Agnostic.com

2 3

[aeon.co]

"The World Health Organization (WHO) defines FGM as any ‘non-medical’ alteration of the genitalia of women and girls. What this is likely to bring to mind is the most extreme version of such ‘alteration’, which is the excision of the external part of the clitoris followed by a narrowing of the vaginal opening, sometimes using stitches or thorns. It is rarely understood that this notorious form of FGM is comparatively rare: it occurs in a subset of the practising communities, and makes up about 10 per cent of cases worldwide. More prevalent, but much less frequently discussed in the media, is a range of less extensive alterations, sometimes performed under anaesthesia by medical professionals and with sterile surgical equipment. These include, among other interventions, so-called ritual ‘nicking’ of the clitoral hood (common in Malaysia), as well as non-medically-indicated labiaplasty and even piercings that might be done for perceived cosmetic enhancement.

"Male genital cutting is performed at different ages, in different environments, with different tools, by different groups, for different reasons

"It should be clear that these different forms of FGM are likely to result in different degrees of harm, with different effects on sexual function and satisfaction, different chances of developing an infection, and so on. And yet all forms of non-therapeutic female genital alteration – no matter how sterilised or minor – are deemed to be mutilations in ‘Western’ countries. All are prohibited by law. The reason for this, when you get right down to it, is that cutting into a girl’s genitals without a medical diagnosis, and without her consent, is equivalent to criminal assault on a minor under the legal codes of most of these societies. And, morally, I think the law is correct here. I don’t think that a sharp object should be taken to any child’s vulva unless it is to save her life or health, or unless she has given her fully informed permission to undergo such an operation, and wants to take on the relevant risks and consequences.

"In that case, of course, she wouldn’t be a ‘child’ anymore, but rather an adult woman, who can make a decision about her own body.

"The story is very different when it comes to male circumcision. In no jurisdiction is the practice prohibited, and in many it is not even restricted. In some countries, including in the United States, anyone, with any instrument, and any degree of medical training (including none) can attempt to perform a circumcision on a non-consenting child – sometimes with disastrous consequences. For a recent example, look up ‘Goodluck Caubergs’ on the internet; similar cases happen every year. As the bioethicist Dena Davis has pointed out, ‘States currently regulate the hygienic practices of those who cut our hair and our fingernails … so why not a baby’s genitals?’

FrayedBear 9 Nov 9
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

2 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

female and male genital mutilation are both horrible, but why compare them or attempt to use one to amplify the feelings of the other?

Exactly. Why argue that domestic violence is only a male perpetrator problem? IMO the above is domestic violence and results in further violence by many of the victims of FMG & Circumcision.

1

So the almighty, all powerful and all loving god decided that he made a mistake in giving boys foreskins and girls clitorides (yes that is the plural believe it or not) and rather than stop children being born with them orders the "faithful" to start cutting bits off and sewing up their infants.
Real nice god they have there.
The fact they anyone would want this abomination performed on their own or any child beggars belief.

The only plus was that each sad little cut off piece of baby foreskin can be grown into several square metres of new skin for burn victims. It is my understanding however that this is no longer necessary following the radical new procedures developed by a Perth Western Australian doctor. [healthcareit.com.au]

@FrayedBear I was unaware of that skin grafting technique, thanks for the information.

@LenHazell53 She got creative after Australians were burnt in the Bali bombings at the turn of the century. I see that the yanks have still not approved it yet waiting for their technology to catch up?

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:424142
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.