Women with vaginal piercings to be classed as suffering from FGM - even where the women is an adult and has consented. But hack-off the foreskin of a male un-consenting infant and who cares - that is just male circumcision… and can be done just for fun.

MonkeyCB · 2015-03-17T22:41:34+00:00

Wow, they're really looking to boost those FGM statistics.

Mitthrawnuruodo1337 · 2015-03-17T21:23:54+00:00

Does this mean that vaginal piercing is now illegal in the UK? So women are not able to express themselves in that way because of the anti-FGM campaign... I guess the matriarchy hurts women, too.

chocoboat · 2015-03-18T00:04:32+00:00

It was a real eye opener when I told people I wasn't going to circumcise my son. Some people got angry (more so online) and others (in person) tried to talk me out of it. It was only my wife and my pediatrician that agreed with me.

Coldbeam · 2015-03-18T00:50:24+00:00

Redefining terms to make it seem like there is more prevalence of a crime that is viewed as having only female victims. This seems familiar somehow... Oh right! Rape on college campuses. Fucking despicable, the lot of them.

jimmy17 · 2015-03-18T00:52:22+00:00

A comment I actually saw on twoxc:

Totally sexist of course: men will still be able to pierce their genitals without the threat of legal action.

hoppythefrog · 2015-03-18T01:02:34+00:00

Im ok with being circumcised but would not do it to my child and leave the decision up to them

McFeely_Smackup · 2015-03-18T01:07:26+00:00

Either the author doesn't know what a vagina is, or this body piercing thing is getting really out of hand.

RavenousPonies · 2015-03-18T01:39:27+00:00

in some communities girls are forced to have them.

Which ones? Be specific. Have you any evidence that this actually happens?

Lord_ThunderCunt · 2015-03-18T01:33:01+00:00

Even if you ignore the rampant, unchecked, male mutilation in western countries, this is some fucked up shit.

Arby01 · 2015-03-18T06:11:56+00:00

Well, I think this makes sense.

Since women can't legally consent to pretty much anything, they clearly need the same protections as children, even from their own decisions.

mikesteane · 2015-03-18T02:20:19+00:00

[permanently deleted]

goosepoop · 2015-03-18T01:13:22+00:00

I hate how I'll never get my foreskin back :( Its messed up how they can just hack it off with no repercussions at all.

Baalzabub · 2015-03-17T23:58:06+00:00

What the fuck is happening to this planet!

eletheros · 2015-03-17T23:50:22+00:00

Horseshoe effect. Is it authoritarian leftist overreach, or conservative puritan offensiveness.

pokemon_fetish · 2015-03-17T21:22:58+00:00

Poor, poor women. So victimized in every way possible.

TheRedThrowAwayPill · 2015-03-18T04:12:42+00:00

Muslim and Jewish parents are gonna circumcise their boys and we wont give a shit at all about this topic.

However, as for grown women piercing themselves being classified as FGM ... that sounds like it will be politically used to make it into a talking point when it actually isn't.

2015-03-18T12:02:22+00:00

If these women are victims, it's only of their own stupidity. They did this to themselves. If they later regret their decision, then that only makes MGM even worse. If a woman can regret a choice she made to alter her body as a legal adult, then how can parents be qualified to alter their newborn son's body when he has his whole life ahead of him?

2015-03-18T12:29:16+00:00

There is no such piercing as a vaginal piercing.

They are pierced via clit, clit hood or labia.

Endless_Summer · 2015-03-18T12:35:09+00:00

Feminism: the largest source of misogyny in the world.

2015-03-17T22:50:01+00:00

But womens are special and need protecting see, that's why we only send boys to war.

lirannl · 2015-03-18T00:20:39+00:00

What?! This is horrible! Why would vaginal piercings be FGM?! They're done to a consenting adult!

And I'm circumcised. It's an issue, but, growing among Jews, I see how explosive such a ban is. I'm afraid of the results.

apullin · 2015-03-18T06:40:04+00:00

Apart from Congress voting themselves backpay during the debt ceiling deadlock, I struggle to think of a more obvious and in the open agenda-cooking in recent memory.

This is oddly reminiscent of how Indian people are counted here in the SF tech world. They are sometimes counted as "People of Color" and "minorities", but then also sometimes not, really just depending on what point someone is trying to substantiate.

2015-03-18T11:51:31+00:00

What's with the UK governments hard stance on the infantisation of women? This is just yet another example of it in yet another poorly thought out piece of legislation.

2015-03-18T13:03:03+00:00

I gave my son the choice I never had... If he wants it cut then by all means he can have it done.

mikesteane · 2015-03-18T01:15:21+00:00

what is FGM?

