While we are on the subject of African outrages, the always interesting John Tierney has a column discussing a conference of anthropologists who will be debating whether or not African female genital mutilation is the outrage that most Westerners are inclined to think it is. Or, is it an empowering rite of womanhood, as various African women are now claiming. This is a step beyond the problematic multi-culti willingless to romanticize the barbaric rituals of others on the basis of their local meaning and cultural authenticity. The argument presented is that women perform the mutilation, which is associated with spiritual and/or supernatural female power (clearly not found in the ambient African culture). So who are we to call for an end to this?

Perhaps someone should question what kind of society it is when slicing off each other’s genitals is the only ritual that allows women to feel a modicum of power.

The fight against local barbarisms has been a long one. Even those who retain a dark view of human nature will acknowledge some progress.

When the British forbade sutee, the locals, some women included, wanted to keep burning those widows. And who are we to call 200 lashes to a gang rape victim barbaric? – Not, of course, that our leaders are doing that. Speaking of which, I would really like to see a Republican candidate — any and all will do — stand up and talk about how much he is revolted by this Saudi outrage. Why is Hillary Clinton the only candidate out there to have made a public statement? I can tolerate sucking up to the corn lobby in Iowa. I don’t think sucking up to — or failing to confront — our Saudi allies over this astonishing example of the nature of Sharia “justice” is tolerable. No matter who they have to appease at home.