KIKUYU CIRCUMSION.
Of all the Kikuyu life stages, circumcision (irua) was and
remains by far the most important, signifying not only a child's passage
into adulthood, but a whole wealth of other socially significant
meanings and assumptions of responsibility.
For both boys and girls, initiation into adulthood - through
circumcision or clitoridectomy - marks their admission into full
membership of Kikuyu society, and was thus a momentous occasion, both
socially and individually. Through circumcision and the period of
initiation and instruction that accompanied it, an individual became a
full participant in society as a whole, beyond the scope of the village (itura) and their families. Their responsibilities, therefore, extended not just to their family group, but to the Kikuyu as a nation.
On the most basic level, the social consequence of a boy's
circumcision meant that he would now become a warrior, and would spend
several years in the service of the entire people to defend and protect,
and occasionally attack neighbouring tribes. Uncircumcised, the boy -
for he would remain a boy even if he lived to ninety years - would also
be barred from getting married and raising children. For a girl,
circumcision meant that she was able to bear children, and marriage was
usually swift to follow.
Origins of circumcision
It is thought that the system of circumcision was borrowed from
Cushitic and Nilotic peoples by the early Thagicu, one of the ancestral
groups of the Kikuyu (and possibly the tenth of the 'full nine' clans
mentioned in oral tradition). The point to note here is that
circumcision was adopted some five centuries ago. Before then, one
presumes that it did not feature in proto-Kikuyu life.
The Kenyan context
In all but a handful of Kenyan societies (notably the Luo and the
Turkana), male circumcision is widely practised, and has no stigma
attached to it at all. There are no groups advocating for men's rights,
and indeed circumcision is for most a much yearned-for, if slightly
dreaded, event. The shame that surrounds a boy who flinches or cries
during the cutting will remain with him throughout his life: to flinch
is a sign that he is not as manly as his age mates, and cannot be
trusted with the defence or government of his people. Few, in
consequence, fail the ordeal.
This is in stark contrast to female circumcision (also called 'female
genital mutilation', or FGM), which over the last century and a half
has attracted furious criticism and opposition not only from
missionaries, the church and latterly Kenyan women's groups, but from
people all over the world. Contrary to a boy's circumcision, there are
few taboos surrounding the behaviour of a girl during her
clitoridectomy.
She may scream and cry, she might even utter curses against her circumciser.
And although she too will become an adult through the ordeal, she
will not gain freedom in the same way that the boy gains the right to
procreate and become a warrior. Instead, she becomes eligible for
marriage, which is often swift to follow (though unlike the common
preconception, she will not be forced to have sex: a sometimes long
period of convalescence follows circumcision, accompanied by her
seclusion along with her age mates when she is instructed in the mores,
rules and customs of society, and is taught her duties and
responsibilities as a mature woman).
The meaning of circumcision
Outwardly a relatively simple physical act, circumcision is in fact
of crucial social importance, with complex meanings that affect the
entirety of society. On its most basic level, circumcision marks the
passage of a child into adulthood. The cutting of a foreskin or clitoris
marks the cutting away of childhood. Psychologists and others variously
ascribe all manner of additional interpretations to the act: it could
be a breaking of innocence, or of purity; it is a cleansing; it marks
the difference between rational man and animal-like childhood, and so
on. Whatever the truth of these additional meanings, what is certain is
that the responsibilities that accompany this rite of passage are
extremely complex, and cannot simply be dismissed as being 'primitive'
or 'barbaric' without a deeper understanding of their significance.
Circumcision symbolises a person's assumption of adult
responsibilities - both social and cultural - and the individual's
acceptance as a full member of the tribe. Among peoples who practice it,
an uncircumcised person, no matter how old he or she might be, will
generally be regarded as a child, or else will be seen as inferior or
lacking. If a person who is not circumcised has children, the act is
believed to anger both God and the spirits of the ancestors, and the
whole community will suffer in consequence.
There would be a drought, for example, because someone who was not
circumcised had made a child. Circumcision, therefore, was necessary for
maintaining relations with ancestors and God. In consequence, many
societies - the Kikuyu included - have a taboo against an uncircumcised
man or woman bearing children. If this occurs, the usual punishment is
exile for both the mother and father, which nowadays takes the form of
people heading off to Nairobi to fend on their own. If a man, this is
not so much of a problem, but if a woman, the city is certainly not a
friendly place: I met many Kikuyu prostitutes propositioning supposedly
well-heeled Westerners in Nairobi's bars.
