The Truth about Female Genital Mutilation

[ck4829]

Yesterday, we had some Troll screaming about how Muslims were the only group of people who practiced FGM.

FGM is a Cultural Thing, not a Religious Thing. It must be stopped, but blaming it on Islam doesn't help.

But, did you know that the West practiced FGM?

"Through the 1950s, some doctors continued to advocate clitoridotomy for hygienic reasons or to reduce masturbation. For example, C.F. McDonald wrote in a 1958 paper titled Circumcision of the Female, "If the male needs circumcision for cleanliness and hygiene, why not the female? I have operated on perhaps 40 patients who needed this attention." The author describes symptoms as "irritation, scratching, irritability, masturbation, frequency and urgency," and in adults, smegmaliths causing "dyspareunia and frigidity." The author then reported that a two-year old was no longer masturbating so frequently after the procedure. Of adult women, the author stated that "for the first time in their lives, sex ambition became normally satisfied." In the U.S., the last documented clitoridotomy to reduce sexual activity occurred in 1958. The procedure was performed on a 5-year-old girl, reportedly to stop her from masturbating. Justification of the procedure on hygienic grounds, or to reduce masturbation, has since declined. The view that masturbation is a cause of mental and physical illness has dissipated since the mid-20th century."

...

"It is also common among African Christians in some countries, and believed to be justified on religious grounds. For example, in Ethiopia some "Coptic Christian priests refuse to baptize girls who have not undergone one of the FGM procedure."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_cutting
http://www.state.gov/g/wi/rls/rep/crfgm/10098.htm

[Oerdin]

1. It is mainly muslims.

Female genital mutilation is primarily practiced in muslim countries though the Christian minorities in those countries some times practice it as well. You're right that it is cultural and it isn't practiced in all muslim countries, however, you're splitting hairs to be politically correct and I don't see that as particularly useful. In any event I can agree that it is a disgusting and barbaric practice that should be stamped out and outlawed every where.

[neweurope]

6. You are WRONG. It is being practized by Christians, Jews,

Muslims and follwers of Nature beliefs. The practice is over 4000 yeras old.

The poster is NOT splitting hairs but informing. Is is NOT mainly Muslims. It is CULTURAL not RELIGIOUS, as the poster said.

----------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[Poppyseedman]

8. FGM is no longer practices by Jews

It was practiced by Ethiopian Jews, but no longer is.

In Israel it is not practiced at all

[neweurope]

34. I know about Israel. While it is forbidden in Ethiopia and

the leaders of all great religions there have spoken out against it, it is in fact still practiced by members of all religions. Or so says Amnesty International: (in German)

http://www2.amnesty.de/internet/Gutachte.nsf/0/c351cd05886f0d03c1256e99002ff71f?OpenDocument

--------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[mikefromwichita]

96. Would you...................

cite some numbers regarding the frequency of the practice among various religions?

[mikefromwichita]

97. oh hell I will do it myself

http://www.amnesty.org/ailib/intcam/femgen/fgm1.htm#a11

This from Amnesty International-

Religion
FGM predates Islam and is not practised by the majority of Muslims, but has acquired a religious dimension. Where it is practised by Muslims, religion is frequently cited as a reason. Many of those who oppose mutilation deny that there is any link between the practise and religion, but Islamic leaders are not unanimous on the subject. The Qur'an does not contain any call for FGM, but a few hadith (sayings attributed to the Prophet Muhammad) refer to it. In one case, in answer to a question put to him by 'Um 'Attiyah (a practitioner of FGM), the Prophet is quoted as saying "reduce but do not destroy". Mutilation has persisted among some converts to Christianity. Christian missionaries have tried to discourage the practice, but found it to be too deep rooted. In some cases, in order to keep converts, they have ignored and even condoned the practice.................

[retread]

98. Did I miss the "numbers" you posted?

*

[mikefromwichita]

110. the numbers are in the LINK

[ET Awful]

38. Incorrect. it has existed culturally in Africa since long before

the birth of Islam.

To try and link it to Islam is completely false. It is not an Islamic practice.

You are simply wrong and are spreading yet more myths designed to disparage the Islamic faith.

[applegrove]

57. Religions pick up all kinds of cultural norms. If Islam is propagating

female mutilation.. they have to take ownership of that and be held accountable. Same with Christianity and slavery. Christians didn't invent slavery but encouraged it or allowed it to continue on.

[ET Awful]

66. "Islam" is NOT propagating it. Educate yourself.

Try this . . . talk to a few Muslims, ask them. You might learn something.

[applegrove]

88. Islam in parts of the world does. In many Islamic places - they do not

stand for it. In some places - Islamic leaders are perpetuating traditions. To ask someone knowledgeable you would have to talk to Islamic leaders in those communities that practice it still.

[ET Awful]

92. So why don't you be accurate instead of stereotyping?

Why are you lumping all of Islam under the same umbrella? You could as easily say "Black people propagate the practice" After all, many place where it's practiced are in Africa. Why the stereotyping?

First, there is NO PLACE in the Quran where the practice is mentioned. NONE. The closest thing to it in any Islamic writing is one of the Hadiths (quotes attributed to Muhammed) which basically refers to, as most Islamic scholars state, removing only the clitoral hood, not the entire organ, in much the same way that circumcision on men removes the foreskin.

This does not fit the mold of the form FGM practiced in much of Africa.

If you wish to speak of Islamic leaders perpetuationg traditions, speak of them as individual leaders perpetuating cultural traditions, as it is NOT an Islamic tradition.

