Should circumcision be treated with the same intolerance as FGM? Sure the physical equivalent would be removing the penis head, but it’s still a violation of choice held up by the crutches of culture and religion right? I wanna hear something from a Muslim or Jew.

jonnytechno · 2019-02-11T11:56:09+00:00

The vast majority of fgm sufferers have NOT had their clitoris removed, this is an exaggeration that has been hyped to support the cause. The clitoris is a major organ and removal can cause serious damage and blood loss and would require considerable medical experience to remove. In most cases the clitoris is damaged with a pin prick or grazed to reduce sensitivity (MUCH LIKE CIRCUMCISION)

intactisnormal · 2019-02-11T16:17:27+00:00

People have to realize that the foreskin itself is the most sensitive part of the penis. (Full study.)

As for the glans role, this study found it's role is as a cushion to protect from both people from damage. "In conclusion, the glans penis has a significant functional role, similar to the role that the glove plays for the boxers, restricting the high pressure values developing during coitus. It is anticipated that such function protects both the [penile erectile tissue] and the female genitalia, preventing trauma [from] axial loading."

LettuceBeGrateful · 2019-02-11T20:49:30+00:00

Jew here.

Nobody should have the right to mutilate someone else's body, period. If someone grows up to be an observant Jew and consents to circumcision, that's his prerogative. Until then, his parents' religious rights stop where his bodily autonomy starts.

It's telling that many of the same people who excuse MGM on the basis of religion, don't consider it a valid justification for FGM. There is a blatant double standard in the international community for male vs. female autonomy.

1LegendaryWombat · 2019-02-11T13:41:27+00:00

Yeah of course, apparently most of FGM is merely a religious ceremony where they poke the clit so it bleeds, proving 'purity'. Its ridiculous.

Foreskin is removed because in the old days men were too lazy to wash their dicks, i guess. As with most traditions, just been done so much its just 'how things are kahleesi, it is known'

Where fgm is, there is mgm, so just stop it completely, everybody wins!

BroaxXx · 2019-02-11T17:05:08+00:00

Any kind of genital mutilation is unacceptable I struggle to understand how (mostly American) society as a whole hasn't come to that conclusion yet (most of the world doesn't perform that).

That being said we must acknowledge there are several degrees of FGM and although all of which are wrong people tend to focus on the complete removal of clitoris and sowing together of labia. If we focus on that then no I don't think it's comparable with circumcision. That, of course, doesn't mean I'm ok with circumcision. I'm not ok with, I think it's immoral and fundamentally wrong and there are possible complications that make the end result comparable with FGM.

That being said the complete destruction of genitals for the sole purpose of deprivation of one's ability to feel pleasure (often replacing it with pain) isn't in any way comparable with a (immoral) aesthetic procedure. Both are wrong and unacceptable but I don't think they're comparable.

That being said, most cases of FGM aren't (thankfully) as extreme and most cases of circumcision don't result in horrible complications that completely destroy the penis (or even result in death) so all things considered I think both should be treated in the same way. Both should be illegal, and according to the degree of mutilation of the genitals should result in increasingly serious punishment for the parents.

kevinnelson89991 · 2019-02-11T13:45:04+00:00

Everybody wins? It’s 2019, at least 2 whole religions consisting of over 1 billion people together will be angry that their age old tradition is being abolished. Obviously you’re not from either of the groups.

Comments