FGM Parties

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Cotty said:

I agree that you could probably prioritise the eradication of FGM, however the other issue still needs to be addressed

Shall we say after we've eradicated FGM?

[WinstonWolf]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

WinstonWolf said:

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Countdown said:

Cotty said:

One is not less serious, one is widely accepted and legal the other is not accepted in the UK and is illegal. Chopping bits off children whatever sex is serious.

If you assert that both are equally serious

1. Why do you think one is legal and the other isn't?
2. Why are the physical effects of both so vastly different?

And why do tens of thousands of medical professionals around the world carry out one, and not the other.

On consenting adults or children? .

On children.

I'm guessing MGM is still acceptable in some cultures. It's time to stop cutting people *without their consent* regardless of their sex.

[Cotty]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Cotty said:

I agree that you could probably prioritise the eradication of FGM, however the other issue still needs to be addressed

Shall we say after we've eradicated FGM?

I don't think you will entirely eradicate FGM but certainly once you have had a good stab at it.

[Countdown]

Cotty said:

I don't think you will entirely eradicate FGM but certainly once you have had a good stab at it.

Not sure if that's the right way to go about it........................

[Blakewater]

Countdown said:

Cotty said:

One is not less serious, one is widely accepted and legal the other is not accepted in the UK and is illegal. Chopping bits off children whatever sex is serious.

If you assert that both are equally serious

1. Why do you think one is legal and the other isn't?
2. Why are the physical effects of both so vastly different?

Because one is supported by several mainstream religions from Jews to Muslims to American Christians. These people will kick up a fuss and claim discrimination if any attempt is made to ban what is part of their religious practice. They are also within government, even in countries such as the UK, and will do their best to maintain in the laws of those countries what they believe is proper according to their cultural beliefs. People who don't follow these religious practices don't want to offend large religious groups and lose their votes so they will try to avoid rocking the boat on any subjects they know will stir up trouble.

Of course there is the consideration that if you ban circumcision there will be people going to less qualified medical practitioners to have it done, though I live in a town with a large Muslim population and out of all the Muslim people I know who've had sons, not one has gone to a proper doctor for the circumcision.

Go to African countries and in those particular places you will have a hard time stopping FGM and ceremonial rape and all sorts of practices we consider barbaric. As people from those cultures come to our Western countries the problems grow here, but trying to stop a small number of Africans cutting their daughters will offend far fewer people than stopping the circumcision of baby boys.

In the USA, when baby boys aren't circumcised doctors to frequently retract the foreskin unnecessarily for routine checks if their parents take them into surgeries with infections.

It's clearly not a painless procedure as you can see in this video of the three main ways of carrying out circumcision. The surgeons like to maintain the crying is with the cold and the silence when the baby has passed out is him falling asleep because he's relaxed. The baby's brain hasn't developed enough for him to remember the procedure as he grows up but it's traumatic and painful as it happens.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjUCR44qZLE

This woman is keen for her son to be circumcised so as he grows up he and his dad can whip out their penises together and rejoice that they look alike.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZ833NuSptI

Amercans are told of the supposed benefits of circumcision but are rarely told of the risks.

rscott said:

How do you suggest we reduce new cases of FGM ?
I'd go for a combination of education around the lack of medical need for it, along with help from various religious leaders to condemn it too. Then follow it up with a strong effort to identify and prosecute those carrying it out.

.

If you want to get down to the basics of dealing with FGM you can use the same methods to tackle male circumcision at the same time. There is plenty of medical evidence to show it isn't necessary and does more harm than good and the reason it's carried out boils down to religious superstition, so it's the same as FGM really.

If your only concern about FGM is it being carried out by backstreet operatives with rusty blades, aside from the fact circumcision often is as well, with Rabbis sucking on the circumcised penises into the bargain in some Jewish practices, why not just make the lesser forms of it legal so it can be carried out in proper medical environments? Plenty of people give the same reasons and the same health benefits for it that they do for male circumcision and if doctors can profit from doing it many will back it.

Edited by Blakewater on Tuesday 25th July 07:30

[Dromedary66]

Well said Blakewater.

