关于女性生殖器的论述

Jordan Wellsch
{"title":"关于女性生殖器的论述","authors":"Jordan Wellsch","doi":"10.32396/USURJ.V5I2.448","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"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.","PeriodicalId":351398,"journal":{"name":"USURJ: University of Saskatchewan Undergraduate Research Journal","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Discourse(s) of Female Genitalia\",\"authors\":\"Jordan Wellsch\",\"doi\":\"10.32396/USURJ.V5I2.448\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"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.\",\"PeriodicalId\":351398,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"USURJ: University of Saskatchewan Undergraduate Research Journal\",\"volume\":\"49 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-08-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"USURJ: University of Saskatchewan Undergraduate Research Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.32396/USURJ.V5I2.448\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"USURJ: University of Saskatchewan Undergraduate Research Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32396/USURJ.V5I2.448","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

“西方”参与女性生殖器切割(FGM)和女性生殖器整形手术(FGCS)之间存在差异。尽管两种方法的结果都模棱两可,但女性生殖器切割最终受到谴责,而女性生殖器切割是允许的。通过拆解各自占主导地位的“西方”话语,本文解释了这种差异;女性生殖器切割被认为是一种医学上合法的选择,可以增强一个人的生殖器效用和解放一个人的性行为,而女性生殖器切割则被认为是对“西方”生殖器效用、性和能人概念的威胁。可以说,这样的话语说明了一种倾向,即谴责语境中的“他者”,并将“我们的”语境结构大部分视为理所当然。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Discourse(s) of Female Genitalia
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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信