue.

The other overwhelming reason is social pressure. In most societies where FGM (and in particular, infibulation) is performed, it is taught that FGM is necessary. Women are told that without it they will be seen as dirty, impure, and promiscuous, and, more importantly, that no man will marry an uncircumcised woman. In a society where a woman’s reproductive capacity is literally all she (feels she) has, that encompasses her entire worth, marriage is key. For a woman to not be able to marry is to render her useless. Under this sort of pressure, even though women know this procedure has made their lives miserable and painful, how can they, in good faith, not have their daughters circumcised, and sentence them to a life alone, ostracized by their community, for being impure, unmarriageable, and therefore incapable of reproducing? Women are afraid that if they do not circumcise their daughters, they will never marry. There is also the social pressure provided by family members, and, in particular, mothers-in-law to circumcise the child. It is considered a matter of family honor.

Why would it be a matter of family honor? There are two main reasons for this. The first is that circumcision is thought to purify the female body, ‘cleansing’ it. To be uncircumcised is to be seen as impure, which would bring shame upon the family. The other is a matter of virginity. In these societies, virginity is prized above all else. Before a woman is married, the husband’s family has the right to examine her to assure that she is a virgin. "In the event that a girl brings dishonor to her family by losing her virginity, it is considered normal for her brother to murder her in order to avenge the family’s honor" (Hosken, p. 134). Infibulation ensures that a girl will be a virgin until she is married, thus securing her family’s honor. Aside from the fact that intercourse is nearly impossible with a ‘properly’ infibulated girl, as discussed earlier, circumcision strips away a woman’s sexuality, removing the organ that provides her with sexual pleasure. If she has no means of enjoying sex, then (theoretically), she will not seek or permit it, other than to reproduce in the sanctity of marriage. This also ensures that when she is married, she will have no reason to stray from her husband, as she will not and cannot enjoy sex.

Another reason women give when asked why they circumcise their daughters is that it is an initiation rite. They explain that girls are not considered to be fully-fledged members of their ethnic group until they have undergone this rite. It symbolizes the cleansing of the elements of childhood and readiness for impending adulthood, and represents the "physical marking of the marriageability of women, because it symbolizes the social control of their sexual pleasure and their reproduction" (Toubia, Female Circumcision as a Public Health Issue, p. 714). Many women also cite the importance of stressing togetherness and the (women’s) group’s social solidarity. For these women, it is important to attach a positive light to the act of circumcision so that they can justify in their minds its continuation. If they convince themselves that they do it to bring themselves closer together, then psychologically speaking, it is easier for them to continue it. Also, in a society where women have no rights and nothing but their reproductive capacity to afford them any status, it is important to have something to bond with. Any act that can bring them together and make them stronger as a group will be seen as positive. They have little else with which they can come together. They are made to stay in their husband’s home, under their husband’s thumb, and are essentially powerless, except when it comes to the power to come together and ceremoniously initiate their daughters to the ranks of the circumcised. Women in societies where FGM is performed on groups of girls (in succession) also say that it encourages socialization and develops bonds of ‘sisterhood’, not unlike the ties American sororities (and fraternities) claim are built by undergoing hazing initiation rites with your ‘sisters’ and ‘brothers’. However, there are two primary differences between these two phenomena. The first is that FGM is mainly performed on children, with or without their consent. In general, girls who are circumcised are circumcised at such a young age that they do not understand what is being done to them. In the U.S. most states have laws regarding statutory rape, stating that until a girl reaches a particular age (generally around 17), she is not old enough or mature enough to knowingly consent to sex. This is to protect young women from consenting to something they don’t really understand. Unfortunately, the societies that practice FGM have no such concerns for young girls with regards to circumcision. And whether or not they consent is insubstantial, because if they do not, they will be held down, kicking and screaming, and the operation will be performed against their will. In fraternities and sororities, while initiation rites may be ethically and psychologically questionable, they are performed on consenting adults, and rarely do they do any sort of permanent physical damage.

There are plenty of women who do not want to have their daughters circumcised, but feel they have no choice. They feel that either way, whether their daughters are operated on or not, they will be victims. As one midwife puts it: "I cannot sacrifice my child. Either way, she suffers. What am I to do? As a midwife, I know the terrible health results. As a mother, I know how the child suffers from being teased, insulted, and excluded by her friends. She will face even worse problems later when the family of the man to whom she will be given in marriage may turn her down as ‘unfit’… their lives will be ruined either way!" (Hosken, p. 123). Many women do not want to subject their daughters to this horror, but feel helpless, caught in a no-win situation, where they feel like they cannot prevent their daughters from being unhappy. Girls that are not circumcised are taunted, teased, insulted, and ostracized. The result of this is not only feelings of inadequacy and low self worth for the child, but resentment of the mother for making her ‘different’ from the other children, and subjecting her to this psychological torment. But, by circumcising her daughter, a woman subjects her to a life most likely filled with pain and misery.