But the taboo against uncircumcised people applies not just
individually, but across entire peoples: many Kikuyu, Maasai and other
circumcising people cannot countenance the possibility that there may
one day be a Luo president of Kenya, for example: along with the
Turkana, the Luo do not circumcise, and so the prospect of a Luo
president would be akin to Kenya being ruled by a child. Much has been
made of this recently, ever since the 'ethnic violence' set-in after the
first multi-party elections were held in 1992.
 Female circumcision |
 Circumcision candidates |
 Male circumcision |
Male circumcision
Traditionally, there was a circumcision ceremony for boys organised
by age-sets of about five-year periods. Although boys could be
circumcised throughout that period, they would become part of the same
age-set, and all the men in that circumcision group would take an
age-set name. Times in the history of Kikuyu society could be gauged by
age-set names.
Circumcision was traditionally a public affair, which only added to
the anxiety - and determination - of the boys to pass the ordeal without
showing the slightest trace of fear. The practice of circumcision is
still followed, although is nowadays more likely to be performed in
hospitals. Traditionally, boys who underwent circumcision became
warriors (anake), although this institution is now defunct. As in
so many societies all over the world, sex was seen as a weakness, both
spiritual and physical. For this reason, junior warriors were barred
from sexual relations, though in compensation they were also given a lot
of food to make them strong. Only senior warriors, who were preparing
to leave warriorhood, were allowed to marry and raise children.
Female circumcision
Although still widespread (around 30% of Kenyan women are thought to
have been circumcised), the practice of female circumcision is gradually
becoming less common, especially as traditional social structures break
down and women gain increasing access to modern western education, and
indeed the cash economy.
Nonetheless, clitoridectomy is far from eradicated, and as long as
the antagonistic attitude from outsiders against it prevails, it seems
likely - somewhat perversely - that it will survive - for to attack
clitoridectomy is, for many, an attack on their own society as a whole.
Among the Kikuyu, as among all the tribes which practice it,
clitoridectomy marks a girl's transition from childhood to womanhood.
With it comes the lifting of the taboo on pregnancy, and usually
marriage is swift to follow.
A sexual as well as a social act (although the circumcision itself is
done in private), the circumcision marks a woman's assumption of her
female identity, allowing her both to procreate, and to take part in
traditional rituals and traditional governing councils. It is also the
time when initiates are instructed in the rules and regulations of their
society, and their responsibilities within it.
Christian missionaries and other Westerners have invariably looked
down on circumcision, of both men and women but especially of women, as
being repugnant. Given the Christian belief that the body is the temple
of God, this apparent act of mutilation was seen - and still is seen -
as sacrilege. And thus, with their typical open-mindedness, the
ceremonies that surrounded circumcision were condemned by the
missionaries to be heathen and anti-Christian.
It was not so much the cutting of the clitoris that outraged them,
but the excision of the labia and other parts which were prevalent
before colonisation, and which were viewed as being abhorrent and
barbaric in the extreme, and as an unwarranted mutilation of a woman's
body. The term female genital mutilation itself (FGM) bears this up, as
does the paradoxical absence of the term 'male genital mutilation'.
The Christian campaign against female circumcision
For more on this, see the section on Christianity
The protestant missionaries who first settled in Kikuyu terrain were
generally very much against female circumcision (unlike the Catholic or
Orthodox churches, which interfered little in local society), and by the
late 1920s and 1930s many missionary organisations, notably the
Presbyterian Church of Scotland, were actively trying to suppress it.
This was done by insisting that converts to Christianity had to denounce
the practice by signing or thumb-printing a written declaration.
Otherwise, they were told, they could not become Christian.
This led to great controversy, as many converts believed that the
practice had nothing to do with their being Christian, and that its
suppression was an affront to their culture and traditions. The problem
was that the missions also provided schools, and the education they
provided was essential if a Kikuyu was to have any hope of paid
employment, which had been made necessary by the colonial policy of
herding the Kikuyu into overcrowded 'native reserves' and later the
'protected villages' where traditional agriculture and herding was
barely a means for survival.
