FGM in America

On 26 April 2010, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) issued a “Policy Statement – Ritual Genital Cutting of Female Minors” that in effect promotes changes in US federal and state laws to “enable pediatricians to reach out to families by offering a ritual nick” such as “pricking or incising the clitoral skin to satisfy cultural requirements.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

really?
a new and improved reach out program? whats next? have the cops return 13 year old runaway brides to marital bliss?

/snicker

leaving the bombast aside for the moment, who here agrees with the inference made by equalitynow....."in effect promotes changes in US federal and state laws":..??

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Damn savages. It should be banned around the world, not given a compromise.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

So, yeah. What exactly is the purpose of this practice?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

As sick as this sounds, if it means they get a tiny incision rather than full blown mutilation elsewhere..I think it's the lesser of the evils.

You don't notice a tiny incision when you're grown up. You do notice a missing clitoris, inner labia, and the ability to orgasm, urinate normally, and give birth normally if you want kids.

 

The trade-off

I'm of two minds about this at present. To the one, I acknowledge the sentiment that any mandatory female genital mutilation is savage. To the other, though, it's not just the lesser of all evils, but rather a long-term outlook.

If a tiny nick satisfies the cultural demand, the practice can have a long-term effect. The topic article notes that the ritual nick has made "some progress toward eradication or amelioration", and in the context of eradication, if this practice replaces full-blown mutilation, there will be many whose outlook is one of fence-sitting with some deference to cultural demand who will eventually view the nicking as pointless. Over the course of a couple generations, societies can make great progress toward eradication.

And this is a good thing. The problem is that FGM won't disappear overnight. While the hard line against the practice has merit, it isn't necessarily a practical approach. Hardline headbanging often results in nothing more than mutual headaches.

Certainly, in this long-term outlook, there will be some prejudice against those who have been fully mutilated, and this is problematic, but if full-blown FGM is culturally marginalized, yes, we can call that progress.
____________________

Notes:

American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Bioethics. Policy Statement Ritual Genital Cutting of Female Minors. Pediatrics. April 26, 2010. Pediatrics.AAPpublications.org. July 21, 2010. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/peds.2010-0187v1.pdf

 

People just need to be educated. There's no need for a nick or anything in the USA. We just need to shame this practice out of existence.

 

Well now, as much as I dislike it, it is what they do. Obviously it has some significance to them, or they wouldn't do it. If it's what they do, then fine. Keep me out of the loop. The world is sickening enough, I don't want to hear about all the evil and bullshit in the world, just the stuff that directly affects me... It's their culture, if they want to do it, then who the hell are you to judge what's right and wrong? Perspective perspective perspective. Get some.

 

It's a fairly simply symptom to interpret

It is, at its basic level, a context of ownership, nor just of body in general but sexuality in particular. The symbolism is blatant, the social attitude clearly neurotic, and the cultural aspects represent an ideology that has not yet reconciled itself to fundamental reality.

 

How about labiaplasty instead? No damage to the clitoris and it tidies the place up, sort of like a male circumcision, perhaps even the same thing as the foreskin and labia are descended from the same ambiguous fetal tissue. If we allow male circumcision on infants then we should allow female labiaplasty on infants.

 

God is human

The theology on that one would be crazy: God loves you. He created you in His image. He just thinks your pussy is ugly.

And if no pussy is good enough, does that make God gay? Or just human?

 

Same argument but in reverse for male circumcision?

 

OK. How are you planning to persuade the FGM promulgators to restrict their modifications to something analogous to male circumcision?

 

My argument is academic, but I guess the same why you would persuade them to make any change to their traditions.

 

How about jail time for perps?

 

I know it might seem that way, but ....

Actually, no. Male circumcision is covered in Abramism. I do not recall that female genital mutilation is likewise. That is, specifically, God has a thing about getting guys to cut their foreskins. There is even a famous massacre in the Bible surrounding a circumcision; see Genesis 34.

And if you want a chuckle involving male circumcision and sexal violence, see Michael Glass, "What the Bible Reveals About Circumcision and Sexual Violence". It's a poorly written, simplistic analysis, but it's still funny.

At any rate, though, the components of justification come from seemingly quite different directions.
____________________

Notes:

Weigle, Luther A., et al. The Holy Bible: Revised Standard Version. Second edition. New York: Thomas Nelson, 1971. University of Michigan. July 27, 2010. http://quod.lib.umich.edu/r/rsv/

Glass, Michael. "What the Bible Reveals About Circumcision and Sexual Violence". Circumcision Information Resource Pages. April 2003. CIRP.org. July 27, 2010. http://www.cirp.org/pages/cultural/glass3/

 

I'm aware of that Tiassa, my argument is in the motive of fairness if male circumcision is allowed then female "circumcision" must be allowed, of course that would not allow removing the clitoris anymore then the head of the penis.

 

This isn't exactly one of them

A very simplistic approach. I admit, I find such superficial logic amusing some days.

 

I'm just trying to play the devils advocate here, be it at a pragmatic level.

 

How prevalent is this practice, is it just Muslims, what purpose does it serve, and what the hell does it actually have to do with Islam? Don't tell me this is in the Quran?