[applegrove]

89. Islam in parts of the world does. In many Islamic places - they do not

stand for it. In some places - Islamic leaders are perpetuating traditions. To ask someone knowledgeable you would have to talk to Islamic leaders in those communities that practice it still.

[Poppyseedman]

2. Good point, but

As long as Islam subjugates it's women, it will be hard to change the culture that allows this evil to continue.

At least in Christian cultures women are allowed to be educated, so progress can be made

[ck4829]

3. As a Muslim I agree

Islam needs a Reformation.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

4. You mean SECULAR cultures.

You know, that ones in which the Enlightenment greatly reduced the power of religion.

[Poppyseedman]

5. No, I mean cultures. Period

Name one non secular culture that is based on Christian theology that doesn't allow women to be educated.

FGM is a cultural problem, not a religious one. If women can be educated about it, it can be stopped

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

7. They used to exist, not long ago. They went the way of the Tasmanian wolf.

eom

[Poppyseedman]

9. Well, duh.

I thought we were talking about present day realities rather than historical facts.

Jews used to sacrifice their children to the god moloch thousands of years ago. Is that also relevant?

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

13. I thought we were talking about what makes a civilized society civilized.

And to that, I still say: secularism.

[Poppyseedman]

14. secularism?

Really? Believe what you wish, but the 80 million plus people who died under secular regimes like Stalin, Pol Pot, and others might disagree

I know religion has had it fair share of killing and murder, but secularist have no right to gloat and talk about how secularism civilized society.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

16. So Christianity championed women's rights? Fought slavery?

Urged the separation of church and state? Fought discrimination against gays? Demanded universal suffrage? Wrote the Bill of Rights?

In what dimension?

Churches don't like progress. It happened in the West DESPITE them. That's a fact. Deal with it. Or not, if you have a psychological need to live in a fantasy world.

Funny you mentioned the Soviet Union. Probably the only dictatorship in the history of mankind that dismantled itself on its own free will. I wonder if they'd have done that if it were a theocracy.

[Poppyseedman]

24. You obviously do not have a working knowledge of Christian

history and the principles that fundamentally changed the way the world viewed women and the people who started the anti slavery movement in this county. Please inform yourself before you continue to embarrass yourself.

If you continue to read propaganda you will never get a rounded perspective on the world. There are facts available out there to learn.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

25. What "propaganda" do you suppose I read? (nt)

[Poppyseedman]

28. Don't know . but who started the anti slavery movement in this country??

I know, obviously by your post you don't. It was Christians.

How did the new Christian faith make women equal to men which at the time was almost universally thought women were mere property.

Christ, that's who, but by your post you obviously didn't know that.

Should I continue?

BTW, what propaganda are you reading that states Christians fought for slavery???

I really want to know

[msongs]

29. slave trade was run by and for white christians nt

[StopTheMorans]

35. SNAP!

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

39. I could say that nearly 100% of the country declared itself Christian back

and therefore it was nearly impossible for a movement for or against ANYTHING to be comprised of anything but Christians. I could also mention how the Bible doesn't see anything abnormal with slavery.

But I feel it'd be pointless. Thanks for sharing your views. :) I'm walking away.

[readmoreoften]

43. Well, except for all those fucking deists, right? n/t

[ET Awful]

41. So is it your contention that all of the slaveholders of the south were

non-Christians?

What propaganda are YOU reading?

The elimination of the institution of slavery had nothing to do with being Christian or non-Christian.

If you'd like to bring Christianity into it, perhaps you can explain why there are passages from Christ telling folks how to treat their slaves?

[StopTheMorans]

45. *crickets*

[ET Awful]

50. Hehehe, come to think of it, didn't the KKK who brand themselves

as Christians support slavery wholeheartedly?

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

94. Yeah, but they put sugar in their porridge.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_True_Scotsman

[Tigress DEM]

60. Agree FGM is Wrong ---- No matter what is used to justify it.

Everybody present and future needs to look at that fact by itself.

The historical perspective merely goes to show that it isn't a "muslim" problem as much as it is an extreemist issue and an issue of extreemists being in control of government and/or religion and forcing people into doing things that go against the common sense of parents who love their children and do what they do in hopes of giving them a better life.

It's about drinking the koolaid and swallowing the propoganda hook, line and sinker.

Educated people who have respect for life and people (females being inclusive in said "people") don't go in and dig out the clits of "oversexed" two-year-olds.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

19. FGM is a REGIONAL practice, not confined to any one religion

It's found in African tribes that are neither Christian nor Muslim, for example.

[PsychoDad]

22. Muslims don't educate their women !

You can tell the barbarism of Muslim nations when one considers that there are only 6 muslim nations who graduate more women in scientific fields than the US, or many other western nations.

Woman Graduates in Science

Bahrain 74%
Bangladesh 42%
Brunei Darussalam 49%
Kyrgyzstan 64%
Lebanon 47%
Qatar 71%
Turkey 44%

Compared with...

U.S. 43%
Japan 25%

And ONLY ONE muslim nation surpassed the US in women engineering graduates.

Morocco 25%

Compared with...
U.S. 19%
Japan 13%


Some disparaging and barbaric gender gaps in higher education also exist in other countries where women are oppressed by Islam: only 44% of people enrolled in higher education in Switzerland are women, Guatemala (43%), Rwanda (37%), Korea (36%), Bhutan (34%), Cambodia (29%) and Liechtenstein (27%). (oh, wait, they're not muslim...nevermind. Ignore those stats...)

