1st UK prosecution for Female Genital Mutilation "imminent"
Discussion
Murcielago_Boy said:
This SHOULD be criminal.
But then why isn't baby circumcision also criminal? That's non-consensual male genital mutilation. Or is THAT ok because your imaginary says it's OK and we have to respect the wishes of the adherents of certain imaginary friends...
True but having been circumcised at the age of 3 due to an infection I can report you still can enjoy all the pleasures of sex with the benefit of not been able to rip your banjo. But then why isn't baby circumcision also criminal? That's non-consensual male genital mutilation. Or is THAT ok because your imaginary says it's OK and we have to respect the wishes of the adherents of certain imaginary friends...
FGM is done purely to deny the women of sexual pleasure and can cause complications at child birth. Grim act carried out by a grim religion. jogon said:
otolith said:
More to do with where people are from than their religion, as I understand it.
True but it is predominantly Muslim countries where it originates from. Do you feel the practice culturally enriches us in anyway?
tless of actually bringing a prosecutionMurcielago_Boy said:
This SHOULD be criminal.
But then why isn't baby circumcision also criminal? That's non-consensual male genital mutilation. Or is THAT ok because your imaginary says it's OK and we have to respect the wishes of the adherents of certain imaginary friends...
circumcision while not medically justified is rather less extreme than FGM - a comparative procedure to FGM on a male would be a partial penectomy including most or all of the glans ... a well conduicted circumcision allows full function at the loss of some sensitivity.But then why isn't baby circumcision also criminal? That's non-consensual male genital mutilation. Or is THAT ok because your imaginary says it's OK and we have to respect the wishes of the adherents of certain imaginary friends...
mph1977 said:
Murcielago_Boy said:
This SHOULD be criminal.
But then why isn't baby circumcision also criminal? That's non-consensual male genital mutilation. Or is THAT ok because your imaginary says it's OK and we have to respect the wishes of the adherents of certain imaginary friends...
circumcision while not medically justified is rather less extreme than FGM - a comparative procedure to FGM on a male would be a partial penectomy including most or all of the glans ... a well conduicted circumcision allows full function at the loss of some sensitivity.But then why isn't baby circumcision also criminal? That's non-consensual male genital mutilation. Or is THAT ok because your imaginary says it's OK and we have to respect the wishes of the adherents of certain imaginary friends...
So still wrong IMO. Don't chop bits off people because you think your sky fairy wants it.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b050bhnq
FMG?
I think the BBC can expect a knock on their door with the butt of an AK47.
(from about 14 mins, 30 secs).
Surely they can't get away with poking fun at regional accents?
FMG?
I think the BBC can expect a knock on their door with the butt of an AK47.
(from about 14 mins, 30 secs).
Surely they can't get away with poking fun at regional accents?
It appears that the CPS chose a pretty hopeless case for the first prosecution. The jury took only 30 minutes to acquit. Great work, CPS.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-31138218
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-31138218
Good result.
On first hearing of the prosecution I was glad they'd caught up with a professional carrying out this horrific procedure, then on actually hearing what he'd done - repairing an adult woman after emergency child birth, as closely back to when he'd found her as he could muster - I was flabbergasted it had made it to court.
He had to look up what he'd done after a midwife/nurse told him it was illegal.
He had to carry out reconstructive surgery - that he hadn't been trained to do - when the woman shouldn't have been anywhere near him as (apparently) there are different planned procedures for woman that have endured FGM which take them out of the normal child birth procedures, emergency or otherwise.
Hopefully these past couple of years won't taint his career.
Incompetent CPS.
On first hearing of the prosecution I was glad they'd caught up with a professional carrying out this horrific procedure, then on actually hearing what he'd done - repairing an adult woman after emergency child birth, as closely back to when he'd found her as he could muster - I was flabbergasted it had made it to court.
He had to look up what he'd done after a midwife/nurse told him it was illegal.
He had to carry out reconstructive surgery - that he hadn't been trained to do - when the woman shouldn't have been anywhere near him as (apparently) there are different planned procedures for woman that have endured FGM which take them out of the normal child birth procedures, emergency or otherwise.
Hopefully these past couple of years won't taint his career.
Incompetent CPS.
alfabadass said:
FGM is truely barbaric.
Male circumcision on the other hand is the superior way guys.
Way too much hate, usually from the anti-god squad.
What are you afraid of?
Cutting bits off of people who are too young to make a decision is barbaric.Male circumcision on the other hand is the superior way guys.
Way too much hate, usually from the anti-god squad.
What are you afraid of?
By all means get circumcised if you want to, but make the choice for yourself, don't force it on other people.
alfabadass said:
FGM is truely barbaric.
Male circumcision on the other hand is the superior way guys.
Way too much hate, usually from the anti-god squad.
What are you afraid of?
I'm an atheist and have no issue at all with male circumcision. FGM however, is a disgraceful practice. Comparing the 2 is like comparing ear piercing to beheading.Male circumcision on the other hand is the superior way guys.
Way too much hate, usually from the anti-god squad.
What are you afraid of?
alfabadass said:
FGM is truely barbaric.
Male circumcision on the other hand is the superior way guys.
Way too much hate, usually from the anti-god squad.
What are you afraid of?
I was recently done for medical reasons. The thought of young boys going through this without the medical need is barbaric.Male circumcision on the other hand is the superior way guys.
Way too much hate, usually from the anti-god squad.
What are you afraid of?
TwigtheWonderkid said:
I'm an atheist and have no issue at all with male circumcision. FGM however, is a disgraceful practice. Comparing the 2 is like comparing ear piercing to beheading.
It's not though, as it's not reversible.Although for what it's worth, seeing kids with their ears pieced makes me cringe as well.
Ozzie Osmond said:
Agree with that too.
P'raps you could pop over to Papua New Guinea and tell these chaps the error of their ways.http://tinyurl.com/mxtqydr
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff