|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Jun 1, 2016 3:32:22 GMT
Throwing out male genital mutilation is NOT the same topic as female genital mutilation. You might want to read up on that and educate yourself of the HUGE GAPING difference.
There is a vast difference between the two and why it is done/happens.
FGM is considered a violation of human rights (whereas not so much with males)
Young women---children are dying in large numbers because of this horrific mutilation. (Where it is rare for men/boys to die from circumcision).
For FGM it is all about males controlling women"s sexual nature. Again not at all the case for men.
I am surprised that you think that they are the same.
|
|
DEX
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,396
Aug 9, 2014 23:13:22 GMT
|
Post by DEX on Jun 1, 2016 3:44:05 GMT
Throwing out male genital mutilation is NOT the same topic as female genital mutilation. You might want to read up on that and educate yourself of the HUGE GAPING difference. There is a vast difference between the two and why it is done/happens. FGM is considered a violation of human rights (whereas not so much with males) Young women---children are dying in large numbers because of this horrific mutilation. (Where it is rare for men/boys to die from circumcision). For FGM it is all about males controlling women"s sexual nature. Again not at all the case for men. I am surprised that you think that they are the same. Amen. It just brings me to tears that women/young girls will never be able to experience an orgasm while men lose their foreskin,which has no affect on their sexuality.
|
|
perumbula
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,439
Location: Idaho
Jun 26, 2014 18:51:17 GMT
|
Post by perumbula on Jun 1, 2016 4:05:22 GMT
I caught up on a lot of podcasts at work this weekend and one was a very interesting (and moving) first-hand account from a woman who had had a form of female circumcision. It was Act One of This American Life Who Do We Think We Are?I found that story deeply moving. FGM is deeply offensive and one of the worst atrocities committed against women. It's not just a one time act of violence. It's an ongoing torture for their entire lives, with ongoing pain, and not just during sex. Some have pain every day because of the FGM. Just to control their desire and enjoyment of sex. In many cases the it's been going on so long the older women are complicit in the mutilation of the younger generations. The men have convinced women that it's for their own good. It not only steals the woman's enjoyment of sex it completely undermines her ability to grow close to her husband through physical contact. The men are so fearful of women's sexuality they have maimed their own relationships as well. It's evil. And I don't mean that figuratively. Literally Evil.
|
|
anniebygaslight
Drama Llama
I'd love a cup of tea. #1966
Posts: 7,402
Location: Third Rock from the sun.
Jun 28, 2014 14:08:19 GMT
|
Post by anniebygaslight on Jun 1, 2016 5:54:08 GMT
That's so sad. It's even sadder that my first thought was "at least she got anesthesia". Same here.
|
|
|
Post by miominmio on Jun 1, 2016 7:29:58 GMT
Did you read the article? It's about a case where it was done in a hospital in a country where it is legal. Actually, no, it's illegal in that country, as stated in the article. If you're going to troll every thread I post, please at least try for basic reading comprehension. And yet....while "illegal" , 92% of Egyptian girls are mutilated. Makes you wonder why they decided to prosecute this case, because I'm sure there are a lot more deaths annually than this one.
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Jun 1, 2016 10:02:44 GMT
That's so sad. It's even sadder that my first thought was "at least she got anesthesia". Same here. Agreed. It is outrageous that young women and girls are forced to undergo this horrific mutilation.
|
|
|
Post by whipea on Jun 1, 2016 11:50:00 GMT
I think male genital mutilation is just as crappy parenting. So Jewish people are "crappy parents"? Real thoughtful comment.
|
|
|
Post by myboysnme on Jun 1, 2016 12:03:55 GMT
I have come to believe that both are mutilation, but the consequences to a woman are devastating and tragic. I had both of my boys circumcised and looking back I have asked myself why I delivered a perfectly formed human being and immediately removed part of that perfection. It has really only been common place in the US for males in my lifetime, or since world war 2 and the pediatrician in the hospital was adamant against it but I went ahead.