Historic records show that women were forced to participate in science and medicine in Muslim societies. Those oppressive muslims have only been educating their women for 1400 years - By contrast, in America, during the 1890's women could not be doctors, and yet, uneducated and oppressed Muslim women doctors were seen as equals to their male counterparts hundred's of years earlier, they were even responsible for written contributions in their fields. Also, oppressed and uneducated women like Ijliya, an astrolabe builder, were employed as skilled scientists in Muslim courts. Other women made progress in pharmacology like Ishi Nili.

Yes... Heavy sarcasm :)

Our sisters are not uneducated, or stupid. To claim they are such is sexism based upon a false stereotype.

Very seldom do positive depictions of Muslim women get portrayed by the western media. Why? Perhaps media profit depends upon a production team's ability to feed the myopic fantasies and stereotypes etched in the minds of many non-Muslims. Many westerners seem comfortable with stereotypes of Muslim women that show them as oppressed and uneducated victims of Islam, instead of educated, strong women with a will of their own.

Muslim women in the sciences have become leaders in their fields, receiving awards, patents and making contribution that further our knowledge and understanding of the world, and yet western eyes see through these women as if they do not exist. The tendency to avoid praise for Muslim achievements hides the seldom explored comparisons.

My muslim sisters are the equal to any western woman or man. Do not discredit their achievements because they are Muslim women.



Peace and Rammadan Mubrak.
BTW- FGM is not sanctioned or condoned by Islam.

[Poppyseedman]

26. Funny you left out Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia and the other

several other Islamic countries that suppress women.

I certainly understand your point. There is a media bias against Muslim women and by no means meant to play into those stereotypes, but the subject was about FGM, which is practices by several barbaric Muslim nations

[PsychoDad]

37. Secondary Saudi schools....

have more Female graduates than male, higher education is hampered by a lack of facilities for the numbers of women applying for university.

"women as a group have excelled academically over males in secondary schools, and the number of female graduates has outstripped the number of males, even though the number of girls entering school was considerably lower than the number of boys. The number of female secondary level graduates has increased more than tenfold, from 1,674 in 1975 to 18,211 in 1988. Calculated as a combination of the hours invested in those who drop out or repeat classes and those who graduate, it took an average of eighteen pupil years to produce a male graduate of general education, as opposed to fifteen pupil years to produce a female graduate. Under conditions existing in the early 1990s, the problem can only become more acute because the Fifth Development Plan projected 45,000 female secondary school graduates in 1995 and only 38,000 male graduates.

Government funding for higher education has been particularly munificent. Between 1983 and 1989, the number of university students increased from approximately 58,000 to about 113,000, a 95 percent increase. Equally dramatic was the increase in the number of women students at the university level: from 20,300 to 47,000 during the same period, or a 132 percent increase. In 1989 the number of graduates from all of the kingdom's colleges and universities was almost the same for men and women: about 7,000 each.

The new campus of King Saud University in Riyadh, built in the early 1980s, was designed to accommodate 25,000 male students; the original university buildings in central Riyadh were converted into a campus for the women's branch of the university. King Saud University included colleges of administrative sciences, agriculture, arts, dentistry, education, engineering, medical sciences, medicine, pharmacy, and science. Of these, the only course of study that excluded women was engineering, on the premise that a profession in engineering would be impossible to pursue in the context of sex-segregation practices. In the early 1990s, the university offered postgraduate studies in sixty-one specializations, and doctorates in Arabic, geography, and history. In 1984 there were 479 graduate students, including 151 women. "

http://countrystudies.us/saudi-arabia/31.htm

So you see, even Saudi women are receiving an education, in fact an equal number if not a little more saudi women than men.

Meanwhile the Infrastructure of Afghanistan has been blasted to crap by the US and should not be used in comparison of educational systems.

As for FGM, it has been historically practiced by a number of cultures. Today it is practiced predominantly in sub Saharan africa by both muslims and christians, and was practiced in the US as recently as the 1950's.

Somalia seems to be a good example where the practice originated in pre-islamic times and continues among some to this day. Kenya is an example of tribal, non-muslim cultures currently practicing it.

"The Kenyan Government, for example, estimates that 32 per cent of women aged between 15 and 49 have undergone the procedure in more than half of the country's districts. In 1998, the Ministry of Health conducted a demographic survey which revealed that genital cutting was more widespread among certain ethnic groups. These included Kisii (97 per cent); Maasai (89 per cent); Kalenjin (62 per cent); Taita/Taveta (58 per cent); Meru/Embu (54 per cent); Kikuyu (43 per cent); Kamba (33 per cent); Miji Kenda/Swahili (12 per cent)."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/ethics/female_circumcision/human_rights.shtml

As for Islam, FGM is not allowable. The practice should be considered HARAM, or forbidden by muslims. It is not mentioned in the Quran and there is strong hadeeth to prove this point against it. If you wish I can share it here with any interested parties.

Peace.

[neweurope]

31. Applause. I had wanted to compile that.

:yourock:

I'm so very tired of the Islam bashing here. There is no differentiating with some. Everybody who repeats the sterotypes without differentiating is deepening trenches instead of building bridges. But bridge building is what is needed, now more than ever.

---------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[rosesaylavee]

95. Have to step in here.

Christian or western culture has only in the last 80 years allowed women to vote. Women do not have equal pay for the equivalent job... yet... in 2005. Women in religious leadership or priestly roles is still a novel or new thing in many Protestant churches and not yet allowed in the Roman Catholic faith.

