There are many types of female circumcision, I dont know what you have read but it is described in literally the first result on google: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_mutilation Removal of clitoris is the worst one, and surely should be banned as it is mutilating. But other types of female circumcision, like removal of only the clitorial hood or labia minora, are equivalent to male circumcision. If we allow male circumcision, then these types of female circumcision must also be allowed.
I don't think anyone should be allowed to do anything to permanently modify another's body without their permission unless in life threatening circumstances. If you want to have something chopped off, who am I to object? If you want to go chopping bits off of children, I have an issue with that.
Who's to say it is "mutilating" ? It looks "cleaner". She won't be missing anything. It will help prevent her from having trouble with premature orgasm. It's just a little flap of skin. It can help prevent problems later in her life (like clitoral priapism, clitoral cancer, and a swollen clitoris, the last of which is not uncommon).
No it is not anything near the same because there are no health benefits to female genital mutilation, and THAT is why the medical community refers to it as "mutilation." It can CAUSE health problems for females. From your link: - - - Updated - - - Post a link please. I think we all know that you are full of it. Lol. What's wrong? Having problems and want to blame it on circumcision?
Everyone's overlooking a so far unmentioned critical point. You can pull the foreskin down and wear it that way. The glans will dry and have all the advantages of circumcision without the circumcision. Everybody wins.
Nope, benefits of male circumcision in modern society are debatable at best, and it is done more because of tradition than any real benefits. It is not considered a mutilation because the amount of tissue removed is relatively small and also because it happens to be socially accepted in western societies, just like female circumcision is accepted in other societes. And who says that there arent any benefits to some of those female circumcision surgeries? Not removal of clitoris, but I could see why removing labia minora or clitorial hood could improve hygiene in some cases. I doubt there are many solid studies about it, tough. My point is, if male circumcision is legal, then obviously female circumcision of comparably small extent should be legal too. Otherwise there is a double standard. The only reason why anyone would support such double standard is sexism against males. Note that I am not talking about the more severe female circumcision types. Those are pretty horrific.
It does make a difference what age you do it at. It was really astounding to see how little newborns minded the procedure when they were given simple sugar water during it. Older children however, would find it more traumatic. Speaking as a circumcised male, I am happy with it and glad I don't have to deal with a foreskin and couldn't be more satisfied with other aspects.
That's not true. Go back and read my post about the amount of skin removed being as large as an index card. The foreskin is double-sided you know.
Male circumcision doesn't create scar tissue that covers up that part of the body as a result of it. VICE news did a youtube documentary on women in Somalia who had reconstruction surgery, and that documentary explained that that was the main harmful effect mutilation had. The documentary explained that it just removes a little flap, but covers the rest of most of it with scar tissue. Circumcision doesnt do the same thing. That's why you cant compare FGM with male circumsion to argue the latter should be illegal.
I'm not an expert on circumcision vis-a-vis the various religions, but isn't there a Jewish sect in New York where the rabbis actually bite off the foreskins of Jewish infants? That can't be much fun to anybody concerned.
Of course? What about the grass always being greener on the other side? No I'm quite confident more sensation would not be an improvement. Though I understand n=1 anecdotes aren't the strongest form of evidence.
I don't no man, I see the whole world celebrating the New Years every year. It has to be circumcision they are celebrating what else could it be ?
Are you crazy? Its not in the Koran and not practiced on the Arabian peninsula... banned in many Muslim countries, but YOU are yammering about equal rights?????????
Female genital mutilation is IslamoTerroristic. Those who commit this crime are legitimate military targets.
Some doctors use the Gomco and it is painless to the baby or very little pain. Not barbaric at all, circumcisions will prevent a lot of health problems that he could get later on in life.
Yes it is. What other religion does FGM? Christians? Jewish? Nope. Only Muslims. - - - Updated - - - Sorry, you are just wrong. You need to look into FGM. There are no medical benefits, but there are medical benefits to male circumcision and very little risk. Those are the facts. There is absolutely no reason to perform FGM. - - - Updated - - - And if you weren't circumcised, then you don't know anything else.
They remove a small flap of skin at the end of the penis. Stop whining. It makes it easier to clean for the when you are a child and also for mom. That extra skin on the end of the penis collects bacteria and is prone to infections. Also, sometimes when pulling back on the foreskin to clean, it can get stuck which is VERY painful for little ones and men. So . . . what's your issue with this procedure? Why are you making such a big deal over a small piece of skin? It's silly. - - - Updated - - - Exactly. Thank you. - - - Updated - - - What? No. They don't "bite it off." However, this is very strange. Some of them "suck the blood" from the circumcised penis. Ewww. I read this on another forum and someone actually posted pictures!! - - - Updated - - - Yes it is. You are wrong. It is practiced in Arab countries and in African countries mostly in Muslim communities.
Please reread my post, I did not even mention muslims or arabs in any way, it is irrelevant. Equal rights means that if male circumcision is allowed, then female circumcision of comparably small extent (type I and some of type II FGM) should be allowed too. Seems pretty equal to me. Also, while you brought it up, here is an islamic opinion on female circumcision: http://islamqa.info/en/45528
More than 125 million girls and women alive today have been cut in the 29 countries in Africa and Middle East where FGM is concentrated (1). The practice is most common in the western, eastern, and north-eastern regions of Africa, in some countries in Asia and the Middle East, and among migrants from these areas. WHO | Female genital mutilation www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en/World Health Organization - - - Updated - - - No, FGM is just mutilation of a girl's vagina that serves no purpose except to prevent her from enjoying sex. OTOH, there are health benefits to male circumcision.
Just because our new PC'ers don't want to admit it, FGM is mostly performed in Muslim practicing communities because we all know how they like to oppress women and the men are patriarchal oppressors of women.