But that is just an opinion I have come to. Thanks for sharing the link because while I am very familiar with the subject from a women's studies class I taught, it is something that needs to stop world wide.
|
|
|
Post by myboysnme on Jun 1, 2016 12:11:53 GMT
I think male genital mutilation is just as crappy parenting. So Jewish people are "crappy parents"? Real thoughtful comment. Jewish people practice male circumcision for religious/cultural practices and the same reasons are given for female genital mutilation in those cultures that practice it. I don't think they are the same in terms of consequences or reasoning, I'm saying people who do it believe it is a cultural or religious norm for them. It has nothing to do with crappy parenting. People believe it is necessary and right. People believe hitting children is necessary and right. I don't believe that. I do not believe it is ok to hit a person under age 18 but on their 18th birthday it becomes assault. These are my beliefs. Everyone comes to their own. I just happen to think that causing harm or pain to a human being is unnecessary regardless of the reason. As I age I become much more of a pacifist.
|
|
Dalai Mama
Drama Llama
La Pea Boheme
Posts: 6,985
Jun 26, 2014 0:31:31 GMT
|
Post by Dalai Mama on Jun 1, 2016 12:14:16 GMT
I graduated from an all woman college in 1989. One of the papers I wrote was about genital mutilation. The sole purpose for a clitorectomy was to ensure that the woman would not experience sexual pleasure during intercourse. The purpose of male circumcision is for sanitary reasons and to ensure the man gets pleasure. DISGUSTING. What? Male circumcision was first prescribed to decrease male pleasure as a preventative measure against masturbation.
|
|
scrapaddie
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,090
Jul 8, 2014 20:17:31 GMT
|
Post by scrapaddie on Jun 1, 2016 12:15:50 GMT
It is still done in some tribes in Africa.... Without anesthesia! Fortunately, it is becoming less common
|
|
Dalai Mama
Drama Llama
La Pea Boheme
Posts: 6,985
Jun 26, 2014 0:31:31 GMT
|
Post by Dalai Mama on Jun 1, 2016 12:16:02 GMT
Throwing out male genital mutilation is NOT the same topic as female genital mutilation. You might want to read up on that and educate yourself of the HUGE GAPING difference. There is a vast difference between the two and why it is done/happens. FGM is considered a violation of human rights (whereas not so much with males) Young women---children are dying in large numbers because of this horrific mutilation. (Where it is rare for men/boys to die from circumcision). For FGM it is all about males controlling women"s sexual nature. Again not at all the case for men. I am surprised that you think that they are the same. Depends on how it's done. If we are talking about a clitorectomy, I agree, not the same thing. If we are talking about the removal of the labia, an argument could be made.
|
|
|
Post by jeremysgirl on Jun 1, 2016 12:32:34 GMT
FYI is not all about controlling a woman's sexuality. In some cultures yes but in other cultures the same reasons are given for FGM as in male circumcision. Culture, religion, cleanliness, less infection. I think our culture has practiced male circumcision so long now that we can't see the forest for the trees.
This girl's parents were medical professionals. Educated. What makes them any different than you or I? This took place in a hospital under general anesthesia. I think if you are judging these parents for upholding a cultural tradition without looking at the very reasons why most Americans choose male circumcision you aren't being very fair.
|
|
|
Post by jeremysgirl on Jun 1, 2016 12:38:35 GMT
I graduated from an all woman college in 1989. One of the papers I wrote was about genital mutilation. The sole purpose for a clitorectomy was to ensure that the woman would not experience sexual pleasure during intercourse. The purpose of male circumcision is for sanitary reasons and to ensure the man gets pleasure. DISGUSTING. With all due respect, have you ever been with an intact man? The foreskin is very sensitive. I, in no way, can understand after being with an intact man how anyone could think circumcision would increase a man's pleasure. It just doesn't make any sense.
|
|
DEX
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,396
Aug 9, 2014 23:13:22 GMT
|
Post by DEX on Jun 1, 2016 12:48:46 GMT
I graduated from an all woman college in 1989. One of the papers I wrote was about genital mutilation. The sole purpose for a clitorectomy was to ensure that the woman would not experience sexual pleasure during intercourse. The purpose of male circumcision is for sanitary reasons and to ensure the man gets pleasure. DISGUSTING. What? Male circumcision was first prescribed to decrease male pleasure as a preventative measure against masturbation. As I stated above, I no longer have my research paper. Circumcision was done in the Victorian era to prevent masterbation but it's history is noted in the Bible and for thousands of years before that. I believe it was Abraham who was commanded by God to be circumcised so he could impregnate Sarah. His foreskin was most likely preventing him from achieving a full erection. He was circumcised and she became pregnant.