Pointing fingers at Islam culture when Christian culture hasn't fully "arrived" yet is not intellectually honest.

[Why Syzygy]

10. "frequency and urgency" would

have absolutely nothing to do with this perfectly beautiful and normal body part.

"Sex ambition" became "perfectly satisfied"? I really doubt it.

This is grotesque. Why cannot HUMAN beings learn to appreciate HUMAN nature?

[dkofos]

12. Because religion does not allow it

[Why Syzygy]

17. All the more reason

to leave religion completely out of it.

[leftchick]

11. A physician in the US did this to my Aunt about 30 years ago..

First he convinced her she had to have an abortion because she could not carry the child to term (which she now believe was not true) then he performed the clitoridotomy while she was under anesthesia. Why she did not sue the man is beyond me. She was traumatized for years after. What a horror.

[patricia92243]

15. Two year old masturbating?? Who taught her that? Sounds like a case of

of an adult taking sexual liberties with a child - and the child got punished. Repulsive!!!

[TorchTheWitch]

18. Young children masturbating is very common

http://www.intelihealth.com/IH/ihtIH/WSIHW000/9105/28955/266765.html?d=dmtContent
In young children, masturbation is a normal part of the growing child's exploration of his or her own body. This exploration is different from adult erotic behavior. It is done simply because the child is curious about how various body parts work and because the genital sensations feel good. Of all age groups, children aged 15 to 19 months are most likely to masturbate in public; however, in 85 percent of cases, this behavior stops spontaneously after age 2.

[dogday]

20. Young kids are always doing that

they are very oral. Discovering everything and trust me the little boys are worse, but the little girls do it as well.

[neweurope]

32. Huh? Nobody needs to be taught masturbation. I t comes

naturally; even animals do it. That is - it comes naturally when you don't forbid your child to touch him/herself "there", thereby installing a guilt that often lasts throughout life. I watched my baby niece doing it when she was just under one year.

--------------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[KitSileya]

21. FMG is actually in Norwegian media a lot.

Many Somalian refugees in Norway send their daughters on vacation to Somalia in order to have the procedure done, because it is illegal in Norway. Fortunately, several young women have spoken out about it - one young woman went undercover in her mosque and got imams on tape advocating the procedure. It caused quite a brouhaha. Unfortunately, women are still being mutilated - in some cases, parents decide to do it to their daughters precisely because they will be living in Norway. The parents are afraid their daughters will be influenced by the "promiscuous" Norwegian culture, and FMG is a good way of hindering that.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

23. And the Norwegians can't prosecute the parents? (nt)

[PsychoDad]

27. Is it against the law?

As this may be a fairly new phenomena in Norway, there may not yet be a law against it any more than there is a law against male circumcision. :( Thus the Norwegian legal system may be at a loss to do much.

Peace

[neweurope]

33. As far as I know it's forbidden all over Europe.

------------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[PsychoDad]

47. Then hopefully the media attention

will attract the attention of law enforcement and the rest of the Muslim community in the country to try and work toward stopping this horrible practice.

Peace.

[KitSileya]

90. They can, but we need to refine the laws.

Currently, it's difficult to prosecute once the procedure's done, because the parents have to be reported by either the girl or a close relative. While there is a law forbidding it, no one's been convicted for it in the 10 years the law's been in effect.

Teachers are authorized to call in social services if they suspect that the girl is in danger, or if they think the procedure's been done. There's also discussion whether girls should be checked as part of their annual health check - some women regard this as a violation of the girl, while others point out that the girls are checked regularly by their mothers and grandmothers after the procedure, to ensure that they haven't been 'broken'.

I am afraid that we err too much on the side of liberalism in this instance. We are too afraid of offending to protect these girls from being harmed. We wouldn't allow parents to cut off a girl's hand or foot without being thrown in jail, so why we don't have a better system to make sure they aren't mutilated in more personal places, as they do in Sweden, is a good question.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

93. How does Sweden do? (nt)

[msongs]

30. but it is OK to mutilate boys in the name of religion

all those mothers get their revenge against their husbands and fathers by mutilating their little boys, and the religious people get power over little boys by chopping their penises.

ain't religion wonderful?

Msongs
www.msongs.com/clark2008.htm

[LostinVA]

84. How is this WOMEN getting revenge on men?

This post is very.... disturbing concerning views on women.

[Crunchy Frog]

100. I find ALL genital cutting of children to be very disturbing.

The degree of severity of the cutting is a factor, but the cutting itself in any degree is what I find disturbing.

[Jose Diablo]

36. Whats good for the goose is good for the gander

Do women ever complain about the practice of cutting the foreskin from an infants pecker the second thing after emerging from the womb. Nope. What is generally said is it's 'easier' to keep clean.

I object. I had no say whatsoever in that decision. Now did my or any father. Somehow many mothers have taken it on themselves to decide what is best. Do they realize what it is like to become a helmet head and to have to hang their head as the 'anteaters' proudly strut from the shower room in gym class.

And what about the loss of sensitivity caused by the practice. The foreskin has a place in protecting the nerve filled skin in that most sensitive place. It also provides a protective moisturizer, smeggle, to keep that spot in perfect working order.

If the women object to female circumcision, they also should come out against involuntary male circumcision.

