"Why does female genital mutilation persist? Examining the failed criminalization strategies in Africa and Canada"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Female genital mutilation is an important human rights and health issue in both Canada and Africa. The Canadian government has made efforts towards eradicating this practice by making it a criminal offense, a “remedy” popularly used in Africa as well. Despite the efforts made by governments, law enforcement, along with international human rights organizations, female genital mutilation persists among African immigrants living in Canada and is still practiced by some in Africa. Using international and government laws and policies, documents, case study reports and articles, this thesis questions why the criminalization of female genital mutilation has not reduced this practice among Africans and immigrants living in Canada. Using qualitative case study research methodology as well as the theories of cultural relativism and feminist human rights, this thesis suggests that cultural practices are resistant to change, even among families who move to societies where the practices are legally criminalized and socially rejected. As such, the strategy of eradicating this cultural practice through criminalization has been largely unsuccessful because of strong social forces as exemplified in myths, cultural reasons and the medicalization of female genital mutilation. This thesis concludes by proposing the need to address the status of females among groups who perpetuate this practice and adopting other measures to supplement the laws which are already in place.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".