The control of women by men, especially of women’s bodies and sexuality, goes on in every society – only the means of control are different. Genital mutilations are one way to control the female behavior of a society. Mutilating the genitalia of female children, and thus altering their normal and natural personality development, renders women subservient to men. The final achievement of exerting control over women is to make them internalize the need for their own mutilation and carry out the operations on their own daughters (Hosken p. 72).

In this day and age, movements abound to end the practice of female genital mutilation. Women cry in outrage at the injustices being done to other women. They propose that FGM ought to be ended, and now. They think that simply making it difficult for the procedure to be performed in societies where it is common will end it. That is where they are mistaken. This tradition is so engrained in the psyches of the people of these societies that it will go on whether it is legal or not. When abortion was illegal in the U.S., it did not stop its practice, the practice just went underground, and more women died. In any case, I say what right have we to tell a woman "You may not, and should not circumcise your daughter"? What shall we tell that same woman, and, in fact, her daughter, when she is older and cannot find a husband? What do we tell her when she is ostracized by friends, family, and community? We cannot simply tell people to end a tradition that has been an important aspect of their culture for generations. We cannot end the brutal practice of FGM until we change the construct of society that dictates that an uncircumcised girl is impure and unclean, and that also dictates that a man not marry an uncircumcised woman. Until we address this basic issue, we cannot and will not end the practice of female genital mutilation.

FGM is a brutal procedure that has far-reaching effects on not only the life of the girl who undergoes it, but into the lives of her offspring. There are many physical and mental complications, that continue throughout a lifetime. FGM dictates the socialization and role a woman will take throughout her life. It, in effect, renders women subservient to men in these patriarchal societies. The fact that women are traumatized for a lifetime by this procedure unfortunately does not make them fight to end it, by and large. It is women who perpetuate this tradition to other women, helpless to effect change in their society as a result of their feelings of helplessness and subservience instilled by their socialization. It is a process that seems horrific to many people in western society, but is simply custom in the societies where it is performed. Ending this tradition would involve the disruption and modification of entire cultures, entire societies. It is certainly not something that can or should be attempted overnight. If this tradition is to be ended, it will likely take generations and generations. To end the vicious cycle that passes on and on from mother to daughter, more will be needed than laws or ordinances. Entire cultures will change… it is not to be lain on the shoulders of only mothers, or only fathers… together societies must effect a change. Whose responsibility, whose right is it to instigate such a change? That is one question that I cannot answer.

 

Bibliography

"Female Circumcision." The New England Journal of Medicine (January 19, 1995) 332: 188-190.

Bengston, Barbara, and Cynthia Baldwin. "The International Student: Female Circumcision Issues." Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development (July 1993) 21(3): 168-173.

Boddy, Janice. "Womb as Oasis: the Symbolic Context of Pharaonic Circumcision in Rural Northern Sudan." American Ethnologist (November 1982) 9: 682-698.

Council on Scientific Affairs, American Medical Association. "Female Genital Mutilation." Journal of the American Medical Association (December 6, 1995) 274: 1714-1716.

Gwako, Edwins Laban Moogi. "Continuity and Change in the Practice of Clitoridectomy in Kenya: a Case-Study of the Abagusii." The Journal of Modern African Studies (June 1995) 33: 333-337.

Hosken, Fran. The Hosken Report. Massachusetts: Women’s International Network News, 1993.

Kressel, Gideon M. "Shame and Gender." Anthropological Quarterly (January 1992) 65: 34-46.

Mackie, Gerry. "Ending Footbinding and Infibulation: A Convention Account." American Sociological Review (December, 1996) 61: 999-1017.

Robertson, Claire C. "Grassroots in Kenya: Genital Mutilation and Collective Action, 1920-1990." Signs (Spring, 1996), 21: 615-642.

Thiam, Awa. "Women’s Fight for the Abolition of Sexual Mutilation." International Social Science Journal (1983) 35(4): 747-756.

Toubia, Nahid. "Female Circumcision as a Public Health Issue." The New England Journal of Medicine (September 1994) 331(11): 712-716

Toubia, Nahid. Female Genital Mutilation: A Call for Global Action. New York: Women, Ink., 1993.