As for the Hebrews rite of passage, in which circumcision is a part. For the man, it is voluntary on his part. Plus by that time he has already decided to wear boxer undergarments, not jockey shorts which aggravate the desensitizing of that very sensitive part of his anatomy. Again the mothers mess over their sons by dressing them in jockey shorts, this after cutting the foreskins off. It's a conspiracy I say.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

40. Jesus H. Q. Rhyste on a pink yellow-polkadotted nuclear powered pogo stick

:wow:

[SheWhoMustBeObeyed]

44. I second that emotion

[nvliberal]

46. Male circumcision and female circumcision aren't the same

thing.

Too bad some people can't see the difference.

[Jose Diablo]

48. How is mutilating the male

any different than mutilating the female? It's too bad some people cannot see that there is no difference.

Edit: Want a link to show the lack of differences?

http://www.noharmm.org/comparison.htm

[GreenPartyVoter]

63. There is a slight difference in that a circumsized male can still

find pleasure in sex. A female who has no clitoris is less likely to find pleasure in sex because that's where the bulk of her nerve bundles were.

[LostinVA]

86. There is a huge difference

[ET Awful]

67. Well, for one, you still have external sexual organs.

The same can't be said for many victims of FGM. In many cases, the entire clitoris, labia majora and labia minora are removed. For male circumcision to be comparable, they'd have to remove your penis basically.

[Jose Diablo]

70. Circumcision should not be minimized

Make no mistake, circumcision has profound effects on men also.



"The fold of foreskin consists of two layers: an outer layer of epidermal tissue (like that of the rest of the body) and an inner layer of mucosal tissue (as in the vagina, mouth or inner eyelid). Each layer is about 1½ inches (4cm) in length. If laid flat (right), the average adult foreskin would measure approximately 3 inches by 5 inches (8cm x 13cm); or about 15 square inches (104cm²). Research published in 1998 by Werker, et al confirmed that the surface areas of two adult foreskins were 60cm² and 90cm² respectively (10 square inches and 14 square inches).

---

Circumcision also destroys nerves and nerve endings that send pleasurable sensations to the brain during sexual activity.

Neuroanatomist Dr. Ashley Montagu states that an area of "normal" skin the size of a quarter (U.S. 25-cent piece) contains more than 12 feet (3.66m) of nerves and over 50 nerve endings.* The illustration at right shows that at least 15 U.S. quarters can fit upon the area of tissue represented by an average adult foreskin. Infant circumcision likely deprives the adult male of about 240 feet (73.2m) of nerves and over 1,000 nerve endings. Since Dr. Taylor's research suggests that the foreskin is more densely nerve-laden than "normal" skin, a circumcised man likely loses many times more than 1,000 nerve endings."


Did you notice the part about 14 square inches would be the equivalent amount of skin if had been allowed to grow?

Please, explaining this practice away by saying it's not comparable to FGM doesn't do either the cause of banning FGM or male circumcision any good. Both practices should be recognized as what they are, barbaric and unnecessary. And the damage the male has is far from little. The only difference is, men seldom speak of it because for them, they think everything is as it should be.

You should research the issue a little more. Try the following link to become more informed

http://www.noharmm.org/morepages.htm

Spelling

[ET Awful]

71. I have researched it, and sorry, there is no comparison.

I'm circumcised, my penis still functions. I have external sexual organs.

The same cannot be said of many victims of FGM.

Quit being so hung up on your own penis and do some research on what FGM really is before you try and manipulate people into believing it is comparable.

[Jose Diablo]

72. I doubt you have really researched it

your response time was too short to have read all there is about it.

Furthermore, who really is doing the manupulator? Me or you?

Edit: BTW are you a conservative or moderate? I am doing a little side research.

[ET Awful]

73. Why do you assume that I've never researched the matter in the past?

Sorry, you are simply wrong. I have researched it, many times. The fact is that most men who are circumicised are circumcised in a safe environment usually with sterile instruments.

When FGM is performed, it is often done with dirty objects ranging from pieces of glass to old razor blades.

When am an is circumised, the foreskin is removed. When FGM is performed, the entire clitoris is removed in most cases, in many cases, the entirety of the external sexual organs is removed.

Your love for your penis is perfectly understandable, but your attempts to compare circumcision of men to mutilation of women is repulsive.

[Jose Diablo]

74. Gosh, I supplied a link that showed

Comparisons of the effects of male and female circumcision are similar and for that you call me a manipulator and repulsive.

With all due respect, I disagree. Your link to the website gallery of cats is broke.

Anyway, nothing you have added in your posts have added anything except insults against me and I am repulsive? I guess you actually don't have much to say.

[ET Awful]

77. Sorry, but any link that says that cutting off of all external sexual

features on a female is comparable to cutting off the foreskin of a male is just wrong.

I don't need to say anything more than that.

[Sapphire Blue]

79. There are different types of FGM; infibulation would be more comparable...

... to removal of the entire penis; removal of the clitoral hood would be more comparable to male circumcision.

Whether any of these practices continue will depend on whether the respective cultures continue to find them acceptable.

An explanation of FGM...

WHAT IS FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION?

The different types of mutilation

Female genital mutilation (FGM) is the term used to refer to the removal of part, or all, of the female genitalia. The most severe form is infibulation, also known as pharaonic circumcision. An estimated 15% of all mutilations in Africa are infibulations. The procedure consists of clitoridectomy (where all, or part of, the clitoris is removed), excision (removal of all, or part of, the labia minora), and cutting of the labia majora to create raw surfaces, which are then stitched or held together in order to form a cover over the vagina when they heal. A small hole is left to allow urine and menstrual blood to escape. In some less conventional forms of infibulation, less tissue is removed and a larger opening is left.

