The Genital Mutilation Thread

[Toughy]

my posts from a different thread:

Human beings of any culture have every right and should vehemently stop the practice of mutilating girl's genitalia. Actually we have an OBLIGATION to stop this.

We also have an OBLIGATION to stop the sexual exploitation of children.....especially girls. The media in Western culture bears the greatest responsibility and obligation to do this.

and

I focus on girls and women for a reason. Yes, I am against snipping off part of a boy/man penis.......for any reason. I don't think that practice of Judaism (and taken up others), rises to the horrific consequences of mutilating a girl's clitoris and entrance to the vagina.

It is a red herring to bring up snipping off the foreskin and leaving the penis a functional pleasurable sexual organ. It does not relate in any way, shape or form, nor has any connection with rendering a girl/women unable to experience sexual pleasure.

edited to add: and that mutilation continues her role as the vessel for the next generation, while ending her ability to have any pleasure from the act of procreation.

[Liam]

To equate circumcision for males with genital mutilation for females, indicates a lack of knowledge, and I hope that people take this opportunity to educate themselves. Removal of the foreskin leaves an organ that is able to feel pleasure, and usually circumcision takes place when the male is an infant, and he has no memory, of this procedure. On the other hand, removal of a female's clitoris quite often takes place when she is an older child, she retains the memory of the procedure, and is robbed of her primary source of pleasurable sexual stimulation, not to mention the health issues which arise from this procedure. The repeated suturing of the vagina, and then the consequent breaking of those sutures is far more brutal than the quick cutting of the penis's foreskin, which happens only once. To equate the two, is to say a scrape on the elbow is the same as having one's arm amputated.

[blush]

Originally Posted by Liam

To equate circumcision for males with genital mutilation for females, indicates a lack of knowledge, and I hope that people take this opportunity to educate themselves. Removal of the foreskin leaves an organ that is able to feel pleasure, and usually circumcision takes place when the male is an infant, and he has no memory, of this procedure. On the other hand, removal of a female's clitoris quite often takes place when she is an older child, she retains the memory of the procedure, and is robbed of her primary source of pleasurable sexual stimulation, not to mention the health issues which arise from this procedure. The repeated suturing of the vagina, and then the consequent breaking of those sutures is far more brutal than the quick cutting of the penis's foreskin, which happens only once. To equate the two, is to say a scrape on the elbow is the same as having one's arm amputated.

No one is equating the two.

[Heart]

Originally Posted by blush

No one is equating the two.

Oh, but they are.

Blush - you directed this question to me:
"How is cutting off the foreskin NOT mutilation? It alters the penis permanently. It does not leave it in the natural state. The female version is much more globally damaging to females. I'm not arguing with you that that is true. Are we defining mutilation differently?"

I mentioned in a previous post that my own son is circumcised. So, according to your definition I have mutilated my son. Yes, we most definitely have different definitions of the word "mutilate."

Mr. Bent said this:
"There is a hierarchy of horrors, and FGM far outweighs - from both physical and cultural perspectives - male foreskin removal. But circumcision is mutilation, and it is relevant to talk about it here."

I think referring to male circumcision as mutilation does in fact minimize the horror of female circumcision. That is why I am comparing the two and hammering at this point. They are not the same thing, but in referring to both of them as mutilation, they are being equated.

Circumcision of both males and females is altering, but only that of females is mutilation.

Heart

[blush]

Originally Posted by Heart

Oh, but they are.

Blush - you directed this question to me:
"How is cutting off the foreskin NOT mutilation? It alters the penis permanently. It does not leave it in the natural state. The female version is much more globally damaging to females. I'm not arguing with you that that is true. Are we defining mutilation differently?"

I mentioned in a previous post that my own son is circumcised. So, according to your definition I have mutilated my son. Yes, we most definitely have different definitions of the word "mutilate."

Mr. Bent said this:
"There is a hierarchy of horrors, and FGM far outweighs - from both physical and cultural perspectives - male foreskin removal. But circumcision is mutilation, and it is relevant to talk about it here."

I think referring to male circumcision as mutilation does in fact minimize the horror of female circumcision. That is why I am comparing the two and hammering at this point. They are not the same thing, but in referring to both of them as mutilation, they are being equated.

Circumcision of both males and females is altering, but only that of females is mutilation.

Heart

Heart, I'm not going to debate your decision to circumcise your son. It is too personal, and I do respect you and your viewpoints. I'm a mother too. We have differing viewpoints on this, can we agree to disagree?

[Nat]

[blush]

http://www.womenshealth.gov/faq/fema...al-cutting.cfm

This is a FAQ page I found helpful.

[blush]

Originally Posted by Toughy

I focus on girls and women for a reason. Yes, I am against snipping off part of a boy/man penis.......for any reason. I don't think that practice of Judaism (and taken up others), rises to the horrific consequences of mutilating a girl's clitoris and entrance to the vagina.

It is a red herring to bring up snipping off the foreskin and leaving the penis a functional pleasurable sexual organ. It does not relate in any way, shape or form, nor has any connection with rendering a girl/women unable to experience sexual pleasure.

edited to add: and that mutilation continues her role as the vessel for the next generation, while ending her ability to have any pleasure from the act of procreation.

Thanks, Toughy.
I agree that one is much more damaging on many more levels.

My concern lies with altering(mutilating) an infant's or child's genitalia for seemingly social/religious reasons when they are too young to have agency in the matter.

[Semantics]

Originally Posted by Toughy

my posts from a different thread:

Human beings of any culture have every right and should vehemently stop the practice of mutilating girl's genitalia. Actually we have an OBLIGATION to stop this.

We also have an OBLIGATION to stop the sexual exploitation of children.....especially girls. The media in Western culture bears the greatest responsibility and obligation to do this.

and

I focus on girls and women for a reason. Yes, I am against snipping off part of a boy/man penis.......for any reason. I don't think that practice of Judaism (and taken up others), rises to the horrific consequences of mutilating a girl's clitoris and entrance to the vagina.

It is a red herring to bring up snipping off the foreskin and leaving the penis a functional pleasurable sexual organ. It does not relate in any way, shape or form, nor has any connection with rendering a girl/women unable to experience sexual pleasure.

edited to add: and that mutilation continues her role as the vessel for the next generation, while ending her ability to have any pleasure from the act of procreation.

I agree.

I hate it when people bring up principles like cultural relativism to explain why we shouldn't interfere with these practices.

All humans have basic, inalienable rights that should be protected. People shouldn’t be tortured and have their health put at risk, their genitals mutilated.