I recently had to fly out to Eritrea to work. When I got up to leave at 3 a.m., my wife was watching TV because she couldn't sleep. It was one of those badly-made African dramas. A girl had died while being genitally mutilated and and trying to refuse the "operation". The women were taking up arms against the men enforcing this practice (even though, in fact, it is normally carried out by women and enforced by them, probably partly connected with the will to repress the sexuality of younger girls than themselves.)

Predictably, the women got their way and the fictitious men were crushed and humiliated. I mentioned that mgm was actually being promoted in Africa by Westerners and she said that it was different because FGM removes a pleasure zone. I told her otherwise and she was surprised. I also said that the arguments against both practices were exactly the same and differed only in degree. She was surprised to find out that male circumcision reduces the man's pleasure.

Here in Eritrea, I was talking to a young man and he was telling me about when the country moved forward by banning FGM. It was a big event, formerly a common practice. He thought that MGM was totally different.

Later, I showed him the quote from John Harvey Kellogg: : “A remedy for masturbation which is almost always successful in small boys is circumcision. The operation should be performed by a surgeon without administering an anesthetic, as the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment. In females, the author has found the application of pure carbolic acid to the clitoris an excellent means of allaying the abnormal excitement.”

He looked a little surprised to find out that male circumcision also has for a goal the repression of male sexuality, and said he would re-consider his POV. It is an issue which has not been considered by most people and we need to bring it to the fore.