The vast majority (85%) of genital mutilations performed in Africa consist of clitoridectomy or excision. The least radical procedure consists of the removal of the clitoral hood.

In some traditions a ceremony is held, but no mutilation of the genitals occurs. The ritual may include holding a knife next to the genitals, pricking the clitoris, cutting some pubic hair, or light scarification in the genital or upper thigh area.

The procedures followed

The type of mutilation practised, the age at which it is carried out, and the way in which it is done varies according to a variety of factors, including the woman or girl's ethnic group, what country they are living in, whether in a rural or urban area and their socio-economic provenance.

Continued @ http://www.amnesty.org/ailib/intcam/femgen/fgm1.htm#a1

[KitSileya]

91. Not to mention the danger of the infibulation

when it comes to urinating and menstruation! Of then, the hole left after the sewing together is so small that it takes many times longer to urinate, and menstruation can take weeks of bleeding. Both problems are very dangerous, and cause major discomfort and pain for the women in question.

I guess when men not only are circumcized, but also scrape away skin to sew together over the urethra, so that it takes a man 15-30 minutes to urinate, creating bladder problems etc, that's when we can say it's comparable! Not to mention the fact that women need to be cut open to have intercourse, which in most cases is incredibly painful every single time. And giving birth! People joke about squeezing a melon out of a hole the size of a grapefruit etc, but how do you think it feels if that hole has been deliberately sewed together? Scar tissue doesn't stretch the same way the original tissue does.

[Crunchy Frog]

102. Actually, in the third world countries where FGM occurs

males are circumcized with the very same pieces of broken glass and dirty razor blades as the females are. If it only removed a few extra folds of skin, and was done in a nice clean hospital, would that make FGM acceptabe?

[ET Awful]

105. Nice job of putting words in my mouth.

Do you always do that, or are you just doing it in this case?

[Crunchy Frog]

107. I don't know what words you think I put in your mouth.

I was simply throwing a question out as food for thought.

In any event, I rarely post my opinions on this subject because these discussions always degenerate into pointless flamewars. In the interests of not contributing further to this one, I will be offering no more comments in this thread.

[Sapphire Blue]

109. According to Amnesty Int'l...

For the very rich, the mutilation procedure may be performed by a qualified doctor in hospital under local or general anaesthetic.

http://www.amnesty.org/ailib/intcam/femgen/fgm1.htm#a2

Is this any more acceptable? You answered this in another post (#100), and I agree w/your answer...

"I find ALL genital cutting of children to be very disturbing.
The degree of severity of the cutting is a factor, but the cutting itself in any degree is what I find disturbing."

[LostinVA]

87. You may have researched it, but you're wrong

Why is this discussion even going on? You can have your own opinion, but not your own facts.

Go cut off your penis and testicles, and then we'll talk.

[LostinVA]

85. There si a HUGE difference saying there isn't just shows

your ignorance on what FGM really is. Try cutting off your whole dick and testicles, and then you'll understand. THAT'S what it is.

But you probably know that.

[Crunchy Frog]

101. Actually, there are many degrees of FGM.

Some of them remove the entire external genitalia and sow the girl up to a pinpoint hole, some simply remove the clitoris, and some only make a small cut on the clitoral hood (the analog of the mail foreskin). I would be inclined to judge these practices on the basis of their severity rather than gender.

I don't like genital cutting of children period. If someone wants to get their genitals altered as an adult, I don't have a problem with it.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

103. Then Don't Have Your Male Children Circumcized

"I don't like genital cutting of children period. If someone wants to get their genitals altered as an adult, I don't have a problem with it."

[Crunchy Frog]

104. I don't plan to.

I guess that people who object to cutting girl's genitals can simply opt not to have their female children cut as well.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

106. If You Find The Two Practices Equivalent....

I don't...


Comparing female and male circumcisions is like comparing liposuction and open heart surgery because they are both medical procedures....

[Crunchy Frog]

108. There are certain types of female cutting

that are very comparable to male cutting. If someone wants to have their daughter cut in a way that is comparable to male cutting, then why in that case is it like comparing liposuction to heart surgery? (Incidently, liposuction can be pretty risky, and I would never advocate performing it on an unconsenting child.)

I won't debate this point further because it seems rather pointless. We have different opinions. I can live with that.

[Sapphire Blue]

49. It isn't good for the 'goose or the gander'...

Edited for clarification

... and, as information, education, and awareness of the brutality of this procedure (male infant circumcision) grows, it is becoming a less common & accepted procedure in this country. Decades ago, male infant circumcision was the standard. Not so anymore...

In 1971, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) reported that there are no valid medical indications for circumcision in the neonatal period.2 After that the nationwide incidence of neonatal circumcision continued the slow decline that started in 1965, although Wallerstein (1985) reported spot samples of 77 to 98 percent.

<snip>

The nationwide circumcision rate had been fluctuating in the low 60 percent range for some years, but a decline in the percentage of boys circumcised started in 2002 and continued into 2003. From 2002 to 2003 declines occured in all four census regions. Non-circumcision has been the norm in the Western Region for more than a decade. The Southern Region now is approaching parity. Data for 2004 is not yet available.

http://www.cirp.org/library/statistics/USA/

(Note: when my youngest grandson was born in 1996, his pediatrician stated that the current (at that time) circumcision rate among his infant male patients was less than 50%. None of my daughter's friends elected to have their sons circumcised, with the exception of one parent... a father... who prevailed against the wishes of the mother.)

