Hyman Reconstruction and Public Debate: And We Thought We Had Problems

If your stomach can handle it, please read the article, "Hymen Repair on the Arabic Internet" by Bjoern Bentlage, Thomas Eich, and edited by yours truly, for the International Institute for the Study of Islam in the Modern World. Bentlage and Eich essentially conducted a study on texts, position papers, and public debate on the Arabic Internet over the controversial issue of hymen repair, a surgical practice in which the remains of a woman's broken hymen are repaired or reconstructed. The surgery is used by women with a broken or torn hymen who are about to be married and must prove they are virgins.

Are you feeling nauseous yet? Okay, moving on. As you might assume, women with torn hymens face a wide variety of harsh societal consequences if it's discovered by their future husbands, so this surgical practice has become more and more popular for women trying to escape such persecution. Of course, the practice is highly controversial and hotly debated by Muslim men (and a few fundamentalist Christian men as well) everywhere, who are mortified that the practice deceives men into thinking they're marrying a virgin when they're not. Prominent Muslim doctors acknowledge that just because a woman has a broken hymen doesn't mean she's had pre-marital sex. But never mind that. Bentlage and Eich have taken a closer look at the nature of the debate itself, which exploded in 1987 at the meeting of the Islamic Organization of Medical Sciences in Kuwait, when two religious scholars were asked to submit their opinions on the issue. The first, Muhammed Na'im Yasin, argued in favor of the operation in order to protect innocent women and girls from being unfairly prosecuted. The second scholar, Izz al-Din al-Tamimi, argued against it, claiming the practice allowed women to deceive the men they were marrying and could lead women on a "slippery slope" toward abortion practices. (Huh?) Tamimi said the practice must be forbidden.

As is to be expected, Yasin's position was slaughtered and Tamimi's barely criticized. Bentlage and Eich further studied reactions since that time on the Arabic Internet, which they presumed to be one of few mediums for free public debate in the Arab world, and concluded that Tamimi's position continues to be widely accepted, or seems to be accepted on the Arabic Internet, even though it is contested in offline texts around the world. This leads Bentlage and Eich to believe that the Arabic Internet, in practice, only serves as another form of media dominated by a few loud conservative voices with the power to influence public opinion and is not an accurate reflection of public views (in spite of the Internet's image as an uncensored medium for public expression).

Bentlage and Eich's analysis provides a thought-provoking look at how illegal hymen repair and all of the women's rights violations the issue implies, is seemingly stifled from a genuine public debate online, and why this should call into question the state of dissent on the Arab Internet.

Bjoern Bentlage, Thomas Eich, Heidi Schnakenberg, hymen reconstruction