Is Anti-FGM Legislation Cultural Imperialism? Interrogating Kenya's Prohibition of Female Genital Mutilation Act

IF 1.4 2区 社会学 Q2 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Social & Legal Studies Pub Date : 2022-08-15 DOI:10.1177/09646639221118862
Hannelore Van Bavel
{"title":"Is Anti-FGM Legislation Cultural Imperialism? Interrogating Kenya's Prohibition of Female Genital Mutilation Act","authors":"Hannelore Van Bavel","doi":"10.1177/09646639221118862","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Postcolonial feminists and anthropologists have criticised anti-female genital mutilation (FGM) efforts for being ethnocentric and for imposing ‘Western’ values onto African communities. Recently, a Kenyan medical doctor has petitioned against Kenya's Prohibition of FGM Act, arguing that the Act is unconstitutional and the entrenchment of Western values. This article critically interrogates the allegation that African legislation against ‘FGM’ (FGM) embodies the culturally-imperialist imposition of Western values by empirically examining how Kenya's anti-FGM Act was produced and became contested. The findings show that international power hierarchies influence who can speak and what can be said about FGM. However, the findings simultaneously challenge the Africa/West and cultural relativism/imperialism divide present in some of the critiques of anti-FGM legislation and interventions. I argue that the notion of ‘imposition’ does not adequately capture the African agency and the transnational collaborations that went into both producing and contesting the Act.","PeriodicalId":47163,"journal":{"name":"Social & Legal Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social & Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09646639221118862","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Postcolonial feminists and anthropologists have criticised anti-female genital mutilation (FGM) efforts for being ethnocentric and for imposing ‘Western’ values onto African communities. Recently, a Kenyan medical doctor has petitioned against Kenya's Prohibition of FGM Act, arguing that the Act is unconstitutional and the entrenchment of Western values. This article critically interrogates the allegation that African legislation against ‘FGM’ (FGM) embodies the culturally-imperialist imposition of Western values by empirically examining how Kenya's anti-FGM Act was produced and became contested. The findings show that international power hierarchies influence who can speak and what can be said about FGM. However, the findings simultaneously challenge the Africa/West and cultural relativism/imperialism divide present in some of the critiques of anti-FGM legislation and interventions. I argue that the notion of ‘imposition’ does not adequately capture the African agency and the transnational collaborations that went into both producing and contesting the Act.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
反女性生殖器切割立法是文化帝国主义吗?审问肯尼亚禁止切割女性生殖器官法案
后殖民时期的女权主义者和人类学家批评反女性生殖器切割(FGM)的努力是种族中心主义,并将“西方”价值观强加给非洲社区。最近,一名肯尼亚医生提出请愿,反对肯尼亚的《禁止女性生殖器切割法》,认为该法违宪,是对西方价值观的巩固。本文通过实证研究肯尼亚反女性生殖器切割法案的产生和争议,批判性地质疑非洲反对“女性生殖器切割”的立法体现了西方价值观的文化帝国主义强加。研究结果表明,国际权力等级制度影响着谁能对女性生殖器切割发表言论以及可以说些什么。然而,调查结果同时挑战了非洲/西方和文化相对主义/帝国主义的分歧,这些分歧存在于一些反女性生殖器切割立法和干预的批评中。我认为,“强加”的概念并没有充分体现非洲机构以及参与制定和反对该法案的跨国合作。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
51
期刊介绍: SOCIAL & LEGAL STUDIES was founded in 1992 to develop progressive, interdisciplinary and critical approaches towards socio-legal study. At the heart of the journal has been a commitment towards feminist, post-colonialist, and socialist economic perspectives on law. These remain core animating principles. We aim to create an intellectual space where diverse traditions and critical approaches within legal study meet. We particularly welcome work in new fields of socio-legal study, as well as non-Western scholarship.
期刊最新文献
Book Review: Insecure Guardians: Enforcement, Encounters and Everyday Policing in Postcolonial Karachi by ZOHA WASEEM Book Review: Decolonisation and Legal Knowledge: Reflections on Power and Possibility by FOLUKE ADEBISI Everyday Healthcare Regulation: British Newspapers and Complementary and Alternative Medicine The Revolving Door of Im/Migration: Canadian Refugee Protection and the Production of Migrant Workers Legal Change and Legal Mobilisation: What Does Strategic Litigation Mean for Workers and Trade Unions?
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1