[Jose Diablo]

51. I wonder if there is direct correlation

Between those males that are circumcised and their political leanings, i.e republicans.

Why I wonder this is because receiving a extremely painful trauma when fresh from the womb, would this have an effect on the personality that emerges latter?

Crummy spelling.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

54. No, because it was nearly universal during the baby boomer generation

the generation that had all those anti-war demonstrations in the 1960s and which still makes up about half the numbers at anti-war demonstrations today.

:eyes:

Look, I'm not for male circumcision, but it's simply not in the same league as FGM, which is intended to and usually does destroy female sexual response.

[Jose Diablo]

58. I don't think it was nearly universal among the boomers

I seem to remember reading someplace that in the USA the rate of circumcision is about 65%, which could correlate closely with the rate of those men that identify themselves as conservative to moderate.

In the world though, the USA does have the highest rate of male circumcision. Could this be why the USA so right wing, as compare to say Canada.

It's a speculation, seeing how republican vs democrate seem to be personality related.

I wonder if anybody has ever tried to correllate this together.

[Sapphire Blue]

61. The birthing process itself can be considered traumatic for an infant...

... along w/circumcision and other procedures that infants undergo. The pain felt by infants has been historically ignored or minimized by 'professionals'... the very 'professionals' inflicting pain upon infants.

IMO, unaddressed, minimized, & ignored trauma contributes to an infant's sense of distrust of those around him/her... which could contribute to many aspects of his/her personality.

An interesting article on infants & pain... not only has circumcision been done w/o anesthesia, but surgery on infants was routinely performed w/o anesthesia...

Historical Perspectives on Pain
Experiments In Infant Pain

Excerpts from "Babies Don't Feel Pain: A Century of Denial in Medicine"
David B. Chamberlain, Ph.D.

Pain, The Unrecognized Trauma

In spite of these experiments with infant pain, the psychological and medical communities never became concerned about it because of the dogma that the brain was too immature to permit babies to comprehend and experience it.

Do babies experience pain? Of course they do. (Mothers and fathers know this; it is the professinals who cannot accept it.) Babies express pain quite clearly--even dramatically--through crying. It seems obvious, but experts decided that crying was not meaningful communication: it was described as random sound, or reflexes. They show by characteristic facial expressions how they feel. Body movements demonstrate a frantic discomfort, struggling, squirming, trying to get away. Vital signs confirm that the system of the baby is in an uproar, with heart racing, respiration galloping. Hormonal changes confirm the stress alarm: cortisol and beta endorphin streaming into the blood stream and saliva. Not that we need them to prove pain, but neurobehavioral observations confirm how much the pain disturbs behavior. Normal sleep cycles can go into reverse. Seizuring, tremoring, spitting up, trunk arching, finger-splaying, fisting, and refusing consolation are just some of the specific measures which manifest the reality of pain.

Ironically, in the hands of 20th Century physicians, virtually everything to do with birth has been made more painful for babies. To begin with, the conditions for pain in the womb have increased with the invasive procedures of contemporary neonatology and obstetrics. Babies born too early (and about 10% of babies are beginning life this way) may have to spend time in a man-made womb, the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, where pain is a way of life. Even "normal" birth in a hospital is a painful experience for most babies, because routine protocols involve lancing, needling, wiping and washing, and a series of upsetting experiences which no baby would welcome. These disturbing practices are all performed with the confidence that babies will not care, will not remember, and will not be harmed by these traumas. The trauma of pain is simply not recognized. No matter how hard babies kick, cry, and scream, doctors and nurses steel their minds and hearts and continue with their work.

Surgery Without Anesthesia: The Ultimate Pain

Hospitalized newborns, from premies of 26 weeks upward, have routinely faced surgery without benefit of pain-killing anesthetics. Although surgery without anesthetic was standard practice for a century, it was unknown to the general public until 1985 when a few parents discovered their seriously ill premature babies had suffered through major surgery with no anesthetic. Instead of anesthetic, the babies had typically been given a form of curare to paralyze their muscles for surgery, making it impossible for them to lift a finger or make a sound in protest!

Continued @ http://www.birthpsychology.com/healing/historical.html

[Qibing Zero]

52. While I'm not sure it's always the mothers...

This issue really needs to be addressed. It's fucking sick what they do, and even worse that it's so widely practiced. I'm glad my parents seemingly had some heart...


P.S. - did you know you can grow it back? O.o

[Jose Diablo]

56. True, some fathers insist on it for their sons

As for "growing it back", don't think so.



Once it's done, the damage to the personality is permanent plus that part of the anatomy that was there before and would develop into a very important part of the man, it's just gone.

This doesn't even address the damage to the infant ability to bond to the mother and how that effects developing the ability to trust others.

What really chaps my hide though, is the general lack of knowledge and the unwillingness of many women to see how damaging this is to men. It's like men are crude and cruel and all women are kind and generous. It's all so much BS underlaying each 'cause' an agenda to only see what they want to see.

[Kailassa]

62. When I had my sons

I didn't give a damn what the doctor advised or their father wanted. His fear of his sons looking different there to him was his problem, not theirs. No way was I letting any doctor start snipping at something so vulnerable on these innocent babies.

Studies come out regularly "proving" some or other slight benefit in male circumcision, and that's enough to keep the average mother believing it's in the child's best interests. This makes it much harder to push for change because the waters are muddied. However I agree it's a cruel, barbaric and unnecessary assault on a baby.

