Pressure for female genital cutting lingers in the U.S.

karrie

OogedyBoogedy
Jan 6, 2007
27,780
285
83
bliss
There are varying degrees of female circumcision, from 'simple labial trimming' to full on removal of the clitoris. I doubt that anyone would say any of them are okay just because they leave most or some sexual enjoyment intact.

And juan, that little bit of foreskin does a LOT to dull down male sexual enjoyment... that was one of the many reasons it was pushed in North America... as a prevenetive for masturbation.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
There are varying degrees of female circumcision, from 'simple labial trimming' to full on removal of the clitoris. I doubt that anyone would say any of them are okay just because they leave most or some sexual enjoyment intact.

And juan, that little bit of foreskin does a LOT to dull down male sexual enjoyment... that was one of the many reasons it was pushed in North America... as a prevenetive for masturbation.


no no no Karrie...makes no difference what so ever...... let's continue to mutilate our boys all the while being holier than thou concerning doing the same thing to girls.:roll:
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
ummmm ya....sure....what ever you say.

Gerry grow up! Losing a bit of foreskin cannot compare with the butchery that is done to women in some African countries by bloody religious zealots.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
Gerry grow up! Losing a bit of foreskin cannot compare with the butchery that is done to women in some African countries by bloody religious zealots.

right....of course......





support your local armed forces...... kill a child so they don't have to.
 

karrie

OogedyBoogedy
Jan 6, 2007
27,780
285
83
bliss
Gerry grow up! Losing a bit of foreskin cannot compare with the butchery that is done to women in some African countries by bloody religious zealots.
It does compare with some female circumcisions juan. And, it started with the same roots if you'll recall.
 

Risus

Genius
May 24, 2006
5,373
25
38
Toronto
Baby boys are completely deferent, even though a man gets circumcised he still has sexual arousal feelings. A woman after such a horrible alteration has no feelings and the reason that was done to them is to keep them faithful, (they don’t get horny)
I assume you actually mean different, not deferent.
Anyway it seems there is discrimination here. Male or female shouldn't make any different.
 

FiveParadox

Governor General
Dec 20, 2005
5,875
43
48
Vancouver, BC
There should be absolutely no genital mutilation performed, at all, without the legal, mature and informed consent of the person (in the case of males for circumcision; I’m not sure whether there are any ‘acceptable’ practices for female circumcision, but I very much doubt it). These practices of female genital mutilation should be a priority of the global community to stop; it is an attack on the very core of womanhood, and an overt act of oppression (not to mention how sick and twisted it is).

Since we seem to have a related tangent going on here, I will also say that I don’t feel parents should have the right to order their male children’s foreskin to be removed, in whole or in part (unless preputioplasty has already been exhausted as an option to resolve frenulum breve, or other such potentially-dangerous conditions).
 

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
Um, I guess people's little chat they had with their peers, parents, or whomever was a little shy on complete information.
We have such things as orgasms from the cervix as well as what people call the g-spot. Removal of the clitoris does not totally squelch the pleasure. As a matter of fact, my cervical orgasms far overshadow my clitoral orgasms. But every female is different so some may have better clitoral orgasms than others. G-spot orgasms are a hoot, too.
Anyway, the practise of female circumcision in cultures that practise or practised it is not to deprive women of pleasure. It is/was to take away any perceived vestige of manhood. Males were also deprived of their nipples.
Either way, mutilation of another life form is pretty loathesome and freakin barbaric.
 

Downhome_Woman

Electoral Member
Dec 2, 2008
588
24
18
Ontariariario
OK - I'm not a big fan of cutting and pasting from onnline articles, but this is from the World Health Organization:

Fact sheet N°241
February 2010
Female genital mutilation



KEY FACTS

Female genital mutilation (FGM) includes procedures that intentionally alter or injure female genital organs for non-medical reasons.
The procedure has no health benefits for girls and women.
Procedures can cause severe bleeding and problems urinating, and later, potential childbirth complications and newborn deaths.
An estimated 100 to 140 million girls and women worldwide are currently living with the consequences of FGM.
It is mostly carried out on young girls sometime between infancy and age 15 years.
In Africa an estimated 92 million girls from 10 years of age and above have undergone FGM.
FGM is internationally recognized as a violation of the human rights of girls and women.


Female genital mutilation (FGM) comprises all procedures that involve partial or total removal of the external female genitalia, or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons.

The practice is mostly carried out by traditional circumcisers, who often play other central roles in communities, such as attending childbirths. Increasingly, however, FGM is being performed by health care providers.

FGM is recognized internationally as a violation of the human rights of girls and women. It reflects deep-rooted inequality between the sexes, and constitutes an extreme form of discrimination against women. It is nearly always carried out on minors and is a violation of the rights of children. The practice also violates a person's rights to health, security and physical integrity, the right to be free from torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, and the right to life when the procedure results in death.

Related links

Female genital mutilation and other harmful practices

Eliminating female genital mutilation. An interagency statement
Procedures

Female genital mutilation is classified into four major types.