[Countdown]

Blakewater said:

Countdown said:

Cotty said:

One is not less serious, one is widely accepted and legal the other is not accepted in the UK and is illegal. Chopping bits off children whatever sex is serious.

If you assert that both are equally serious

1. Why do you think one is legal and the other isn't?
2. Why are the physical effects of both so vastly different?

Because one is supported by several mainstream religions from Jews to Muslims to American Christians. These people will kick up a fuss and claim discrimination if any attempt is made to ban what is part of their religious practice. They are also within government, even in countries such as the UK, and will do their best to maintain in the laws of those countries what they believe is proper according to their cultural beliefs. People who don't follow these religious practices don't want to offend large religious groups and lose their votes so they will try to avoid rocking the boat on any subjects they know will stir up trouble.

That may well be the case. Equally you could argue that's democracy in action. Lots of people kick up a fuss about lots of things. Some issues get dealt with by laws, others don't. Now, I fully understand that you and others feel strongly against male circumscision. You're entitled to do that, and campaign to have it banned or whatever. But equally, others are entitled to their views.

Blakewater said:

Of course there is the consideration that if you ban circumcision there will be people going to less qualified medical practitioners to have it done, though I live in a town with a large Muslim population and out of all the Muslim people I know who've had sons, not one has gone to a proper doctor for the circumcision.

I'm reasonably sure I know more muslims that you. I have 3 brothers, lots of male cousins, and 20+ nephews. All of us were circumsised by Doctors. Over the last 20 years all of them have been circumsized in Clinics or operating theatres. I assume you're not a muslim, in which case I'm surprised that the muslim people you know have discussed with you where and who circumsized their kids. It's not the sort of thing that crops up in polite conversation.

Blakewater said:

Go to African countries and in those particular places you will have a hard time stopping FGM and ceremonial rape and all sorts of practices we consider barbaric. As people from those cultures come to our Western countries the problems grow here, but trying to stop a small number of Africans cutting their daughters will offend far fewer people than stopping the circumcision of baby boys.

I disagree. The campaign against FGM isn't because it's easier. It's because it's a far more horrific issue. that's why even in African countries and those particular places there are numerous campaigns targetted at stopping FGM and educating parents.

Do you care to comment about the previous links to benefits of male circumcision?.

[anonymous-user]

Countdown said:

I disagree. The campaign against FGM isn't because it's easier. It's because it's a far more horrific issue. that's why even in African countries and those particular places there are numerous campaigns targetted at stopping FGM and educating parents.

Do you care to comment about the previous links to benefits of male circumcision?.

There are none that are not better managed in other ways - this has already been mentioned/explained .

If you really think that circumcision is the best way to control STIs then it can be a choice by a consenting adult. Of course it's still way worse than using a condom, but then I'm sure their sexaul health really was your primary concern

[Countdown]

wsurfa said:

There are none that are not better managed in other ways - this has already been mentioned/explained .

If you really think that circumcision is the best way to control STIs then it can be a choice by a consenting adult. Of course it's still way worse than using a condom, but then I'm sure their sexaul health really was your primary concern

Good. I'm glad you're sure.

[WinstonWolf]

wsurfa said:

Countdown said:

I disagree. The campaign against FGM isn't because it's easier. It's because it's a far more horrific issue. that's why even in African countries and those particular places there are numerous campaigns targetted at stopping FGM and educating parents.

Do you care to comment about the previous links to benefits of male circumcision?.

There are none that are not better managed in other ways - this has already been mentioned/explained .

If you really think that circumcision is the best way to control STIs then it can be a choice by a consenting adult. Of course it's still way worse than using a condom, but then I'm sure their sexaul health really was your primary concern

And it should ALWAYS be a decision for the individual when they reach adulthood unless there's a genuine medical reason. It's no one else's business to be chopping bits of kids genitals off.

[anonymous-user]

Countdown said:

wsurfa said:

There are none that are not better managed in other ways - this has already been mentioned/explained .