|
|
craftykitten
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,304
Jun 26, 2014 7:39:32 GMT
|
Post by craftykitten on Jun 1, 2016 12:49:11 GMT
FYI is not all about controlling a woman's sexuality. In some cultures yes but in other cultures the same reasons are given for FGM as in male circumcision. Culture, religion, cleanliness, less infection. I think our culture has practiced male circumcision so long now that we can't see the forest for the trees. This girl's parents were medical professionals. Educated. What makes them any different than you or I? This took place in a hospital under general anesthesia. I think if you are judging these parents for upholding a cultural tradition without looking at the very reasons why most Americans choose male circumcision you aren't being very fair. I recently did a course on child protection, and the information there is that there is NO religion which requires FGM. It is entirely a cultural practice, and it is entirely about a woman's sexuality. It is not about actual cleanliness (merely the perception that women who enjoy sex are 'unclean') and it is not about infection (it causes it, not prevents it). It is an utterly horrific practice that has no place in modern society, whether anaesthesia is used or not. Calling it 'circumcision' somehow legitimises it because it makes it sound equal to male circumcision. It is not. It involves not only the removal of the labia and clitoris but also sewing up the girl so that there is barely a hole for her to urinate through. Male circumcision (while I don't agree with that either) does not impact *so significantly* on normal bodily functions.
|
|
|
Post by jeremysgirl on Jun 1, 2016 13:04:18 GMT
FYI is not all about controlling a woman's sexuality. In some cultures yes but in other cultures the same reasons are given for FGM as in male circumcision. Culture, religion, cleanliness, less infection. I think our culture has practiced male circumcision so long now that we can't see the forest for the trees. This girl's parents were medical professionals. Educated. What makes them any different than you or I? This took place in a hospital under general anesthesia. I think if you are judging these parents for upholding a cultural tradition without looking at the very reasons why most Americans choose male circumcision you aren't being very fair. I recently did a course on child protection, and the information there is that there is NO religion which requires FGM. It is entirely a cultural practice, and it is entirely about a woman's sexuality. It is not about actual cleanliness (merely the perception that women who enjoy sex are 'unclean') and it is not about infection (it causes it, not prevents it). It is an utterly horrific practice that has no place in modern society, whether anaesthesia is used or not. Calling it 'circumcision' somehow legitimises it because it makes it sound equal to male circumcision. It is not. It involves not only the removal of the labia and clitoris but also sewing up the girl so that there is barely a hole for her to urinate through. Male circumcision (while I don't agree with that either) does not impact *so significantly* on normal bodily functions. My information on this came from the WHO. They state specifically that there is more than one form of FGM. They state that in some cultures it is supported by religious leaders. They state that there is sometimes an argument of cleanliness. Most of the time it simply comes down to cultural traditions. I wish I knew how to link because I would but I'm peaing from my phone and can't figure it out. Do I think we are talking about apples vs oranges? I think differences in genitalia make a comparison difficult. But I do believe it's the same factors motivating both practices. It's just so culturally ingrained in America parents can't even see it. I mean look Dex made the argument right here in this thread that she thinks male circumcision improves sexuality. If she made the choice to circumcise based on that then that is trying to control someone else's sexuality. Whether the intention is for the good or the bad, it's still a parent trying to control someone else's sexuality.
|
|
Dalai Mama
Drama Llama
La Pea Boheme
Posts: 6,985
Jun 26, 2014 0:31:31 GMT
|
Post by Dalai Mama on Jun 1, 2016 13:12:46 GMT
What? Male circumcision was first prescribed to decrease male pleasure as a preventative measure against masturbation. As I stated above, I no longer have my research paper. Circumcision was done in the Victorian era to prevent masterbation but it's history is noted in the Bible and for thousands of years before that. I believe it was Abraham who was commanded by God to be circumcised so he could impregnate Sarah. His foreskin was most likely preventing him from achieving a full erection. He was circumcised and she became pregnant. Abraham's circumcision was a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham, nothing more. If Abraham was incapable of achieving an erection (no mention of that was made in Genesis 17) it might have had something to do with him being 99 years old.
|
|
DEX
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,396
Aug 9, 2014 23:13:22 GMT
|
Post by DEX on Jun 1, 2016 13:19:15 GMT
I mean look Dex made the argument right here in this thread that she thinks male circumcision improves sexuality. If she made the choice to circumcise based on that then that is trying to control someone else's sexuality. Whether the intention is for the good or the bad, it's still a parent trying to control someone else's sexuality. Hold on a second. I am sorry if I gave that impression. That was not my intention. What I meant to say was male circumcision was believed to increase sexual pleasure.
