Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Circumcision is grievous bodily harm, German judges rule [View all]riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)A "family" cultural/religious matter in many places of the world and certainly not a matter of "superior public interest". Yet we in the west with our western values have decided that depriving women of sexual pleasure is worthy of legal action (and I agree with that) but why do we get to decide which cultural/religious practices are okay and others are not? Its because we've had a conversation in our society about what cultural/religious norms we want for our part of the planet. Presumably that position is fluid and things could change on that front (I sincerely hope not) but the first step had to be a conversation about a particular practice. I see this happening with circumcision. What has been happening without a great deal of questioning by many cultures is now getting some scrutiny and a conversation about it is going to occur. Then society will come to some conclusions about whether it will continue. Germany is clearly farther along in this convo than we are in the US, and are moving in the direction of laws about it.
Taking it further, for example, telling women what they can and cannot wear in public seems to me to be pretty major but we've all agreed to it because we're culturally acclimated to it. Perhaps that cultural norm will change in the future but its fairly benign in comparison to mutilating an infant's genitals if you ask me. Yet women wearing tops is enforced pretty strictly in our western cultures. What superior "public interest" is served by outlawing toplessness for women?
So we have big problems with one practice that's pretty harmless (toplessness) yet somehow something really drastic (like genital mutilation) deserves a pass - on cultural/religious grounds no less which isn't really even valid in my opinion.