FGM Parties

[Cotty]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Why do you think it is that there are thousands of medical professionals that'll happily carry out a circumcision without any medical requirement, but none that will carry out FGM?

I wasn't aware that a medical professional would carry out circumcision if there were no medical requirement.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Cotty said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Why do you think it is that there are thousands of medical professionals that'll happily carry out a circumcision without any medical requirement, but none that will carry out FGM?

I wasn't aware that a medical professional would carry out circumcision if there were no medical requirement.

How the hell do you think the literally tens of millions of non religious circumcisions are carried out? You do know that for decades, nearly all American and Canadian boys were circumcised in hospital a few days after birth. it was routine.

I live in a multicultural area of London. A local medical centre does it privately for £80, as even many Muslims who want their boys circumcised want it done by a medical professional.

56% of the male population of the world are circumcised. Did you think none were done by doctors???

Good god, how can you not know this, about a subject you seem so passionate about.

[Cotty]

I must have been distracted when I wrote that as I know doctors carry out medial procedures when there is not a medical requirement. Plastic surgery etc.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Cotty said:

I must have been distracted when I wrote that as I know doctors carry out medial procedures when there is not a medical requirement. Plastic surgery etc.

So back to my question. If they are both on a par, why don't medical professionals carry out FGM?

[Cotty]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

So back to my question. If they are both on a par, why don't medical professionals carry out FGM?

Medial professionals do conduct Labiaplasty but don't carry out FGM as it would be at the detriment of the subject.

[Countdown]

Cotty said:

Countdown said:

Do you think they're equal, in terms of pain/risk/physical and mental impact?

What would you say to your son if when he grows up tells you he didn't want to be circumcised?

i'd explain why we did it and hope he'd understand.

Cotty said:

As for pain/risk/physical impact, very similar if being conducted by someone who is not a medial professional.

In all our cases it was done by the family GP.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Cotty said:

Countdown said:

Do you think they're equal, in terms of pain/risk/physical and mental impact?

What would you say to your son if when he grows up tells you he didn't want to be circumcised?

Yes, he could be one of those ridiculously tiny proportion of men, circumcised as babies, who actually give a fk.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Cotty said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

So back to my question. If they are both on a par, why don't medical professionals carry out FGM?

Medial professionals do conduct Labiaplasty but don't carry out FGM as it would be at the detriment of the subject.

So they don't carry out FGM (labiaplasty is an entirely different thing), but they do carry out circumcision. Why?

[Cotty]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

So they don't carry out FGM (labiaplasty is an entirely different thing), but they do carry out circumcision. Why?

I don't know, but they shouldn't do it if it is not needed.

[Uncle John]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Cotty said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

So back to my question. If they are both on a par, why don't medical professionals carry out FGM?

Medial professionals do conduct Labiaplasty but don't carry out FGM as it would be at the detriment of the subject.

So they don't carry out FGM (labiaplasty is an entirely different thing), but they do carry out circumcision. Why?

Isn't it to do with the M in FGM, as in mutilation?

Circumcision isn't mutilation of the male genitalia.

[herewego]

Uncle John said:

Isn't it to do with the M in FGM, as in mutilation?

Circumcision isn't mutilation of the male genitalia.

Of course it is.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

herewego said:

Uncle John said:

Isn't it to do with the M in FGM, as in mutilation?

Circumcision isn't mutilation of the male genitalia.

Of course it is.

It really isn't. If it was, medical professionals wouldn't do it without a medical reason.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Cotty said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

So they don't carry out FGM (labiaplasty is an entirely different thing), but they do carry out circumcision. Why?

I don't know,

I think you do know. You just don't want to sink your own argument by saying it.

[Cotty]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

I think you do know. You just don't want to sink your own argument by saying it.

Rather than beating around the bush (scuse the pun) but why don't you say what you think I mean

[Countdown]

Cotty said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

So they don't carry out FGM (labiaplasty is an entirely different thing), but they do carry out circumcision. Why?

I don't know, but they shouldn't do it if it is not needed.

i think, if they thought it caused harm to the patient, they wouldn't do it. (Hippocratic oath and all that...)

With regards to "need" if that was a legitimate basis then cosmetic surgery rates would be significantly reduced.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Cotty said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

I think you do know. You just don't want to sink your own argument by saying it.

Rather than beating around the bush (scuse the pun) but why don't you say what you think I mean

OK, the reason medical pros will do one and not the other is because the medical profession realises the 2 things aren't remotely comparable.

[Cotty]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

OK, the reason medical pros will do one and not the other is because the medical profession realises the 2 things aren't remotely comparable.

I suppose it is like Countdown said in that doctors do not think circumcision causes harm but FGM does. Also circumcision is something that has been around for a long time in our society and is deemed acceptable. However FGM has been around for a long time in a different society and they find it acceptable.

I still stand by my point that you should not chop bits off children unless there is a medical need.

[herewego]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

herewego said:

Uncle John said:

Isn't it to do with the M in FGM, as in mutilation?

Circumcision isn't mutilation of the male genitalia.

Of course it is.

It really isn't. If it was, medical professionals wouldn't do it without a medical reason.

To the best of my knowledge circumcision is not offered by any NHS hospital. It's way past time it was banned unless for medical reason.

[ruggedscotty]

Uncle John said:

Isn't it to do with the M in FGM, as in mutilation?

Circumcision isn't mutilation of the male genitalia.

FFS ! what a stupid thing to say.......

Mutilation or maiming is an act of physical injury that degrades the appearance or function of any living body.

So you come to me and cut off the foreskin of my penis, you are mutilating me, pure and simple. You are removing a piece of skin that covers the glans, its a biological part of your body, much the same as your nose eyes ears toes etc. it does a function it keeps the glans moist and protected. So you remove that then you are mutilating the penis. So dont come on here and say that you are not.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

herewego said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

herewego said:

Uncle John said:

Isn't it to do with the M in FGM, as in mutilation?

Circumcision isn't mutilation of the male genitalia.

Of course it is.

It really isn't. If it was, medical professionals wouldn't do it without a medical reason.

To the best of my knowledge circumcision is not offered by any NHS hospital.

Your knowledge is wrong. Many NHS hospitals will do circumcision, especially in areas of the UK where it's popular. The view is taken that it's going to be done anyway, may as well do it in a safe and sterile environment. Some NHS trusts however, will not fund it.