|
|
|
Post by jeremysgirl on Jun 1, 2016 13:37:01 GMT
Hold on a second. I am sorry if I gave that impression. That was not my intention. What I meant to say was male circumcision was believed to increase sexual pleasure. Thanks for clarifying. I hate being controversial. It's just not in my nature to argue. I guess I would ask you who makes this argument because as it has been pointed out the practice really got heated up here in America to decrease pleasure. So your argument took me by surprise a little.
|
|
DEX
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,396
Aug 9, 2014 23:13:22 GMT
|
Post by DEX on Jun 1, 2016 14:19:17 GMT
If the foreskin is too tight it will impede an erection, especially as men age. Therefore if you are circumcised, the belief was that sexual pleasure was improved because men were able to have a complete erection.
The practice of male circumcision has been around since the dawn of time. It has waxed and waned in America through the years. There has been so much misinformation regarding sex throughout history and currently. Rhino horns, fish bladders, etc are being poached to be ingested by men to increase their virility now.
I actually don't have feelings one way or the other about male circumcision. Like I said, I did a research paper in 1989 on female genital multilateral. At that time there wasn't much material on the subject. I remember being horrified by what I was reading. Not one of my fellow students had even heard of the practice at that time.
|
|
scrappinghappy
Pearl Clutcher
“I’m late, I’m late for a very important date. No time to say “Hello.” Goodbye. I’m late...."
Posts: 4,307
Jun 26, 2014 19:30:06 GMT
|
Post by scrappinghappy on Jun 1, 2016 14:43:03 GMT
What? Male circumcision was first prescribed to decrease male pleasure as a preventative measure against masturbation. Umm, no. Male circumcision was first prescribed in the BIBLE as a covenant between Abraham and Gd. Abraham was a very old man when he circumsized himself. ETA. Oops, I see this was already clarified
|
|
Dalai Mama
Drama Llama
La Pea Boheme
Posts: 6,985
Jun 26, 2014 0:31:31 GMT
|
Post by Dalai Mama on Jun 1, 2016 14:47:28 GMT
What? Male circumcision was first prescribed to decrease male pleasure as a preventative measure against masturbation. Umm, no. Male circumcision was first prescribed in the BIBLE as a covenant between Abraham and Gd. Abraham was a very old man when he circumsized himself. NM - you saw that.
When I used the word 'prescribed' I was referring to specifically therapeutic prescription.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Jun 1, 2016 15:10:05 GMT
FYI is not all about controlling a woman's sexuality. In some cultures yes but in other cultures the same reasons are given for FGM as in male circumcision. Culture, religion, cleanliness, less infection. I think our culture has practiced male circumcision so long now that we can't see the forest for the trees. This girl's parents were medical professionals. Educated. What makes them any different than you or I? This took place in a hospital under general anesthesia. I think if you are judging these parents for upholding a cultural tradition without looking at the very reasons why most Americans choose male circumcision you aren't being very fair. I recently did a course on child protection, and the information there is that there is NO religion which requires FGM. It is entirely a cultural practice, and it is entirely about a woman's sexuality. It is not about actual cleanliness (merely the perception that women who enjoy sex are 'unclean') and it is not about infection (it causes it, not prevents it). It is an utterly horrific practice that has no place in modern society, whether anaesthesia is used or not. Calling it 'circumcision' somehow legitimises it because it makes it sound equal to male circumcision. It is not. It involves not only the removal of the labia and clitoris but also sewing up the girl so that there is barely a hole for her to urinate through. Male circumcision (while I don't agree with that either) does not impact *so significantly* on normal bodily functions. This!!! Perfectly said! I'm not sure why it's being defended so vigorously!?! A boy, man, today (especially in the US) being circumcised is NOT considered mutilation. Whereas-- Female genital mutilation (FGM) includes procedures that intentionally alter or cause injury to the 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 cysts, infections, as well as complications in childbirth and increased risk of newborn deaths. More than 200 million girls and women alive today have been cut in 30 countries in Africa, the Middle East and Asia where FGM is concentrated. FGM is mostly carried out on young girls between infancy and age 15. FGM is a violation of the human rights of girls and women. 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. (Those are FACTS from the World Health Organization)
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Jun 1, 2016 15:12:50 GMT
And this too:
Cultural and social factors for performing FGM The reasons why female genital mutilations are performed vary from one region to another as well as over time, and include a mix of sociocultural factors within families and communities. The most commonly cited reasons are:
Where FGM is a social convention (social norm), the social pressure to conform to what others do and have been doing, as well as the need to be accepted socially and the fear of being rejected by the community, are strong motivations to perpetuate the practice. In some communities, FGM is almost universally performed and unquestioned. FGM is often considered a necessary part of raising a girl, and a way to prepare her for adulthood and marriage. FGM is often motivated by beliefs about what is considered acceptable sexual behaviour. It aims to ensure premarital virginity and marital fidelity. FGM is in many communities believed to reduce a woman's libido and therefore believed to help her resist extramarital sexual acts. When a vaginal opening is covered or narrowed (type 3), the fear of the pain of opening it, and the fear that this will be found out, is expected to further discourage extramarital sexual intercourse among women with this type of FGM. Where it is believed that being cut increases marriageability, FGM is more likely to be carried out. 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 unclean, unfeminine or male. 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, where FGM is practised, it 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.