Nonetheless, a large number of converts decided that they could not
abandon female circumcision, and instead set about establishing new
churches and schools which were independent of the missions (in this,
they were helped by the Catholic and Orthodox churches). There, they
could practice Christianity with the liberty of their traditional
practices, and would also gain the education they needed for employment.
Their independent status, incidentally, also helped pave the way for
the fight for national independence in the 1950s. Their stance against
the colonial attitude about circumcision made them a focal point against
colonialism. In was in these independent schools that the ideologies of
nationalism and self-government developed.
Mau Mau and circumcision
The relationship between Mau Mau and circumcision is often cited, but
rarely covered in full. Of course, circumcision was an aspect of
traditional life which was threatened by the colonial administration.
But some Mau Mau took this a step further, considering that anyone who
had not circumcised, or who refused that their children be circumcised,
was an enemy of Mau Mau, and thus of independence. As a result, a number
of uncircumcised girls were forcibly circumcised by Mau Mau, and many
others (many more then the colonists killed by Mau Mau) were executed
for their beliefs: the adverse publicity which surrounded this persists
to this day, and very few Kikuyu are prepared to talk about this period
openly.
A digression
If you'll forgive my digression, I would like to state my own position about female circumcision.
I would like to begin by emphasising the Christian notion that ideas
and practises contrary to traditional Christian beliefs are not so much
different, but 'anti-Christian'. Unfortunately, it is the belief of many
missionaries that they are involved in a spiritual conflict that has
characterised so many missions in Africa, notably in Kenya. In fact, if
you take a look at the Caleb Project's website,
at the bottom of some of their profiles you'll see the phrase: "Any
missionary going to that area needs to have a strong prayer team behind
them and be well versed in spiritual warfare". This is personally what I
find repugnant, irrespective of what one might feel about female
circumcision. For the ultimate consequence of this 'warfare' is the
destruction of the society that is being converted, and with it the loss
not only of one or two 'barbaric' practises, but the loss of the
values, traditions, music and structures of the entire society.
Sadly, instead of working to construct or suggest alternatives, the
most vociferous commentators on female circumcision simply state their
opposition, without taking much time to consider the context in which
clitoridectomy takes place, and its broader meaning and significance
within those societies. It must be understood that it's very difficult -
and misguided - to attempt to separate circumcision itself from the
other practices that surround it.
I should point out, for those who are already beginning to seethe in
self-righteous anger, that I personally believe that female circumcision
is a bad thing, certainly physically, quite obviously as it takes away a
good deal of the pleasure a woman might experience in sexual relations.
It can also make childbirth dangerous or even fatal, though this aspect
has - as far as I can gather - been somewhat exaggerated by outsiders,
as in the majority of cases childbirth passes without any complications
(otherwise, how else could the population of Kenya have increased
tenfold over the last century?).
Nonetheless, from these medical facts many people have assumed that
female circumcision is a way of controlling the sexual desires of a
woman by reducing or simply removing them, and is thus a means of
keeping her faithful to her husband. While there seems indeed be a good
deal of truth in this, circumcision is a great deal more complicated. In
any case, the reasoning that circumcision is intended to keep a woman
faithful assumes that a woman must essentially be a lust-driven
creature, which is certainly not what the opponents of female
circumcision believe to be true.
What I do know for certain is that in all the Kenyan societies who
practice female circumcision (exactly as in north African societies), it
is women who actually do the cutting, and it is women who thereby pass
the tradition on to their daughters. It is thus fair to say, I think,
that it should only be women - specifically the women of the societies
concerned, both the circumcisers and the circumcised - who should decide
whether their practice is good or bad, and nobody else. What we as
outsiders can do is to educate people about health and free choice. That
is indeed important, in fact crucial for the successful development of
Kenya in the future. But we should always be aware of our moral limits:
we should never tell people what they should and shouldn't do, for it
not our business - or our right - to interfere with anything else.
Rather than provoke head-on confrontations with traditional
societies, it is my own belief that working towards consensus and
compromise is a much more constructive path. The headway made among the
Meru by women's groups, for example, with the full support of the elders
and some NGOs, means that a new form of female initiation has been
created with the full backing of the entire society. Called
"circumcision through words", this parallels the former ceremonies, and
keeps the full significance of female circumcision, without a single
knife being wielded. For more on this, see the section on Meru circumcision.
Comments
Post a Comment