Clitoridectomy: partial or total removal of the clitoris (a small, sensitive and erectile part of the female genitals) and, in very rare cases, only the prepuce (the fold of skin surrounding the clitoris).
Excision: partial or total removal of the clitoris and the labia minora, with or without excision of the labia majora (the labia are "the lips" that surround the vagina).
Infibulation: narrowing of the vaginal opening through the creation of a covering seal. The seal is formed by cutting and repositioning the inner, or outer, labia, with or without removal of the clitoris.
Other: all other harmful procedures to the female genitalia for non-medical purposes, e.g. pricking, piercing, incising, scraping and cauterizing the genital area.
No health benefits, only harm

FGM has no health benefits, and it harms girls and women in many ways. It involves removing and damaging healthy and normal female genital tissue, and interferes with the natural functions of girls' and women's bodies.

Immediate complications can include severe pain, shock, haemorrhage (bleeding), tetanus or sepsis (bacterial infection), urine retention, open sores in the genital region and injury to nearby genital tissue.

Long-term consequences can include:

recurrent bladder and urinary tract infections;
cysts;
infertility;
an increased risk of childbirth complications and newborn deaths;
the need for later surgeries. For example, the FGM procedure that seals or narrows a vaginal opening (type 3 above) needs to be cut open later to allow for sexual intercourse and childbirth. Sometimes it is stitched again several times, including after childbirth, hence the woman goes through repeated opening and closing procedures, further increasing and repeated both immediate and long-term risks.
Who is at risk?

Procedures are mostly carried out on young girls sometime between infancy and age 15, and occasionally on adult women. In Africa, about three million girls are at risk for FGM annually.

Between 100 to 140 million girls and women worldwide are living with the consequences of FGM. In Africa, about 92 million girls age 10 years and above are estimated to have undergone FGM.

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 certain immigrant communities in North America and Europe.

Cultural, religious and social causes

The causes of female genital mutilation include a mix of cultural, religious and social factors within families and communities.

Where FGM is a social convention, the social pressure to conform to what others do and have been doing is a strong motivation to perpetuate the practice.
FGM is often considered a necessary part of raising a girl properly, and a way to prepare her for adulthood and marriage.
FGM is often motivated by beliefs about what is considered proper sexual behaviour, linking procedures to premarital virginity and marital fidelity. FGM is in many communities believed to reduce a woman's libido, and thereby is further believed to help her resist "illicit" sexual acts. When a vaginal opening is covered or narrowed (type 3 above), the fear of pain of opening it, and the fear that this will be found out, is expected to further discourage "illicit" sexual intercourse among women with this type of FGM.
FGM is associated with cultural ideals of femininity and modesty, which include the notion that girls are “clean” and "beautiful" after removal of body parts that are considered "male" or "unclean".
Though no religious scripts prescribe the practice, practitioners often believe the practice has religious support.
Religious leaders take varying positions with regard to FGM: some promote it, some consider it irrelevant to religion, and others contribute to its elimination.
Local structures of power and authority, such as community leaders, religious leaders, circumcisers, and even some medical personnel can contribute to upholding the practice.
In most societies, FGM is considered a cultural tradition, which is often used as an argument for its continuation.
In some societies, recent adoption of the practice is linked to copying the traditions of neighbouring groups. Sometimes it has started as part of a wider religious or traditional revival movement.
In some societies, FGM is being practised by new groups when they move into areas where the local population practice FGM.
And for those who equate it with male circumcision? sorry - It's a WORLD away. Many young girls who are 'circumcised' are left with a genital opening that only allows for menstrual fluids and urine to escape. On their wedding night they are cut open to allow penetration. Many of these young women develop infections and fistulas that dfisgust their husbands so much they abandon them. because of 'circumcision, they have difficulties giving birth (more often complicated by theior youth).
For those here who want to bring it down to a case of women being 'deprived' of sexual feeling? Give me a break - if only it were that superficial - and yes, I said superficial, because if I would have to decide between my life/health and an orgasm? Laugh all you want but there are women who aren't just losing an 'orgasm' because of this procedure - they're dying horrible, painful, isolated deaths because of it.
 

Liberalman

Senate Member
Mar 18, 2007
5,623
36
48
Toronto
This is part of religious freedom so the big question is now if the government decides to outlaw this practice can they outlaw other religious practices.

I am glad that the government is not allowing genital cutting but at the same time I worry about the chains being put on religious freedoms
 

karrie

OogedyBoogedy
Jan 6, 2007
27,780
285
83
bliss
This is part of religious freedom so the big question is now if the government decides to outlaw this practice can they outlaw other religious practices.

I am glad that the government is not allowing genital cutting but at the same time I worry about the chains being put on religious freedoms
This doesn't restrict religious freedom, it merely places a limitation on when that freedom can be practiced.

My right to religious freedom does not supercede anyone else's right to security of person. Canadian law has set precedent time and time again that one person's religion does not give them the right to visit harm upon another person.

