Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Cosmetic surgery, FGC & Culture - Coggle Diagram
Cosmetic surgery, FGC & Culture
norms of appearance
-
are social :
others - mums, sisters, friends - not always neg comments but bring norms to forefront
-
-
-
-
female circumcision
definitions
-
-
-
other --> all other harmful practices to female genitalia for non-medical purposes - e.g. piercing, pricking, incising, cauthersing, labiaplasty
-
condemned as a practice by WHO, lots of African nations, UN open assembly, etc
-
-
-
-
-
-
upshot
Chambers 2008 args that state shouldn't simply focus on 2nd order autonomy given pervasiveness of oscial norms BUT capibilities don't help disintguish our cases either since we aren't worried about serilisation
-
-
1) pure liberty - ‘the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.’ (Mill) (can’t intervene if act is chosen and only/mainly harms oneself) (e.g. individuals can morally condemn)
2) soft paternalism - self-harming acts not be fully informed, & state can intervene to inform people about them (e.g. educate)
3) hard paternalism - can intervene if acts are harmful, whether the agent knows or doesnt known (eg. ban)
-
summary
most feminsitns underscore the importance of osical norms, womens choice & harmful practices Qs anout harmful practices --. SHOULD:
- some things be banned (how do we decide whats in or out Chambers offers way but do we want to reduce womens options
- lots of things be banned (is brest augmentatino morally on par with FGC
- only worst elemetns of practices be banned (are still left with prob of these practices maintaining male domination/gender inequality)
- nothing be banned (maxes choices but permits FGC
-
additional worries about 'them' & 'us' in cross cultrual critques (capabilities might be 1 way to overcome this but there are criticism