If you really think that circumcision is the best way to control STIs then it can be a choice by a consenting adult. Of course it's still way worse than using a condom, but then I'm sure their sexaul health really was your primary concern

Good. I'm glad you're sure.

Well, I've read a number of the relevant papers and their recommendations, I doubt you have. So yes pretty sure that washing/wrapping/vaccinating is by far a better approach. In the same way that regular teeth brushing is better than fillings, and a filling is better than pulling a tooth.

You seem to be advocating pulling out healthy teeth to avoid filings. Fillings that wouldn't occur anyway if proper oral hygiene was followed.

[herewego]

Well said to Blakewater from me too.

I suppose people find it hard to accept that their parents have done a bad thing.

[del mar]

wsurfa said:

Well, I've read a number of the relevant papers and their recommendations, I doubt you have. So yes pretty sure that washing/wrapping/vaccinating is by far a better approach. In the same way that regular teeth brushing is better than fillings, and a filling is better than pulling a tooth.

You seem to be advocating pulling out healthy teeth to avoid filings. Fillings that wouldn't occur anyway if proper oral hygiene was followed.

if it was laid out in their religious scriptures that All lower teeth were pulled out at the age of 10 they would all be doing it.

religious circumcision in today's world has nothing to do with any perceived health benefits, it is about blindly following religous brainwashing.

[Blakewater]

Countdown said:

Blakewater said:

Countdown said:

Cotty said:

One is not less serious, one is widely accepted and legal the other is not accepted in the UK and is illegal. Chopping bits off children whatever sex is serious.

If you assert that both are equally serious

1. Why do you think one is legal and the other isn't?
2. Why are the physical effects of both so vastly different?

Because one is supported by several mainstream religions from Jews to Muslims to American Christians. These people will kick up a fuss and claim discrimination if any attempt is made to ban what is part of their religious practice. They are also within government, even in countries such as the UK, and will do their best to maintain in the laws of those countries what they believe is proper according to their cultural beliefs. People who don't follow these religious practices don't want to offend large religious groups and lose their votes so they will try to avoid rocking the boat on any subjects they know will stir up trouble.

That may well be the case. Equally you could argue that's democracy in action. Lots of people kick up a fuss about lots of things. Some issues get dealt with by laws, others don't. Now, I fully understand that you and others feel strongly against male circumscision. You're entitled to do that, and campaign to have it banned or whatever. But equally, others are entitled to their views.

Blakewater said:

Of course there is the consideration that if you ban circumcision there will be people going to less qualified medical practitioners to have it done, though I live in a town with a large Muslim population and out of all the Muslim people I know who've had sons, not one has gone to a proper doctor for the circumcision.

I'm reasonably sure I know more muslims that you. I have 3 brothers, lots of male cousins, and 20+ nephews. All of us were circumsised by Doctors. Over the last 20 years all of them have been circumsized in Clinics or operating theatres. I assume you're not a muslim, in which case I'm surprised that the muslim people you know have discussed with you where and who circumsized their kids. It's not the sort of thing that crops up in polite conversation.

Blakewater said:

Go to African countries and in those particular places you will have a hard time stopping FGM and ceremonial rape and all sorts of practices we consider barbaric. As people from those cultures come to our Western countries the problems grow here, but trying to stop a small number of Africans cutting their daughters will offend far fewer people than stopping the circumcision of baby boys.

I disagree. The campaign against FGM isn't because it's easier. It's because it's a far more horrific issue. that's why even in African countries and those particular places there are numerous campaigns targetted at stopping FGM and educating parents.

Do you care to comment about the previous links to benefits of male circumcision?.

I assume you are a Muslim, which means you're looking at this from a somewhat biased perspective yourself.

I never asked where the Muslim people I know got their children circumcised, they were discussing it in group conversations with other Muslims and they weren't talking about doctors and hospitals but people they knew within their communities who arranged these things very much in the same way female circumcision is arranged within the religious community.

I covered the issue of American studies before you posted your links, including the Daily Mail one.

If you want to tackle sexual heath, try looking here.

http://www.boots.com/health-pharmacy/lifestyle-wel...

