FGM in America

Discussion in 'Ethics, Morality, & Justice' started by Gustav, Jul 20, 2010.

  1. Gustav Banned Banned

    Messages:
    12,575
    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":..??
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Bowser Life is Fatal. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,507
    Damn savages. It should be banned around the world, not given a compromise.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,878
    So, yeah. What exactly is the purpose of this practice?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. visceral_instinct Monkey see, monkey denigrate Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,913
    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.
     
  8. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,519
    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
     
  9. Michael 歌舞伎 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,285
    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.
     
  10. Kernl Sandrs Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    645
    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.
     
  11. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,519
    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.
     
  12. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,477
    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.
     
  13. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,519
    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?
     
  14. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,477
    Same argument but in reverse for male circumcision?
     
  15. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,906
    OK. How are you planning to persuade the FGM promulgators to restrict their modifications to something analogous to male circumcision?
     
  16. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,477
    My argument is academic, but I guess the same why you would persuade them to make any change to their traditions.
     
  17. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    26,906
    How about jail time for perps?
     
  18. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,519
    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/
     
  19. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,477
    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.
     
  20. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    35,519
    This isn't exactly one of them

    A very simplistic approach. I admit, I find such superficial logic amusing some days.
     
  21. ElectricFetus Sanity going, going, gone Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,477
    I'm just trying to play the devils advocate here, be it at a pragmatic level.
     
  22. Fraggle Rocker Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,690
    There are vaginal orgasms. I don't know if anyone is keeping statistics on what percentage of women are able to have them. The last time this topic came up a Muslim woman (probably Sam but my memory is not totally reliable) insisted that lots of women with clitoridectomies reported having orgasms routinely.

    Based upon my conversations with American women I'd guess that the majority of them would not be able to have orgasms under those circumstances, but some would. Of course as a man my sample may be too small to be statistically valid.

    And of course we have no measure of the reliability or statistical validity of the anecdotal evidence from the Islamic region either.

    Many people--especially Muslims naturally--compare clitoridectomies to circumcision, and indeed it has lately become fashionable in some circles to call them "female circumcision" as a way of making them seem respectable. I accept the assertion that an uncircumcised penis is somewhat more sensitive than a circumcised one, but nonetheless it doesn't seem to interfere materially with our ability to climax. In fact anything that can retard the speed of our climax would be regarded as a boon by exactly half the population of this planet.

    If people want to campaign to end male circumcision, then let them. (Although the final tally is not in on the public health value of circumcision in the battle against AIDS.) But I think it's disingenuous to compare it to clitoridectomy, and the comparison shows the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of the campaign to legitimize clitoridectomy.

    If we can stop those people from hiding their women under a shroud, we should certainly be able to stop them from mutilating them. If the arguments are entirely religious, then this is yet one more reason why religion sucks.
     
  23. Giambattista sssssssssssssssssssssssss sssss Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,878
    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?
     

Share This Page