| Literature DB >> 36032217 |
Marie-Hélène Doucet1, Alexandre Delamou2, Hawa Manet3, Danielle Groleau4.
Abstract
Female genital mutilation (FGM) is justified by sociocultural arguments, including that it guarantees girls'/women's appropriate sexual behavior, thus preserving family honor. We explored the perspectives of Guineans who do not practice FGM ("positive deviants"), as well as of Guineans who still practice FGM but who are supportive of abandoning the practice ("reluctant adherents"). We conducted a "focused ethnographic" study in Conakry, Guinea with a sample of 58 people. Individual semi-structured interviews were undertaken to explore the views and experiences of 18 women and 12 men of different generations who abandoned the practice of FGM. Group interviews with an additional 16 women and 12 men (half of whom were "positive deviants" and the other half "reluctant adherents") validated and enriched the data. Participants consider that FGM has deleterious consequences as it: (1) does not prevent girls or married women from being sexually active outside of marriage; (2) may impair couples' sexual satisfaction, and thus lead to divorce, men's infidelity or polygamy; and (3) may reduce women's ability to have multiple children, because of the increased risk of infertility or obstetric complications. In addition, participants reported that many Guineans fear that the promotion of FGM abandonment is a Western plot to eradicate their culture. We conclude that Guineans who practice and do not practice FGM share the same cultural values about the importance of culturally appropriate sexual behavior, being married, and having many children, which are central sources of honor (symbolic capital) to women and their families. They, however, have opposing views on how to achieve these objectives. Based on our participants' perspectives, the harmful consequences of FGM can potentially sabotage these sources of honor. Recommendations for messages aimed at promoting FGM abandonment are discussed.Entities:
Keywords: Cultural values; Female genital mutilation (FGM); Positive deviance; Qualitative research; Sexuality; Symbolic capital (honor)
Year: 2022 PMID: 36032217 PMCID: PMC9399019 DOI: 10.1007/s12119-022-09975-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sex Cult ISSN: 1095-5143
Participants included in the study
| Individual interviews | Group interviews | Total | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| "Positive deviants" | "Positive deviants" | "Reluctant adherents" | ||
| Women | 18 | 8 | 8 | 34 |
| Men | 12 | 6 | 6 | 24 |
| Total | 30 | 14 | 14 | |
Participants’ socio-demographic characteristics
| Individual interviews | Group interviews | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n = 30 | Percentage (%) | n = 28 | Percentage (%) | ||
| Generation | |||||
| Young adultsa | 8 | 27 | |||
| Parentsb | 18 | 60 | |||
| Grandparents | 4 | 13 | |||
| Age | |||||
| 18–24 | 6 | 20 | 11 | 39 | |
| 25–29 | 2 | 7 | 4 | 14 | |
| 30–39 | 10 | 33 | 6 | 21 | |
| 40–49 | 8 | 27 | 1 | 4 | |
| 50–59 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 7 | |
| 60–69 | 3 | 10 | 0 | 0 | |
| Level of education | |||||
| University – doctorate | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | |
| University – master | 8 | 27 | 1 | 4 | |
| University – bachelor | 5 | 17 | 12 | 43 | |
| Secondary or professional training | 6 | 20 | 6 | 21 | |
| Primary or no education | 5 | 17 | 3 | 11 | |
| Religion | |||||
| Muslim | 24 | 80 | 28 | 100 | |
| Christian | 6 | 20 | 0 | 0 | |
| Ethnic identity | |||||
| Malinké | 9 | 30 | 8 | 28 | |
| Peul | 6 | 20 | 10 | 36 | |
| Soussou | 4 | 13 | 7 | 25 | |
| Badiaranké | 5 | 17 | 0 | 0 | |
| Kissi | 4 | 13 | 0 | 0 | |
| Guerzé | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | |
| Manon | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | |
a Unmarried women and men aged between 18 and 30 years old
b This category could include mothers-in-law/co-wives or aunts
Fig. 1FGM and its sociocultural consequences