In Name of Female Sexual Pleasure: Discussing the Fight against ‘Female Circumcision’ and the Rise of ‘Genital Cosmetic Surgery’

In the 1970s, feminists such as Fran Hosken reframed female circumcision as “female genital mutilation” (FGM). Performed mostly in African countries, this bodily practice consists in the partial or complete removal of the external female genitalia. The condemnation of this practice is based on the fact that it is typically performed on underage girls and that it is meant to diminish female sexual pleasure. Feminist movements claimed women’s right to sexual pleasure; accordingly, they represented ‘FGM’ as exemplary of women’s oppression. The fight against so-called FGM has continued ever since. Almost fifty years later, however, the rise of female (cosmetic) genital surgeries (FGCS) in Western countries has divided feminists between those who include FGCS in their definition of FGM (the alternative discourse) and those who exclude it while focusing only on female circumcision (the dominant discourse). On the basis of four field studies conducted in Switzerland (using expert interviews and the analysis of parliamentary debates, criminal court cases, and the Swiss press), I will discuss the power relations at play in the debate over FGM in the Swiss public sphere. Following Carol Bacchi’s ‘What’s the Problem Represented to Be’ approach, this paper examines the use of female sexual pleasure both to condemn female circumcision and to legitimate FGCS. I show that, despite the anatomical similarities of these two bodily practices, both the right to bodily integrity and the notion of empowerment are shaped by colonial presumptions of ‘white superiority’ against African 'backward traditionalism'. In fact, Western politicians have adopted white feminist claims; yet they mobilize them to stigmatize migrants who represent the figure of the Others, while ensuring the prosperity of cosmetic industries. I argue that FGCS offers a new discursive arena for ‘sexual nationalism’, wherein racialized representations strengthen imperialistic discourses in the debate over FGM.