The Cut in Conflict: Female Genital Mutilation and the Concept of Religious Violence in the Western World
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Female genital mutilation (FGM) is both a concurrent and historical practice, manifesting in geographically diverse regions and across different religious groups. Wherever it is practiced, the ritual cutting of female genitals is an act designed to undermine a woman’s personal sexual autonomy and identity, as well as reify patriarchal power relations. Although historically practiced in Islamic communities, records of female genital mutilation predate Islam, and the validity of Quranic references to the practice are contested by modern Islamic scholars. The recent incidents of FGM reported to have occurred in expatriate Muslim communities in Western European and North American nations reveal an ancient tribal practice that has acclimated itself to notions of modern Western medical authority. In fact, there is evidence for the presence of FGM in Western culture since the 19th century, in a context distinct from Muslim communities or Islamic religious influence; the history and current iterations of FGM in the West conform closely to Foucauldian theories of sex and power, and echo Foucault’s assertion, discussed in The History of Sexuality, that power relations must successfully conceal their own mechanisms in order to maintain viability within society. Consequently, patterns associated with twenty first century FGM analogize the construction of “religious violence” as a cultural category in Western discourse. When gendered violence is categorized as “religious,” it is inevitably subjected to a process of othering that serves to further embed its practices as part of the collective social reality.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".