The lived experience of female genital cutting (FGC) in Somali-Canadian women’s daily lives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many of the Somali women who have immigrated to other countries, including Canada, have experienced Female Genital Circumcision/ Mutilation/ Cutting (FGC). While there is literature on the medical aspects of FGC, we were interested in understanding the daily life experiences and bodily sensations of Somali-Canadian women in the context of FGC. Fourteen women living in the Greater Toronto Area were interviewed. Interview data were analyzed using a phenomenological approach. We found that the memory of the ceremonial cutting was vivid but was frequently described with acceptance and resignation-as something that just is; that was normal given the particular context, familial and cultural, and their young age. Most of the women recounted experiencing pain and discomfort throughout their adult lives but were intent on not noticing or giving the pain any power; they considered themselves healthy. The following themes emerged from our interviews: Every Body Had It: Discussing FGC, I'm Normal Aren't I?, and Feeling in My Body-all themes that work at normalizing their bodies in a society that they know views them as different. They dealt with both pain and pleasure in the context of their busy lives suggesting resilience in spite of the day-to-day difficulties of daily life.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".