Arguing about genital mutilation...

JesusSaidSo · 2012-09-24T17:17:46+00:00

What does it matter? Mutilating the genitals of children is wrong regardless of why its done. Next time someone argues something inane like this, bring the argument back on the rails by saying that it doesn't impact why its wrong.

Lonemango · 2012-09-24T23:07:53+00:00

From a strictly anatomical standpoint she is correct. The glans penis is analogous to the clitoris, and the clitoral hood is analogous to the foreskin. As to how much removal of any of these structures affects sensation is anyone's guess.

AnthonyZarat · 2012-09-24T18:44:01+00:00

I don't think that there is any value to the argument. Both MGM and FGM are completely wrong. For the record though, your friend is only partly right. FGM by type:

Type 4 - Ritual nicking to draw a drop of blood, heals completely (consequently not technically mutilation).

Type I - Clitoral hood removed (similar to mild MGM, where the frenulum is spared)

Type 2 - Clitoral hood + clitoral head. (similar to severe MGM, where the frenulum is crushed or excised)

Type 3 - Gruesome and barbaric beyond description, I will not even tell you what horror this is.

Note that type 4 is the most common worldwide, mostly because it is the dominant form of FGM in Southeast Asia (including Indonesia, the worlds most populous Muslim country). I would not mind if the same thing were to happen to boys (some kind of religous ritual where a drop of blood is drawn using a pin or needle, which fully heals later). Type I is also very common. Sadly, the incomprehensibly barbaric type 2 and type 3 are not THAT rare, and are very common in some specific areas.

If feminism was a genuine civil rights movement, they would have strong and compelling issues to fight about.

It pays for MRAs to remember that there are places in the world where women's rights are routinely violated. Given the number of people who live in developing nations, a case can be made that (globally) equity feminism is more relevant than the MRM, simply because (1) maltreatment of women affects people in more populous countries (2) the maltreatments are more barbaric and cruel.

One day, if the MRM ever achieves any significant political power, I feel confident that (unlike feminsits) we will do more than simply talk about the horrors of FGM in developing nations. I would like to see a clear link between full legal equality for women (and men) and any American foreign aid. Foreign aid is a tiny amount of money for middle income countries, but it can be 50% of government revenue for very poor African nations .... where the problem is worse.

rightsbot · 2012-09-24T15:40:18+00:00

Post text automatically copied here. (Why?) (Report a problem.)

wufoo2 · 2012-09-24T19:26:21+00:00

I don't get into these fights. Two different structures cannot be the same.

It's the motivation behind them that's identical: A desire to contain the sexuality of others. It's behind male circumcision even though it's covered with a series of false medical claims.

Title	Arguing about genital mutilation...
Author	nathan1942
Upvotes	2
Comments	13
Date	September 24, 2012 3:38 PM UTC (13 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/10e9ql/arguing_about_genital_mutilation/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/arguing-about-genital-mutilation.1012859 https://theredarchive.com/post/1012859

Comments