欧洲女性生殖器切割后阴蒂重建手术的需求日益增长:主导话语的循环效应?

IF 0.1 Q4 LAW
S. Johnsdotter
{"title":"欧洲女性生殖器切割后阴蒂重建手术的需求日益增长:主导话语的循环效应?","authors":"S. Johnsdotter","doi":"10.4000/droitcultures.6153","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"When activism to combat «female circumcision» gained momentum in the 1980s, a discursive gap was created that persists until today. On the one hand, campaigners, activists, governments and some scholars promoted a discourse that focused on these practices as mutilations; on the other hand, not all scholars were willing to adopt the new term (FGM, «female genital mutilation») or to drop the perspective that these practices must be described within their wider contexts, with the full variations in different settings. Starting from this gap, this article discusses «reconstructive clitoral surgery», or «clitoris repair», as a cultural phenomenon growing out of the first discursive stream. Using Ian Hacking’s concepts «interactive kinds» and «looping effect», I argue that the increasing demand for reconstructive clitoral surgery in European countries needs to be understood in relation to the dominant anti-FGM discourse. While many interdisciplinary teams around Europe strive toward providing a holistic and respectful care for women requesting the surgery, I contend that the ubiquitous anti-FGM discourse has negative effects for both circumcised women who opt for surgery and those who do not.","PeriodicalId":41121,"journal":{"name":"Droit et Cultures","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Growing Demand in Europe for Reconstructive Clitoral Surgery after Female Genital Cutting: A Looping Effect of the Dominant Discourse?\",\"authors\":\"S. Johnsdotter\",\"doi\":\"10.4000/droitcultures.6153\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"When activism to combat «female circumcision» gained momentum in the 1980s, a discursive gap was created that persists until today. On the one hand, campaigners, activists, governments and some scholars promoted a discourse that focused on these practices as mutilations; on the other hand, not all scholars were willing to adopt the new term (FGM, «female genital mutilation») or to drop the perspective that these practices must be described within their wider contexts, with the full variations in different settings. Starting from this gap, this article discusses «reconstructive clitoral surgery», or «clitoris repair», as a cultural phenomenon growing out of the first discursive stream. Using Ian Hacking’s concepts «interactive kinds» and «looping effect», I argue that the increasing demand for reconstructive clitoral surgery in European countries needs to be understood in relation to the dominant anti-FGM discourse. While many interdisciplinary teams around Europe strive toward providing a holistic and respectful care for women requesting the surgery, I contend that the ubiquitous anti-FGM discourse has negative effects for both circumcised women who opt for surgery and those who do not.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41121,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Droit et Cultures\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Droit et Cultures\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4000/droitcultures.6153\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Droit et Cultures","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4000/droitcultures.6153","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

当反对“女性割礼”的行动主义在20世纪80年代获得势头时,产生了一种一直持续到今天的话语鸿沟。一方面,活动家、活动家、政府和一些学者推动了一种将这些做法视为肢解的讨论;另一方面,并不是所有的学者都愿意采用新的术语(女性生殖器切割,“女性生殖器切割”),或者放弃必须在更广泛的背景下描述这些做法的观点,在不同的环境中完全不同。从这个缺口开始,本文讨论了“重建阴蒂手术”,或“阴蒂修复”,作为一种从第一股话语流中生长出来的文化现象。利用Ian Hacking的“互动类型”和“循环效应”概念,我认为欧洲国家对阴蒂重建手术日益增长的需求需要与占主导地位的反女性生殖器切割言论联系起来理解。尽管欧洲各地的许多跨学科团队都在努力为要求手术的女性提供全面和尊重的护理,但我认为,无处不在的反女性生殖器切割言论对选择手术的割礼女性和不选择手术的女性都有负面影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Growing Demand in Europe for Reconstructive Clitoral Surgery after Female Genital Cutting: A Looping Effect of the Dominant Discourse?
When activism to combat «female circumcision» gained momentum in the 1980s, a discursive gap was created that persists until today. On the one hand, campaigners, activists, governments and some scholars promoted a discourse that focused on these practices as mutilations; on the other hand, not all scholars were willing to adopt the new term (FGM, «female genital mutilation») or to drop the perspective that these practices must be described within their wider contexts, with the full variations in different settings. Starting from this gap, this article discusses «reconstructive clitoral surgery», or «clitoris repair», as a cultural phenomenon growing out of the first discursive stream. Using Ian Hacking’s concepts «interactive kinds» and «looping effect», I argue that the increasing demand for reconstructive clitoral surgery in European countries needs to be understood in relation to the dominant anti-FGM discourse. While many interdisciplinary teams around Europe strive toward providing a holistic and respectful care for women requesting the surgery, I contend that the ubiquitous anti-FGM discourse has negative effects for both circumcised women who opt for surgery and those who do not.
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
1
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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