[bettyellen]

64. i read that dads have the bigger role in the decision....

and the biggest factor- if it's not a jewish bris- is whether the dad had it done himself.
often the same with women - if women were mutilated themselves- it is mouch more likely they will support doing it to thier own daughters.
same with people who are abused in any way.
btw, yoo are way off base equating the two procedures. please son't minimise tthe mutilation just to score points for your own pet issue.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

65. I Was Circumcized At Birth

And I don't feel I was mutilated...

[Jose Diablo]

68. Oh, you poor man

From site:

Do the victims learn to accept it as "normal" or defend the practice? Yes

[DemocratSinceBirth]

80. Hmmmm

Women like it...


It's an aesthetic thing....


To each his own....


But I couldn't be happier that I'm cut....

[NickB79]

111. Circumcision may offer Africa AIDS hope

"French and South African AIDS researchers have called an early halt to a study of adult male circumcision to reduce HIV infection after initial results reportedly showed that men who had the procedure dramatically lowered their risk of contracting the virus.

The study's preliminary results, disclosed Tuesday by the Wall Street Journal, showed that circumcision reduced the risk of contracting HIV by 70 percent -- a level of protection far better than the 30 percent risk reduction set as a target for an AIDS vaccine."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/07/06/MNGANDJFVK1.DTL&type=printableL

[DemocratSinceBirth]

112. Thank You...

There are pros and cons in the male circumcision debate...


So, lets say it's a wash....


Then, it comes down to aesthertics...


I have had sex with white, black, and asian females and every time I dropped trou the first remarks were it's a relief to see you are cut....

[Jose Diablo]

76. I am doing an informal research

If you don't mind, could you tell me if you consider yourself a moderate in your political beliefs? It's pretty clear you are a Democrat from you screen name.

I'm curious about the effects of circumcision on personality and if it has any bearing on political beliefs.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

81. A Greater Correlation

I think you would find a greater correlation between the onset of puberty and political beliefs....

[JVS]

78. Was it part of a ceremony of making you a Democratsincebirth?

[Heddi]

69. smeggle?

I think you mean Smegma.

It would help your point if you could use the correct terms when making your argument.

[Jose Diablo]

75. Thank you

It's natural that wouldn't remember the exact term. And your right, it would have helped my point. I'll try hard to remember the term if I need it again. But I think, you understand what I meant, even with the inexact term.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

82. Are You Sure He's Referring To Smegma..

Smegma is a residue found on the uncircumcized penis.....

[DemocratSinceBirth]

113. How Is It Voluntary?

"As for the Hebrews rite of passage, in which circumcision is a part. For the man, it is voluntary on his part. "


It's done when the kid is a week old or so...

[Sapphire Blue]

42. Info from Amnesty Int'l on FGM...

Geographical distribution of female genital mutilation

An estimated 135 million of the world's girls and women have undergone genital mutilation, and two million girls a year are at risk of mutilation - approximately 6,000 per day. It is practised extensively in Africa and is common in some countries in the Middle East. It also occurs, mainly among immigrant communities, in parts of Asia and the Pacific, North and Latin America and Europe.

<snip>

Why FGM is practised

Cultural identity

Custom and tradition are by far the most frequently cited reasons for FGM. Along with other physical or behavioural characteristics, FGM defines who is in the group. This is most obvious where mutilation is carried out as part of the initiation into adulthood.

<snip>

Religion

FGM predates Islam and is not practised by the majority of Muslims, but has acquired a religious dimension. Where it is practised by Muslims, religion is frequently cited as a reason. Many of those who oppose mutilation deny that there is any link between the practise and religion, but Islamic leaders are not unanimous on the subject. The Qur'an does not contain any call for FGM, but a few hadith (sayings attributed to the Prophet Muhammad) refer to it. In one case, in answer to a question put to him by 'Um 'Attiyah (a practitioner of FGM), the Prophet is quoted as saying "reduce but do not destroy". Mutilation has persisted among some converts to Christianity. Christian missionaries have tried to discourage the practice, but found it to be too deep rooted. In some cases, in order to keep converts, they have ignored and even condoned the practice.

FGM was practised by the minority Ethiopian Jewish community (Beta Israel), formerly known as Falasha, a derogatory term, most of whom now live in Israel, but it is not known if the practise has persisted following their emigration to Israel. The remainder of the FGM-practising community follow traditional Animist religions.

http://www.amnesty.org/ailib/intcam/femgen/fgm1.htm#a3

FGM in Africa - Information by country: http://www.amnesty.org/ailib/intcam/femgen/fgm9.htm

[maddiejoan]

53. Genital Mutilation occurs quite frequently in the USA

under the guise of "corrective" surgery of intersex children.

It is estimated that 1 in 2,000 births in this country are intersexed.

go to www.isna.org and get informed.

[porphyrian]

55. Genital mutilation is common to many cultures,...

...but I don't understand why female genital mutilation is unacceptable while male genital mutilation is. It is proven scientific fact that male circumcision is medically unnecessary, yet it continues to be practiced on a wide scale today. Hygiene is only an issue with those who don't clean themselves, as is any susceptibility to STDs, and these are behavioral problems rather than physical ones anyway. Jews, Muslims and many Christians all perform this form of genital mutilation regularly. Shouldn't it all be considered barbaric and unacceptable?

[Jose Diablo]

59. Yes, it should all be considered barbaric and unacceptable, IMO n/t

[roguevalley]

83. I don't care who practices it. It sucks. Period.

[ck4829]

99. Agreed.

[ismnotwasm]

114. Thank you

I couldn't have said better myself.