Theory and Framing

Before getting into the examination of U.S debates, understanding the theory and framing around female genital cutting is important in approaching the topic properly. Acknowledging that African women are the rightful champions in the fight against female genital cutting but non-Africans can be involved for supportive purposes is a common theme. The purpose of African women being the primary theoreticians is because they are significantly more familiar with the details and complexity of cultural tensions around cutting [3]. The role the non-African activists must play in the movement to eradicate female genital cutting is to educate themselves about the historical and cultural context surrounding the procedure but leave space for African women’s efforts. The need for Western women to educate themselves on the proper context of female genital cutting stems from the common assumption that cutting is only a torturous practice designed to control women. Western women must leave space for African women to champion the movement against female genital cutting because these women face invisibility in their strong efforts to eradicate the practice. Most attention regarding female genital cutting is put on the strong voices of white women in Western culture who do not have a full understanding of the cultural practice. Out of this, a sense of power is implemented on white women who feel the need to protect African woman or any non-White women from the risks of female genital cutting. The discourse around white women feeling the need to save and protect non-White women further stratifies them. In the context of the 1990s in the U.S, if the issue does not affect the woman directly, they should not be in a decision-making position. Instead of being othered, African activists need to be recognized and respected as the leaders they are.