Thankfully, like most pig-ignorant, primitive fuckheads, they are unable to make a coherent argument in this regard. The lecture is summarised on Patchwork.
Robert Daniels, professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, took part in a lecture on Female Genital Mutilation on Thursday, April 7. He applied the concept of cultural relativity to the practice female circumcision.
How nice that a man feels happy to defend this practice.
"Cultural relativity involves suspending one's own judgments when looking at the practices of others. It does not say that all cultural practices are equally valid or just," said Daniels.
What it actually is is a product of colonial, Western guilt; it is a morally bankrupt and cowardly position that allows people to turn away from condemning the barbaric practices of others. There are, as I said previously, some things for which there are no excuse: FGM is one of them.
Perhaps you'd like to email Professor Daniels and tell him?
Conversely, cultural relativity involves recognizing the autonomy and responsibility of others.
And being civilised means recognising and defending those who have no autonomy. I would consider that young girls of under 10 (to whom FGM is most likely to be applied) do not have autonomy; they are held down and cut. As civilised people, it behoves us to help the helpless.
"Female Genital Mutilation is a prejudicial term," he said. "To speak of these practices only as operations or mutilations is like speaking of making the sign of the cross on someone's forehead on Ash Wednesday as 'soiling the face' or speaking of a fraternity branding as 'mutilating the upper arm,'" said Daniels.
Go fuck yourself, Daniels, you turdstick. Really, people like you make me want to vomit.
It is absolutely nothing like "making the sign of the cross on someone's forehead", which does no permanent bodily damage. And "a fraternity branding" is undertaken by two consenting parties, you fuck.
This isn't cultural relativism, this is moral equivalence.
Circumcision is a deeply embedded right of passage in Africa. It is a central ritual that defines social roles in families, communities, marriage-systems, a person's self-identity and self-worth, said Daniels.
No, it's fucking not. It is a permanent and unnecessary mutilation of the body inflicted on young children who are not capable of making decisions, even were they given any choice.
Does the girl in this video look like she's going through a process of "self-worth"? The only thing deeply embedded here is the knife in her clitoris and labia. Fuck you, you evil fuck.
We should object and intervene when some people are destroying others, as in Darfur.
Except that we aren't doing that either, are we?
There are more than enough cases of that within our own social and political system, and those in which we can have some effective influence.
Ah, I see. This just reinforces my contention above: you just basically can't be arsed to do anything about this awful practice, so you salve your conscience with explanations of cultural relativism.
Fuck you, you are scum.
"The cutting in each case removes our inherent androgynies, taking away the most feminine aspects of boys' genitalia and the most masculine aspects of girls' genitalia, so that we are truly made men and women," Daniels said.
Look, sunshine: I can accept that there is a small medical justification for male circumcision (although for it to be done under any religion, including Judaism, is quite wrong), but there is nothing to justify female excision.
Can you not see the difference? The circumcised male still has the main organ of sexual pleasure: the circumcised female has hers removed. This is deliberately designed to ensure a severe reduction of sexual pleasure for the woman.
Daniels referred to a feminist critique by Wairimu Njambi, a circumcised woman, to support his argument.
Oh, here we go...
"Anti-FGM discourse perpetuates a colonialist assumption by universalizing a particular western image of a 'normal' body and sexuality," Njambi wrote.
Look, you Njambi fuckhead, the normal body is the one that you were born with*, you shit. Once you start cutting bits off it, it isn't normal, is it?
Especially when that operation is to reduce the woman's "sexuality".
"This discourse includes not only a missionizing Christian bias, but also a Western sexist bias by considering women's issues as separable from men's," Daniels said.
Fuck off, you cunt; this is a separate issue because of the simple anatomical differences between the two.
Daniels critiqued the common feminist notion that the rituals are an extreme form of male oppression.
Really? How? It seems pretty fucking clear to me, sunshine.
"If one says they are examples of male oppression, does that mean that most or all the women in these societies are not only victims but agents in their own victimization?"
To an extent, yes. But when you are seen as property—as all too many women in these societies are—then you are lacking something that we hold dear: choice.
Cultural relativity does not say that all human behavior is just or justified, but it does say that we have to entertain the possibility that other ways of life may be equally valid ways to be human, that the "natives" are not simply ignorant and need our enlightenment, but that perhaps they know what they are doing as much as we do.
In the case of FGM, that is a pathetic argument, although I accept that many of them know exactly what they are doing (although that doesn't make them any less primitive, barbaric and ignorant).
And that is why they are guilty.
And perhaps the most defining characteristic of the "valid ways to be human" is common fucking humanity: watch that video, you awful piece of shit, and tell me where the humanity is there.
Justify that with your cultural relativism and your "equally valid ways to be human" argument, Daniels. Because, if you can, then you are lacking in common humanity and, if that is so, then you are not human.
And that would be great, because then we could hunt you down like the dog that you are.
Check out Njambi's critique in Colonizing Bodies: A Feminist Science Studies Critique of Anti-FGM Discourse.
Maybe I will; at least I will know the evil that we are up against.
* Yes, I am aware that this is a slightly simplistic argument and there are always exceptions. But these people are bastards who should be shot in the face and I see no reason to go to the trouble of expounding any further for these arseholes.