Men and women would still be free to have their genitals modified as they see fit once they are old enough to make the informed decision to do so.
 

Durry

House Member
May 18, 2010
4,709
286
83
Canada
Immigrants from middle eastern and south Asian countries always seem to bring a lot of their cultural garbage with them when they come here.
Part of our immigration process should include a law that prevents them from bringing in the garbage part of their culture into this country.
 

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
This doesn't restrict religious freedom, it merely places a limitation on when that freedom can be practiced.

My right to religious freedom does not supercede anyone else's right to security of person. Canadian law has set precedent time and time again that one person's religion does not give them the right to visit harm upon another person.

Men and women would still be free to have their genitals modified as they see fit once they are old enough to make the informed decision to do so.
... or have parental guidance, as when my kids wanted their ears and noses done.

Immigrants from middle eastern and south Asian countries always seem to bring a lot of their cultural garbage with them when they come here.
Part of our immigration process should include a law that prevents them from bringing in the garbage part of their culture into this country.
Cultural garbage? Like aboriginals weren't content before Europeans decided to flood NorthAm with their strange practises. :roll:

Lots more info on the issue:
Female genital cutting - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

By the way, I'd like to add that a people's culture includes all the religions they practise. I have no idea why people separate the concepts.
 

Durry

House Member
May 18, 2010
4,709
286
83
Canada
... or have parental guidance, as when my kids wanted their ears and noses done.

Cultural garbage? Like aboriginals weren't content before Europeans decided to flood NorthAm with their strange practises. :roll:
By the way, I'd like to add that a people's culture includes all the religions they practise. I have no idea why people separate the concepts.

We have a great country and we now know what it takes to build a good country.
All we have to do now is make sure we do the things that keep this a good strong country, being careful on who we allow to become citizens of this country is a responsiblity we have to keep this a good country.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Downhome_Woman

Electoral Member
Dec 2, 2008
588
24
18
Ontariariario
This is part of religious freedom so the big question is now if the government decides to outlaw this practice can they outlaw other religious practices.

I am glad that the government is not allowing genital cutting but at the same time I worry about the chains being put on religious freedoms
Female Genital Mutilation is NOT a religious practice - it's cultural. Did you know that while it's practiced mostly by Muslims in Africa, it's also practiced by Christian families as well? did you realize that very few Muslims outside Africa practice it? It goes back thousands of years - female Egyptian mummies have been found with cut genitals.Ancient Greeks thought it was a great way to keep women in their place as did Europeans in the Middle Ages. they were doing it regularly in England up until the 1860s - so don't call it a 'religious' practice. There is nothing in the Quran or the Bible (Old or New Testament) that condones it.
AND EVEN IF THERE WAS - we live in a country where the rights of the human are as - if not more - important than the right to religious freedom. In other words, if women and children are harmed by a so called 'religious' practice then the rights of the human take precedence over religion.
While slavery has been outlawed in many Islamic countries,it is documented in the African republics of Chad, Mauritania, Niger, Mali and Sudan - and those countries sanction it through religion. Having said that, does that mean that an immigrant from Sudan or Mali should be able to keep slaves, simply because he claims it is his religious right to own slaves?
 

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
All we have to do now is make sure we do the things that keep this a good strong country, being careful on who we allow to become citizens of this country is a responsiblity we have to keep this a good country.
And so far, it hasn't been that successful.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Downhome_Woman

Electoral Member
Dec 2, 2008
588
24
18
Ontariariario
Immigrants from middle eastern and south Asian countries always seem to bring a lot of their cultural garbage with them when they come here.
Part of our immigration process should include a law that prevents them from bringing in the garbage part of their culture into this country.
Is this law that you want specific to 'Immigrants from middle eastern and south Asian countries'? or will it encompass immigrants from the 'more acceptable' Christian countries. Seems to me that some of them have a lot of garbage as well, but that doesn't seem to bother you too much .... maybe acceptable colour and religion trumps 'garbage' in your mind ...
 

Curiosity

Senate Member
Jul 30, 2005
7,326
138
63
California
Downhome_Woman

Thank you for the interesting information you provided - I had to accomplish all your posts in a couple of visits because the topic is so borderline anthropodic and inhumane.

Curio
 

karrie

OogedyBoogedy
Jan 6, 2007
27,780
285
83
bliss
I think in the end, education is the ONLY thing that eradicates these kinds of cultural pressures. I hope that the law can afford girls some protection, but I know true change won't happen until people realize that cutting apart healthy genitalia for 'the look' or to limit function, makes zero sense.
 

TenPenny

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 9, 2004
17,467
139
63
Location, Location
Gerry grow up! Losing a bit of foreskin cannot compare with the butchery that is done to women in some African countries by bloody religious zealots.


Genital mutilation is genital mutilation. Don't let the 'boys vs girls' or the 'we've always done it this way' confuse you. Either genital mutilation is wrong, or it's okay.

Pick one and stick with it.