NYT refuses to use the term “female genital mutilation” to describe female genital mutilation

When it comes to female genital mutilation, the general consensus is that the practice is a major violation of human rights — and in fact, is internationally recognized as such, according to the World Health Organization. More specifically, however, female genital mutilation (or FGM for short) is an issue of women’s rights, because as the name implies — it is a barbaric act that is perpetrated against women, and predominantly, young girls.

Apparently, the Left-wing media has forgotten that they are supposed to be advocating for women’s rights. Or perhaps, they’ve just determined it’s more fruitful to pander to other groups these days. Recently, The New York Times took their political correctness to new heights by referring to the savage procedure not by it’s name or acronym, but simply as “genital cutting.” Not genital mutilation or FGM, which is the correct description for what is being done to little girls often under the tender age of 15; nope, just “genital cutting,” a term which all but strips the act of its brutality

As The Daily Caller reports:

“There’s a gulf between the Western (and some African) advocates who campaign against the practice and the people who follow the rite, and I felt the language used widened that chasm,” NYT science and health editor Celia Dugger explained Friday. 

Dugger exemplifies what is wrong with political correctness: By changing the terminology, she has diminished the pain and suffering that the act of FGM brings about. She is effectively putting the needs of the oppressors — those who support FGM — ahead of their victims. As the WHO explains, there are many misunderstandings in communities that uphold the “tradition” of FGM. While many proponents of the atrocious procedure claim it’s a religious rite of passage, FGM is not actually linked to any specific religion. As Human Rights Watch explains, FGM has infiltrated a number of cultures, irrespective of their religion. Beyond religion, FGM is considered a cultural practice that, as the WHO describes, represents an “extreme form of discrimination against women.”

It is true that many supporters of FGM do not understand that it is an egregious violation of human rights because it is so ingrained in their traditions and way of life. In many of the nations that practice FGM, there are erroneous beliefs about it — such as that it promotes cleanliness, ensures virginity and fidelity, and is a part of being “feminine.” Many of these cultures also believe FGM ensures the marriageability of young girls.

But, the fact remains that Dugger chose to change the terminology to make it much less “shocking” while discussing a recent FGM case that had occurred in the United States, where FGM is illegal and carries a sentence of up to five years in jail. She was not “protecting” the culture of another country as she seems to insinuate — she was protecting a criminal doctor in the U.S. who mutilated a young girl’s genitals. According to Dugger, the term “mutilation” is “culturally loaded.” Apparently, because she traveled to sub-Saharan Africa in 1996, Dugger is now allowed to police the use of the term “female genital mutilation” as she sees fit, in order to dull the instinctive blow of horror afforded by the word “mutilation.”

Some human rights organizations distinctly frown upon the use of the word “cutting” in place of “mutilation” because it takes away from the suffering imposed upon these young girls. As the United Nations Population Fund explains,“Use of the word ‘mutilation’ also emphasizes the gravity of the act and reinforces that the practice is a violation of women’s and girls’ basic human rights.”

To put it simply, the use of the term “cutting” instead of the more appropriate word “mutilation” serves only to undermine the suffering felt by millions of girls in countries where FGM is the norm. FGM is a cultural practice that reeks of the very misogyny that Leftist media outlets like the Times claim to fight against — and yet, with a simple change of words, they reveal that they are, in essence, condoning this literal violence against women.

Sources:

DailyCaller.com

WHO.int

HRW.org

UNFPA.org

We will respect your inbox and privacy