ABSTRACT
At present international relations are characterized by a dialectic of two concepts: universalism, exposing what is common, and particularism, underlining what is specific. Starting with an analysis of the practice of clitoridectomy and taking the controversy concerning female circumcision as a case study, this chapter bridges the gap between the view that human rights are non existent and the view of naturalistic philosophers according to which human rights are derived from a basic human nature the people all share. It argues that human rights that exist and have to be protected is not equivalent to denying the different cultural contexts in which human beings live and rights must be embedded. Most people think that human rights are, in some sense, justified in that they concern the intrinsic dignity of each person, but there is considerable controversy about the way they should/can be justified. Much of the attractiveness of cultural relativism is derived from its apparent anti-imperialism.