If you want to tackle hygiene, look here.

http://www.boots.com/soap-hand-wash

If you have sweaty tackle, try these.

http://www.marksandspencer.com/l/men/underwear/box...

The idea that baby boys need to be circumcised for sexual health and hygiene is based on the idea that they'll grow up to be too stupid to wash and use condoms.

As for penile cancer, studies have found that more babies die of circumcision complications than people die of penile cancer. STDs are a penile cancer risk, but we've addressed that with the safe sex issue. Other risks include smoking and simply being older. It only occurs in 1 in 100,000 men in Europe and North America.

Don't forget that you can find American scientists who will tell you man made global warming is all a hoax. These studies and scientific proof are all based around what keeps the money flowing in.

Instead of a Daily Wail link, have a look at a proper scientific paper.

http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/cancer/

[TwigtheWonderkid]

There may be religious requirements for circumcision, but there is no religious requirement on who carries it out. Hence increasing numbers of Jews and Muslims get it done in a clinic by a doctor. In my limited experience, as Countdown says, the majority in the UK.

Circumcision is akin to abortion, in so much as it is never going away. There is no choice between abortion and no abortion, it's a choice between abortion and backstreet abortion. But abortion is here to stay. Same with circumcision.

No point in making it illegal, you'll just move it all away from doctors to idiots in robes. There's an argument in making non medical circumcision illegal, hopefully forcing even more people to take the medical route. That could move the numbers even more in favour of proper clinics with sterile facilities.

FGM is a different issue. Most religious scholars are against it, and argue with those in favour. Governments across the world are against it, and it's illegal in most countries, even where it's prevalent. It could be stopped, with the right amount of will and determination. And legal enforcement. But it'll never happen whilst we continue to pander to cultural sensitivities on the issue and whilst the seriousness of the whole issue is constantly diluted by the anti circumcision debate.

[WinstonWolf]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

There may be religious requirements for circumcision, but there is no religious requirement on who carries it out. Hence increasing numbers of Jews and Muslims get it done in a clinic by a doctor. In my limited experience, as Countdown says, the majority in the UK.

Circumcision is akin to abortion, in so much as it is never going away. There is no choice between abortion and no abortion, it's a choice between abortion and backstreet abortion. But abortion is here to stay. Same with circumcision.

No point in making it illegal, you'll just move it all away from doctors to idiots in robes. There's an argument in making non medical circumcision illegal, hopefully forcing even more people to take the medical route. That could move the numbers even more in favour of proper clinics with sterile facilities.

FGM is a different issue. Most religious scholars are against it, and argue with those in favour. Governments across the world are against it, and it's illegal in most countries, even where it's prevalent. It could be stopped, with the right amount of will and determination. And legal enforcement. But it'll never happen whilst we continue to pander to cultural sensitivities on the issue and whilst the seriousness of the whole issue is constantly diluted by the anti circumcision debate.

Why the obsession with interfering with children's genitalia?

Just let them decide for themselves when they're adults.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

WinstonWolf said:

Why the obsession with interfering with children's genitalia?

I thought that's what this thread was about. What were you expecting, a detailed critique of the USA's involvement in Central American politics during the 70s and 80s?

[Troubleatmill]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Cotty said:

I agree that you could probably prioritise the eradication of FGM, however the other issue still needs to be addressed

Shall we say after we've eradicated FGM?

Murder is evil.
So is rape.
We should be looking to stamp out both as soon as possible - wouldn't you say?

[Blakewater]

There are varying degrees of female circumcision from clitoral hood removal to removing the whole clitoris and sewing shut the vagina to prove the woman is a virgin and prevent sex. All are banned as FGM.

If we're going to campaign against genital mutilation we may as well cover all of it because it all originates from the same mentality with the same justifications. No unnecessary surgery that carries a risk of death is something insignificant.

[anonymous-user]

Troubleatmill said:

Murder is evil.
So is rape.
We should be looking to stamp out both as soon as possible - wouldn't you say?

ABH good, GBH bad - it's the circumcision slogan for the early 21st C