A rose by any other name?

As the Instructor of the “Sexuality and Health” class in our school, this paper by Robert Darby and J.steven Svoboda (2007) strongly triggered my attention. Following most of the other sex educators, I will definitely introduce the circumcision surgery to my students from both the culture and medical perspective. Very seldom, I talked about the female genital mutilation and explain it as very negative tradition in some isolated tribes. And as a medical person, my opinion used to be very straight forward that the circumcision already been taken as a normal medical procedure because it has obvious benefits: especially for the patients who have long foreskin and defect their sex behavior.

This paper triggered some other thinking of me under culture:

(1) Human rights under tradition: People claim that genital mutilation to the infants before they can make consent decision defects their right, so their parents should not have this right. But how about the baby shower and other church related activities that children was involved by their parents? Should we also claim that the new born children have the right to choose their own religion to become either a Christine, catholic or Muslim? Should we challenge certain things people do under their culture or religion? Or furthermore, the “normal behaviors” under social norms?

(2) Besides the physical and sexual damages caused by the surgery, the reason that people do this since they want to manipulate people’s sexual behavior which could refer to masturbation. The whole story is behind people’s sexual attitudes. 50 years ago, the main culture of American society thought that any other orgasms outside of the marriage between a man and a woman are immoral. Which bring out my problem that no matter how we talk about this two surgery and their concepts, should we think about the cultural influence of people? What’ their attitudes to sex behavior? To me, it is more important to change people’s sexual attitudes than accuse their behavior that were highly concerned and discussed. Last, how can we as an outsider influence other culture and value? Should we show the respect by sealing the mouth?

At the end, where should a message deliver like me stand on this topic?

Zionist hate mongering, the race/terror trope, and the Free Speech Union: Part 1

March 15, 2019. It was a day of terror. Unleashed by a white supremacist far-right terrorist. Driven by hate for brown people. Driven by Islamophobic hate. Earlier in the day, I had come across a hate-based hit piece targeting me, alongside other academics, the University of Auckland academic Professor Nicholas Rowe , Professor Richard Jackson at Otago University, Professor Kevin P Clements at Otago University, Dr. Rose Martin from University of Auckland and Dr. Nigel Parsons at Massey University. Titled, "More extremists in New Zealand Universities," the article threw in the labels "terror sympathisers" and "extremist views." Written by one David Cumin and hosted on the website of the Israel Institute of New Zealand, the article sought to create outrage that academics critical of Israeli settler colonialism and apartheid are actually employed by universities in New Zealand. Figure 1: The web post written by David Cumin on the site of Israel Institute

Whiteness, NCA, and Distinguished Scholars

In a post made in response to the changes to how my discipline operates made by the Executive Committee of the largest organization of the discipline, the National Communication Association (NCA), one of the editors of a disciplinary journal Rhetoric and Public Affairs (RPA), Professor Martin J. Medhurst, a Distinguished Scholar of the discipline, calls out what he sees as the threat of identity (see below for his full piece published in the journal that he has edited for 20+ years, with 2019 SJR score of 0.27). In what he notes is a threat to the "scholarly merit" of the discipline, Professor Medhurst sets up a caricature of what he calls "identity." In his rhetorical construction of the struggles the NCA has faced over the years to find Distinguished Scholars of colour, he shares with us the facts. So let's look at the facts presented by this rhetor. It turns out, as a member of the Distinguished Scholar community of the NCA, Mr. Medhurst has problems wit

Disinformation, Zionist propaganda, and free speech: Far right cancel culture

Thursday October 12, 2023. The settler colonial occupation had unleashed its infrastructure of violence over the Palestinian people over a period of five days. Gaza was being indiscriminately bombarded, with mass civilian casualties that Amnesty International noted " must be investigated as war crimes ." At 3:32 p.m., my office phone rang. I was occupied and the call went to the voicemail. "Dutta, you are a murderous, f***ing, racist c***. Go back to where you belong...I will see to your termination in New Zealand." A couple of hours before that, an email had gone out from the Zionist Dane Giraud to the email listserv of the Free Speech Union, performed as a supposed apology for attacking my academic freedom. In the email, Giraud referred to my earlier b log post on the interlinkages between far-right Zionism, attacks on academic freedom, and the free speech union, noting how he had been enraged by the following statement on my blog: "I was therefore not surpri

Mohan Dutta: Culture-Centered Approach

Search This Blog