Summarize the point and arguments presented by Karen Musalo in her article on female genital mutilation, “When rights and culture collide”

Introduction

Karen Musalo was an attorney representing Fauziya Kasinga. The facts of the case were that Fauziya was compelled to undergo female genital mutilation in preparation of getting married an old man with whom she had been engaged. After the death of her father, her aunt exiled her mother and proceeded to engage her to an old man. It is after her mother and sister went to seek assistant that she was rescued and taken under the legal care of Karen Musalo. Karen requested for Fauziya to be granted asylum in the United States. However, she is constantly questioned over her stand on cultural relevance, norms and practices and her decision to defend Fauziya (Musalo, 2015).

Cultural relativism holds the perception that the international convention of human rights should not dictate a nation’s cultural belief. Scholars who subscribe to this school of thought believe that there is no moral principle that can be applied evenly to all countries for each nation has its own different and unique culture. The scholars believe that the human rights conventions are meant to impose western ideals on weaker states that are unable to defend their stand and position on the matter. As for cultural universalism, it is the belief that human rights convention should be applicable to all nations irrespective of their culture and religion (Musalo, 2015).

My Analysis on the Karen Musalo arguments in her article ‘when rights and culture collide’

I do agree with her position on ethnocentrism. Karen arguments raise pertinent issues on whether ethnocentrism is bad or good. I am of the opinion that ethnocentrism is bad for it can lead to discrimination against people with a different affiliation. An example is a country with religious minorities; there is always a tendency that they often face discrimination and negative judgments from the dominant religion. However, ethnocentrism is not bad entirely. Studies show that it creates loyalty among people of the same social group or society. There is a sense of pride when you have a unifying factor based on your cultural belief and stand (Khan Academy, 2016).

On cultural relativism, I disagree with Karen Musalo’s argument. She advocates for regulation of standards by measuring what is wrong, strange and normal. I believe that we should understand cultural practices not by limiting the acts they do but by asking questions as to the reasoning behind the cultural belief and practices. In this case, rather than demonizing female genital mutilation as a whole, she could seek to find answers as to why people still practice FGM and the reasoning behind the constant compulsion by fellow women to undertake the cut. Cultural relativism can only be achieved when we limit western ideals on what is good and bad.

What worries me, in this case, is the concept that culture has. Karen defines culture as an evil act which exposes minority and marginalized groups to abuse and misinterpretation. It is evident that one cultural activity may not amount to all cultural beliefs. An example is, many countries and international organization are opposed to whaling for environmental purposes. Environmental organizations are opposed to the fact that there are not many whales in the ocean and such acts need to be stopped before the whales become extinct. However, countries like China argue that whaling has been part of their oceanic cultural practice for centuries and should not be stopped based on cultural difference. Anthropologists have often defined culture to mean a way of life over a period of time and how it relates to customs and cultural roots (Rasando, 2015).

In conclusion, practices of female genital mutilation and whether it’s a cultural sense should be subjected to cultural universalism. This is the belief that human rights convention should be applicable to all nations irrespective of their culture and religion. However, what makes us unique is the fact that different cultures gives us a sense of belonging and pride. Human rights conventions have always tried to impose western ideals on weaker states dictating their religious preference and cultural limitation. There is no moral principle that can be applied evenly to all nations. This is because each country has a different past and shape its policies implementation based on historical experiences on issues relating to cultural and the perception that people have. (Rasando, 2015). In this case, Karen tries to impose International norms to dictate cultural practices which is termed as a violation to the sovereignty of the state. Her actions are deemed to undermine the principles of cultural relativism.

njogujameskarugia@gmail.com or WhatsApp on +254711144556

References

Musalo, K. (2015) When rights and culture collide. Markkula Center for applied ethics. https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/ethical-decision-making/when-rights-and-cultures-collide/

Khan Academy. (2016) How Culture is defined. Khan Academy. https://www.khanacademy.org/test-prep/mcat/society-and-culture/culture/a/cultural-relativism-article

Rasando, C. (2015) Cultural relativism. https://www.andrew.cmu.edu/course/80-241/guided_inquiries/articles/cultural_rel.html

Frese, M. (2015) Cultural practices, norms, and value. Journal of Cross-cultural psychology. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0022022115600267?journalCode=jcca Vol 46, Issue 10, 2015.

Friedman, S.H. (2017) Culture, Bias and Understanding: We can do better. The journal of American academy of psychiatry and the law. http://jaapl.org/content/45/2/136 Vol 45 (2) 136-139.