Are female and male circumcision comparable ?

59 points19 commentssubmitted by OkLetterhead10left-wing male advocate to r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates

Everytime a new anti female circumcision law is passed a lot of people ask a very valid questions in my opinion "what about male circumcision?" "why the law ban circumcision against half of the population but njot the other half?" "this is discriminatory against boys !" but the anti female circumcision campaigners say the comprison between the two is revolting like this article from the guardian titled "A ban on male circumcision would be antisemitic. How could it not be?" that argue that the two practices are different. but are they ? what make some people say they are ?

Female circumcision is inherently sexist and a symbol of male domination:

Female circumcision is inherently sexist and symbol of male domination they say, for example Michael Shermer the founder of "skeptic" magazine said male and female circumcision are not morally equivalent because "the motivation is to control women" ! before answering if this is true or no, why the motivation is even relevant (other than medical requirement) ? according to this logic the law should not punish parents who commit circumcision for religious reasons if the problem is when you do it "to control women"

Calling female circumcision sexist is false, because every society that practice FC they also practice male circumcision, and also there is no proof that FC is a symbol of patriarchal male domination. actually it is a matriarchal tradition. men often favor the ending while women defend it. as explain Johnsdotter Sara in Female Genital Cutting: The Global North and South:

controversial as it may seem from a feminist and activist perspective, clitoridectomy in its wider cultural and social context actually provides individual women with self-esteem, cultural recognition as moral female persons, and space for agency (Ahmadu, 2000). Therefore, campaigns against female circumcision have met with strong resistance from women themselves (Bledsoe, 1984; Dellenborg, 2009; Hernlund, 2000). Importantly, in Casamance, the religious and cultural value of girls’ circumcisions and initiation rites were negotiated and challenged in various ways by different actors. The greatest schism was along gender and age lines. During Dellenborg’s time in the field, young and middle-aged men tended to question women’s circumcision rituals while older women defended them. Older men generally supported the opinions of their wives and sisters. A recent study confirms that these circumstances have not changed (Tomàs et al., 2018).

Women generally emphasized that circumcision is a crucial process of purification preparation for prayers. Men complained that women did not know enough about Islam, and that the idea of female circumcision being connected to religion was a misunderstanding. Men were also concerned about clitoridectomy having an impact on sexual pleasure, arguing that sex was more enjoyable with an uncircumcised woman. Another problem noted by men was the expense entailed in conducting the initiation rites and the fact that their wives would be absent from the home for several weeks while the rites took place. Chastity is not particularly highly valued in Jola society, and married women are permitted to take a lover (asangor) during the ritual, although this should be done with discretion and their husbands are rarely keen on it. Women explained the custom (basangabou) as linked to arranged marriages and a socially accepted way of meeting your ‘high-school lover.’

Male circumcision is just a little snip unlike female circumcision:

People who say that are just proving that they don't know anything about the topic, female circumcision is different from culture to culture. but all forms of female circumcision is considered genital mutilation and is socially and legally unacceptable. the World Health Organization consider even prickingas genital mutilation and push countries to ban. meanwhile all forms of male circumcision is considered acceptable, even removing 50% of the forskin. how is this okay for someone who support gender equality ?!

Conclusion:

Female and male circumcision are both genital mutilation, there is no reason why would any one say other wise other than anti male sexism (misandry). WHO estimates that 125 million women and girls are affected , compared with around one billion men and boys. we should reject any law that protect girls only. any claim that the two practices are different somehow is completely false ans is based on ignorance or misandry.