| | Is female circumcision a vicious act of mutilation and injury or a virtuous act of purity and rectitude? Two opposing views dominate current debates, one authorising cultural accommodation and the other advocating the observance of universal standards of human rights. The former view has been widely vilified for sanctioning violence under the guise of culture, and the latter has been reproved for its ethnocentric stance toward cultural rights. The fundamental ideas embedded in these divergent viewpoints toward the practice deserve consideration. |