Discourse(s) of Female Genitalia

Abstract

There is a discrepancy between “Western” engagement with female genital mutilation (FGM) and female genital cosmetic surgery (FGCS). Despite a similar ambiguity regarding the outcomes of each, FGM is ultimately condemned, while FGCS is permitted. By unpacking the dominant "Western" discourse(s) of each, this paper accounts for the discrepancy; FGCS is constructed as a medically legitimated option for enhancing the utility of one's genitals and for liberating one's sexuality, while FGM is constructed as a threat to "Western" conceptions of genital utility, sexuality and agency. Such discourse(s) arguably illustrate the tendency to condemn the contextual "other" and take “our” contextual constructions largely for granted.