Although circumcision (female genital mutilation) is considered a violation of human rights, its deep connection to ethnic group identity and cultural roots makes it difficult to stop. Circumcision is the partial or total removal of external female genitalia or other injuries to the female genital organs for reasons other than medical, usually on girls between infancy and the age of fifteen [1]. Although it has no benefit to female health but rather may cause bleeding, urinating problems, infections, and even death[2], over 200 million girls and women had been circumcised by 2016[3].
The defiance against the ban on circumcision in the Mau Mau rebellion in Kenya demonstrated the obstacles to eliminating it which can be summarized as the politics of the female reproductive system. A grand patriarchal system trapped Kikuyu women: a system that penetrated every layer of the society and made females' long-lasting political resistance fail to bring them body autonomy, oppositely, bringing them self-circumcision.
The Mau Mau Rebellion and The Ban on Circumcision
In Kenya's decolonization history, the Mau Mau Rebellion from 1952 to 1960 symbolized the bravery and determination of ordinary Kenyans to fight for independence. After decades of discriminatory colonial laws on land and labor had accumulated resentment and resistance, the British declaration of a State of Emergency in 1952 sparked the rebellion[4]. It significantly raised colonial officials' power to prevent Kikuyu from banding together for independence[5]. The rebellion was concentrated in the Kikuyu areas of Kenya's Central Province and Mount Kenya[6]. The vast majority of its participants were Kikuyu speakers from various classes and sectors, including peasants, landless people, squatters, waged laborers, prostitutes, rural and urban women, hawkers, tenants with customary land rights, Rift Valley exiles, ex-WWII soldiers, and some ex-chiefs[7]. This rebellion resulted in 20,000 to 30,000 deaths and countless cases of severe torture in detention camps[8].
One of the most unexpected events to the British was the defiance against the ban on circumcision. The ban was implemented in Meru in 1956 in the process of colonial occupation by further constraining the activities of local people and supporting white settlers. The ban on circumcision went along with coercive soil conservation campaigns and increasing restrictions on cash crop production for the locals. In the eyes of the British, the ban would establish a 'modernized' land unit where people on the land were separate from the Kikuyu, who were seen as backward, primitive and underdeveloped[9]. Meru without circumcision would serve as a 'good example to other tribes in Kenya', while their people were controlled as well[10]. It was also supported by the Meru African District Council and the Council of Elders to demonstrate their capability to the British[11]. However, it was strongly opposed by the youth. Kikuyu girls, particularly, displayed a self-destructive tendency by circumcising themselves[12]. This was thought to be in contrast to the generalized traditional image of African women as passive, docile, and unpolitical[13].
Females’ resistance and patriarchal system
The defiance was not an isolated incident but only one part of Kikuyu women's resistance to British colonizers. A series of policies centered on marriage laws and women's wage labor already increased women's resentment[14]. These policies included communal labor (1908), hut and poll taxes as colonial laws (1910 and 1934), unfair labor practices, and political exclusion[15]. Women began to resist 20 years before the Mau Mau rebellion by joining major nationalist organizations such as the Kikuyu Central Association and the Kenya African Union, and organizing labor strikes such as The Revolt of the Women in 1947[16]. In the Mau Mau rebellion, women were active in all sectors. They played a major role in the ‘passive wing’ to help the ‘militant wing’ by food and information exchange[17]. While the British portrayed women as the main victims of the Mau Mau, the British, in fact, observed their resistance. A large number of female fighters in the Mau Mau rebellion were apprehended and imprisoned in detention camps[18]. The villagization policy was imposed to disrupt the original networking and complementary work of Kikuyu men and women[19].
However, increased political exposure did not bring body autonomy with self-circumcision as clear evidence. In a grand patriarchal system from colonization on the top to the community in the middle and to households at the bottom, body autonomy to women and girls was inaccessible.
Girls in Meru were subjected to four layers of patriarchal agencies. First of all, they were subjected to the local community's age hierarchy. As the least powerful of all the female characters who were all subjected to the patriarchal system in their communities, respect had to be earned through age and rituals. Circumcision, as one of the important rituals, marks the beginning of being a complete woman[20]. After circumcision, girls who were subordinated to their mothers and grandmothers might be able to move up the age hierarchy. Secondly, young females in Meru were subordinate to local young males. Circumcision was the ritual that could decide their life outside of war. Although they were complementary fighters during the Mau Mau rebellion, once the war was over, the admired female fighters were expected to return to the domestic sphere and fulfill their traditional obligations. They were still constrained by the conventions of purity, sexual control, and motherhood. Even today, ‘social acceptance’ and ‘better marriage’ are still the major reasons for conducting circumcision[21]. Thirdly, young females were subordinate to local elder males who were the highest authority in the community. However, the latter group, from 1956, stood with colonizers to impose the ban on circumcision, which could deprive girls of all respect, opportunities, connections, and the future.
Finally, females were subjected to the grand narrative of nationalism. While their intentions at the time were largely obscured in later documents, their actions, particularly self-circumcision, were utilized by nationalists to portray an image of aggressive resistance. However, did the girls identify national independence as their self-circumcision goal? Were they proactive in getting circumcised, or did peer pressure play a bigger role? Also, did all of them strictly follow the correct circumcision? If not, then does this mean that the symbolic meaning of circumcision is more important than cutting the vulva? Is it possible that no matter which similar convention was banned, there would be such resistance consistent with all women's resistance for decades? Although their defiance with risks of being punished showed great bravery, did it demonstrate body autonomy or exactly the opposite? No matter how hard they tried to escape from patriarchy which penetrated from the top colonial government to the local community and households at the bottom, they were still trapped inside. It was a system in which no actor was completely independent and autonomous.
Post rebellion
Power struggles did not end with national independence but persisted in memory, trauma healing, and the pursuit of justice. Women's subordination in this story was shown by lack of availability of primary sources focusing on women. Their resistance was seldom recorded in postcolonial literature, songs, and arts[22]. They were once again depicted as suffering mothers, victims or prostitutes, being passive, obedient, and impolitic[23].
On the other hand, unequal power between colonized Kenya and Britain was also reflected in the distribution of sources on the Mau Mau rebellion. The majority of written records were preserved by the British government. However, it purposefully destroyed part of them, rendering the complete record of history unavailable[24]. The deception and denial of the Mau Mau Rebellion, as well as Kenya's entire colonial history, made post-colonial justice more difficult to approach[25]. The fact that the British sides could decide the path to justice demonstrates the two countries' unequal power.
Along with the memory in historical sources, women have still been struggling with circumcision in the contemporary world. Cultural anthropologists argue that circumcision is positively vital in maintaining local gender relations and kin group cohesion[26]. One way to keep it but reduce harm and diseases is medicalization[27]. However, it does not solve the issue that its existence is a violation of human rights. Traditional cultural preservation rights are always in conflict with human rights legislation that criminalizes female circumcision[28]. The resulting ethical issues also include financial profits generated by doctors and nurses who perform circumcision surgery. Currently, alternative rites of passage are the best way to reconcile traditional cultural preservation and human rights violations[29]. They are 'circumcision by words' or 'ritual without cutting,' sometimes in the form of training camps to transfer maternal knowledge[30]. Although it is debatable whether preserving the cultural meaning of such a ritual is still harmful, eliminating physical harm could be an important first step. As demonstrated in Kenya in the 1950s, resistance to the grand patriarchal system will be a long journey.