2015-03-18T10:08:15+00:00

Seems to me that the system in its typical high-handedness, thinks nothing of stigmatizing patients in medical settings for political aims. Thanks, Feminism!

ToReykjavik · 2015-03-18T12:46:04+00:00

Sorry I'm a little hungover and I'm scanning but I had a question to ask a while ago and I think this is a good place to ask. Why is it still okay to have your child circumcised? They have no idea what is happening (or very little). Its not like you can get them permanently tattooed but you're allowed to have part of their genitals removed forever

mushybees · 2015-03-18T15:43:28+00:00

people really need to get the concept into their heads, if a person wants to mutilate themself, or pay someone else to do it, and they're over the age of consent, they should be free to do whatever the hell they want. but to cut off or pierce or mutilate in any way the body of a person who is underage and can't consent to it is morally wrong. that's all the law needs to say. it can be gender neutral and fair and then that's it, case closed, anyone who does it goes to prison.

ShutupPussy · 2015-03-18T01:13:12+00:00

Don't you guys consider the act of circumcision mutilation? So even if a person consents to circumcision he is still mutilated?

ecancil · 2015-03-18T02:49:23+00:00

Sensationalist title

2015-03-18T13:14:54+00:00

The mandatory reporting regulations, sent to medical staff by the Department of Health

Utter lies, I've told reddit time and time and time again, DIG DEEPER. Who is behind this? Who is the person who is pushing for this.

Is it Jane Ellison MP who is doing this? Is it from another source trying to find FGM statistics for their rant against immigration?

We need to unravel the motives of these incompetents.

Stephen1985 · 2015-03-18T01:38:56+00:00

Well in all fairness women are stupid and child like so they probably got tricked into having the piercing by their abusive partner. It's only right that we protect them by limiting their ability to make choices. /S

Stephen1985 · 2015-03-18T01:34:33+00:00

I have my penis pierced, am I now official classed as having mutilated genitals?

SirGingerBeard · 2015-03-18T04:20:21+00:00

To be fair, I'm super glad that I was circumcised. It looks fucking disgusting to me, it just looks animalistic.

votingdownurshit · 2015-03-18T10:06:19+00:00

do you really feel like you were mutilated by your parents? my dick looks great! i wouldn't want it any other way. can people just let other people make choices for themselves and their children?

JFConz · 2015-03-18T10:45:10+00:00

I hate this argument. Hate it. Not the piercings are mutilation, that is just absurd. Pierce your own vagina with consent, woogoo to you, not mutilation, pierce someone else's without their consent, yea then I would say that is mutilation. Rather... The removal of a small strip of flesh at the end of a penis is not on the same order of magnitude as the removal of an entire clitoris or set of labia. For the record, before anyone jumps on me for hating men or something, I am a person with a penis. I do not have a foreskin, and if I had had one during my teenage years, with how much I was showering then, I probably would have had an excess of dick-cheese.
Now wait, I implied that having a foreskin would somehow make me dirtier, that's not fair! To me, the foreskin has been in the same group of body parts the appendix belongs in. Whatever it was supposed to do for me, it doesn't and I get by just fine. It would have just been there collecting lint during my week-long showerless binges. I am dirty, not foreskins.
But wait, there's more! The removal of the clit or labez in a genital mutilation case is motivated usually by religion, to reduce the pleasure of a woman by removing the tidbits that feel great. Any guy here consider his foreskin to be his primary erogenous zone? 'Cause I prefer the head of my dick, which is always free from interference from my long-lost foreskin. We remove foreskins as a means of ensuring a higher level of minimum cleanliness and studies show reduced rates in the transfer of STIs.
Maybe you wish you had your foreskin back and you think your parents are totally lame for making that choice for you, I hear you dude, but there's no going back. I'm sure your parents didn't make that choice because it seemed fun to them. Maybe intentions don't count for a lot to you, and that's cool too, but the removal of foreskin for hygienic (psh, mostly cosmetic in this age) hardly compares to the removal of large (relatively) components of the female sex organs. To make this comparison as if it were valid is to dismiss the hell some women have gone through. Let me remind you that most FGM occur long after the brain has set up camp and started being aware and conscious, I lost my foreskin before my earliest memory. I lost my foreskin like my pa before him and I chose to have my sons removed. Even with it removed, cleaning his little dick off when he's filled his diaper to capacity with shit-pudding is a delicate hassle. A foreskin would only make my job harder, not that that was the reason I decided for it.

Comments

The mandatory reporting regulations, sent to medical staff by the Department of Health