|
|
Dalai Mama
Drama Llama
La Pea Boheme
Posts: 6,985
Jun 26, 2014 0:31:31 GMT
|
Post by Dalai Mama on Jun 1, 2016 15:22:32 GMT
I recently did a course on child protection, and the information there is that there is NO religion which requires FGM. It is entirely a cultural practice, and it is entirely about a woman's sexuality. It is not about actual cleanliness (merely the perception that women who enjoy sex are 'unclean') and it is not about infection (it causes it, not prevents it). It is an utterly horrific practice that has no place in modern society, whether anaesthesia is used or not. Calling it 'circumcision' somehow legitimises it because it makes it sound equal to male circumcision. It is not. It involves not only the removal of the labia and clitoris but also sewing up the girl so that there is barely a hole for her to urinate through. Male circumcision (while I don't agree with that either) does not impact *so significantly* on normal bodily functions. This!!! Perfectly said! I'm not sure why it's being defended so vigorously!?! A boy, man, today (especially in the US) being circumcised is NOT considered mutilation. Who's defending it?
And you might not consider it mutilation but it fits the definition.
|
|
|
Post by bostonmama on Jun 1, 2016 17:11:03 GMT
As I stated above, I no longer have my research paper. Circumcision was done in the Victorian era to prevent masterbation but it's history is noted in the Bible and for thousands of years before that. I believe it was Abraham who was commanded by God to be circumcised so he could impregnate Sarah. His foreskin was most likely preventing him from achieving a full erection. He was circumcised and she became pregnant. Abraham's circumcision was a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham, nothing more. If Abraham was incapable of achieving an erection (no mention of that was made in Genesis 17) it might have had something to do with him being 99 years old. I'm a Christian...but what the heck sense does that make?! Cut off the foreskin of your penis as a contract/promise?? We're still doing it today because that made sense to people?? If God wanted boys circumcised wouldn't he create them that way?
|
|
|
Post by katieanna on Jun 1, 2016 17:17:06 GMT
The sole purpose for a clitorectomy was to ensure that the woman would not experience sexual pleasure during intercourse. The purpose of male circumcision is for sanitary reasons and to ensure the man gets pleasure. DISGUSTING. I've never heard of that before. UNbelievable!!
|
|
Dalai Mama
Drama Llama
La Pea Boheme
Posts: 6,985
Jun 26, 2014 0:31:31 GMT
|
Post by Dalai Mama on Jun 1, 2016 17:27:10 GMT
Abraham's circumcision was a sign of the covenant between God and Abraham, nothing more. If Abraham was incapable of achieving an erection (no mention of that was made in Genesis 17) it might have had something to do with him being 99 years old. I'm a Christian...but what the heck sense does that make?! Cut off the foreskin of your penis as a contract/promise?? We're still doing it today because that made sense to people?? If God wanted boys circumcised wouldn't he create them that way? And I'm an atheist so religion doesn't make much sense to me in general.
The thing about the foreskin is that, unlike the appendix, sinuses, or wisdom teeth, it actually does serve a purpose.
|
|
|
Post by myboysnme on Jun 1, 2016 19:57:08 GMT
[/quote] A boy, man, today (especially in the US) being circumcised is NOT considered mutilation.[/quote]
I consider it mutilation. You don't. Neither one of us saying it is or isn't is only our opinion.
To me it is mutilation to far different degrees but mutilation never the less.
|
|