Male circumcision vs Female Genital Mutilation

AnnArchist · 2012-12-31T03:53:56+00:00

Both are bad. Its not an oppression olympics game.

Both are bad.

The only people comparing the two are feminists to attempt to make the anti-mgm people look nuts and people that don't understand that comparing two different things (one is an issue in all nations, the other is only an issue in 3rd world countries) is the old apples to oranges discussion.

If you feel your time would be better spent on something that is already widely accepted as bad, instead of promoting something that is not yet widely accepted (as evidenced by this post) as a harmful mutilation, a non consensual amputation of a newborn, and instead focusing on what is already widely acknowledged as morally reprehensible, then have fun pissing in the rain.

FGM is something that isn't accepted in any western country. MGM is accepted in almost all of them. You are free to choose where to spend your time, but good luck finding someone who doesn't already agree with your stance on FGM. I promise you will find many who don't understand or agree with my view of how barbaric the practice infant circumcision on male newborns is in practice. Just because its done in a clinic, it doesn't make it anything less than mutilation.

Cid420 · 2012-12-31T06:10:01+00:00

and as male, I feel my time would be better spent in the anti FGM camp.

Why? Isn't FGM already banned where you live? Don't the majority of people already look down on it as the twisted practice it is? How many females do you know that have had their genitals mutilated compared to men who have had their genitals mutilated? How many people do you know that would go apeshit if you said "FGM isn't that bad"? Now how about if you said "circumcision isn't that bad"? Personally, I think my time is better spent fighting child mutilation that people still find acceptable instead of something that's not even an issue anymore in the developed world.

The whole FGM vs MGM thing kind of reminds me of the the whole global warming debate. Some people say it's man-made, others say it's not, and some say it doesn't exist at all...but all these are 100% irrelevant because we should be taking better care of the planet regardless. Feminists often say that FGM is worse and deserves all the attention, and MRAs say MGM is bad too and needs to be addressed, but just like the global warming debate, both are 100% irrelevant because they're both immoral for the same reasons and we shouldn't be practicing either of them to begin with.

I do think it's funny that I can see MGM brought up in FGM posts on reddit causing a shitstorm of epically derailing proportions, but I don't see the same thing in posts about MGM where FGM is brought up. Now I could completely understand things like MGM stories being posted in /r/feminism, or FGM posts being posted to /r/mensrights--they're irrelevant to the subreddits purposes, but, if the topic of genital mutilation is brought up I see no reason why the discussion can't involve other relevant branches. If someone makes a post about how their dog died and someone starts talking about how their cat died, is that cat guy going to get shit on for derailing the talk about how hard it can be to loose a dog? Fuck no because that's disgusting and sick, and while they're not exactly the same thing, they're both extremely relevant to one another.

We already live in a society that gives woman the vast majority of funding, sympathy, and attention when it comes to their issues, yet they act like the fucking world is going to end by also talking about something else, and it's going to somehow make FGM less important or less evil. It's like they really think the subscribers of their subreddits are so stupid that if they see MGM as a bad thing too, or even a couple people talking about it, they'll start seeing FGM as not so bad. It's idiotic. I thought men were suppose to be the stereotypically competitive ones too...

kanuk876 · 2012-12-31T10:25:57+00:00

Quick summary of issues comparing MGM and FGM:

http://www.circumstitions.com/FGMvsMGM.html

	FGM	MGM
Cutting?	YES	YES
Of the genitals?	YES	YES
Of babies?	YES	YES
Of children?	YES	YES
Without consent?	YES	YES
At parents' behest?	YES	YES
Removing erogenous tissue?	YES	YES
Supposedly beneficial?	YES	YES
Justified by aesthetics?	YES	YES
Justified by supposed health benefits?	YES	YES
Justified by religion?	YES	YES
Justified by sexual effects?	YES	YES
Justified by custom?	YES	YES
Justified by conformity?	YES	YES
Effects minimised by its supporters?	YES	YES
Performed by its adult victims?	YES	YES
Extremely painful?	YES	YES
Can cause harm?	YES	YES
Very severe damage?	USUALLY	SOMETIMES
Can cause death?	YES	YES
Legal in Western countries?	NO	YES

I would add, 85% of the world's male population and 95% of the world's female population did not have genital tissue forcibly amputated as a child. I know MGM is popular in North America, but it remains a marginalized and generally unacceptable practice worldwide.

kanuk876 · 2012-12-31T10:15:17+00:00

FGM is so much more harmful and cruel.

Says who?

I dont expect FGM activists to do much for anti-circumcision movements

Wrong.

