The Greatness of Sharia – Female Circumcision as an Example

The reason why I am writing this article is because I caught myself doing the very same thing I always warned my students from.

The methodology I try to adhere to is to always speak the truth and to not be shaken by the volume “Big Lies” the opponents and adversaries use to intimidate you or suffocate the truth.

In the past few days, I was focused on defending my position regarding Female Genital Cutting, and particularly a sub-type of it in which the clitoral hood is cut (incised or partially and minimally excised). While I didn’t retreat from my well thought out and scientifically irrefutable position, I also didn’t do what I used to teach, namely “those on the defensive will only break even, at best.”

It is time to walk my talk!

The minimal cutting of the clitoral hood is likely to have some advantages. I may not have strong scientific proofs on this. However, the fourth degree of acceptable scientific data in medicine is the expert opinion based on correct physiological bases.

If you agree that the clitoral hood is the embryological counterpart of the foreskin of the male external genitalia, then it is not unexpected that some of the many benefits of male circumcision may apply, albeit to a lesser extent, to female circumcision. It is also noteworthy that the smegma, said to be harmful, which is found under the male foreskin is also found under the clitoral hood.

In fact, there are many physicians, in the East and West, who spoke about the many possible benefits of cutting the clitoral hood. Dr. W. G. Rathman[1] mentioned in his textbook of internal medicine some benefits such as that the hood may be at times larger than usual or narrower, leading to a delay in reaching the clitoral orgasm or some inflammations that may lead to stress and tension. He claimed that with adequate circumcision of the clitoral skin, he was able to document improvements in many cases that he studied. [2]

Although I didn’t have the privilege to review the studies behind Dr. Rathman’s claim, and therefore, can’t count on them to prove those benefits, the physiological bases of the claim are well understood.

Whenever there is a potential benefit or harm on the bases of physiological understanding, the next step would be conducting studies to pursue a conclusion. The question is, would the Western universities be willing to conduct impartial studies to look for the possible benefits of female circumcision? They don’t need to do it, if you are thinking that! They have enough emigrants who would be willing to participate in those studies.

If they don’t, will they accept studies from abroad? In fact, there are many notable physicians overseas that spoke about the benefits of the minimal forms of female genital cutting. I kept their statements out because too many readers may be too prejudiced to take note of anything said by someone with a weird-sounding name.

The greatness of the Sharia is that while it emphasized male circumcision, it was less assertive on female circumcision. It simultaneously recognized the same origin of the tissues cut in both procedures. It also factored in the greater benefit in male circumcision. Moreover, the only clear communication from the Prophet (blessings and peace be upon him) is one in which he prohibited excessiveness in performing this procedure. To me, it is an indication that most of the deviation regarding this matter will come from those who are ignorant and excessive. What a balanced position! How beautiful is our Shari’a!

Allah is Great and Most Merciful!