Reference #1: Soraya Mire: Victim of FGM and anti‑FGM activist

This act [of] female genital mutilation or male cutting or male genital mutilation—whether it's a cultural or religious or personal choice—I think is nothing but a scar of betrayal; it really is a sore wound; [the minute] you touch that child—the minute you cut at that child—[inaudible, so this is a guess at the meaning: the pain and betrayal is always there in the cut person's head]; whether [that person] chooses to speak for or against it, it's there.

I've been fighting for the past 30 years—I'm only 19 now [laughter]. Seriously, you know, I've been fighting really child abuse. This is the ultimate child abuse—as you've heard me say a million times, and the reason why I say it is that [this] first cut is all you need: Violation of their rights; they have no voice to speak.

You are supposed to be the mothers and fathers, giving those voices and protecting those children. So, [over] the past few years [I've] chosen to speak about child abuse that is—in our case—handed down generation after generation, that was kind of protected by the word "ga ah" ("culture") as if [that] provides, you know, absolution.

But we, the activ[ist] survivors who really went through this, we decided [to] use our own stories—first of all to heal ourselves and try to find a way to say:

I didn't ask for this. Don't look at me [as though] I'm different [from] you. I'm still a woman. I'm still [a person], whoever you are. I didn't choose this, but I [do] chose to say: "No! We have to stop this!"

and that's what we've been doing, and I'm hopefully changing [minds].

But the reason why I'm a little bit nervous about this is [the following:] What I remember [from] back in 1993, sitting in Marilyn Milos's living room, watching that video of that young baby boy undergoing the genital mutilation, what struck me the most was this painful cry as his wrists and legs were tied down to the surgical table: I saw myself in him—as my own mother stood above my head, eyes watching, the doctor's rough finger dancing around my private parts, touching a place he had no business touching—No Business Touching!

And that's the reason why [I came] here: Not only [to help] Intact America but [also to say] that no one has a right to touch the child down there!

While taping a female genital mutilation show, Oprah Winfrey said... she didn't understand why women don't just rise up and say:

You can't do this to our daughters! We're not going to allow this to happen!

That, Operah said, she didn't understand, and that's what I'm asking today; America, why don't you get up and say:

We're not going to do this to our boys! We're not going to allow it!

Reference #2: a USA born and raised woman, victim of FGM performed on American soil by an American doctor

I step out of the shower and I stand in front of the mirror and I look like your average European American, pale skin, red hair, green eyes. I am not your average woman though.

I am circumcised.

I am a white American, non-Muslim woman who was circumcised as a toddler by the same pediatrician that circumcised my brothers and at the same hospital at which I was born. I have no clitoral hood and only a V shaped scar and the tiniest bit of inner labia they were kind enough to leave behind.

...

I will speak out against MGM because just like those innocent baby boys my prepuce has been removed. Can I orgasm? Yes I can. Within about sixty seconds of sexual contact I orgasm. Sounds good right? WRONG. After I orgasm I experience oversensitive raw pain for the duration of the sexual contact. There is no hood to protect my clitoris. I may very well be the only woman out there who is looking for a partner who is a "one minute wonder" to spend the rest of my life with. Even now, years later, clothing, undergarments, contact... all of these irritate my overexposed clitoris. I also have to deal with the fact that if I choose to have a new sexual partner I will deal with the inevitable comments and questions which leave me feeling unattractive and just plain wrong down there.

So I say: I DO have a right to speak out against MGM and I will continue to do so. I know the continued frustration and all that is missing due to being circumcised and no baby, boy or girl, should ever have to live with this choice being forced upon him or her.”

Back to your questions...

Am I wrong? am I missing something?

Yes. And obviously yes.

Pecanpig · 2012-12-31T08:06:56+00:00

Depends.

The main difference is that there is only 1 kind of male circumcision and 4 kinds for girls, with type 1 and 2 being roughly comparable.

For example, type 1 is simply the removal of the clitoral hood, a bit of skin used to cover a nerve hub (sound familiar?). Type 2 includes the removal or "trimming" of the labia minora, also non-necessary bits of skin used to keep everything else generally moist and covered.

It's type 3 and 4 that I feel as justified to call "mutilation" (all forms of circumcision are technically forms of mutilation, but to a far lesser level) where they basically remove the genitals.

rightsbot · 2012-12-31T03:38:18+00:00

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

Bobsutan · 2012-12-31T16:52:41+00:00

Watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98f3IavuEgQ

Title	Male circumcision vs Female Genital Mutilation
Author	saturdayraining
Upvotes	0
Comments	19
Date	December 31, 2012 3:37 AM UTC (13 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/15peyt/male_circumcision_vs_female_genital_mutilation/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/male-circumcision-vs-female-genital-mutilation.1005389 https://theredarchive.com/post/1005389

Comments