I wonder what other cultures make of western women mutilating themselves for the pleasure of men.
Women in Britain might get vaginal surgery to make it look neater, and boob implants, etc, but at least there's no suggestion that our mothers will force this on us when we are 11, or that it's to stop us from enjoying sex. It is messed up though that women can be made to feel so neurotic.
Male genital mutilation is rife in America and legal everywhere... now if only we could find a country that cared for both sexes equally.
Please don't compare female genital mutilation with circumcision. You clearly don't understand what FGM entails. I agree, I hate the very thought of circumcision but it is something that is tolerable (or even irrelevant) to the man, whereas this is agonising, disfiguring, potentially fatal and will cause the woman life-long health problems.
Women in Britain might get vaginal surgery to make it look neater, and boob implants, etc, but at least there's no suggestion that our mothers will force this on us when we are 11, or that it's to stop us from enjoying sex. It is messed up though that women can be made to feel so neurotic.
I just think its crazy that i can look smugly down on these 'poor uneducated women' while I've got friends who's boyfriends have paid for them to have boob jobs. We're supposed to be the developed forward thinking nation here.
I'm not knocking any of the posters here, female circumcision is indeed shocking and wrong.
Alice Walker who wrote the Colour Purple also wrote a book on this subject called Possessing the Secret of Joy... Very interesting read but I had my legs crossed most of the time I was reading it!
I just think its crazy that i can look smugly down on these 'poor uneducated women' while I've got friends who's boyfriends have paid for them to have boob jobs. We're supposed to be the developed forward thinking nation here.
I'm not knocking any of the posters here, female circumcision is indeed shocking and wrong.
I just think its crazy that i can look smugly down on these 'poor uneducated women' while I've got friends who's boyfriends have paid for them to have boob jobs. We're supposed to be the developed forward thinking nation here.
I'm not knocking any of the posters here, female circumcision is indeed shocking and wrong.
I don't really think you can compare a boob job for female genital mutilation. For one, most men don't like boob jobs, in the vast majority of cases it's the woman's wish alone to get a boob because she wants it for herself, she's not being forced to by anyone and a lot of people including her partner sometimes will try and talk her out of it. I was a late developer and I didn't really have large boobs until I was about 17 or 18. I was pretty much flat chested until I was 16 and I wanted a boob job. That wasn't to please boys or because I felt I had to, that was because I wanted to feel womanly and I thought having larger boobs would look better in clothes and things. I would imagine that's the same for most women who have boob jobs.
Now if you compare that FGM where I would imagine practically all the girls are forced into it, held down by people, whilst no pain relief is given, they are mutilated without their consent for no justifiable reason, in poor conditions with many dying or suffering complications, you can see it is totally different to women having boob jobs.
I don't really think you can compare a boob job for female genital mutilation. For one, most men don't like boob jobs, in the vast majority of cases it's the woman's wish alone to get a boob because she wants it for herself, she's not being forced to by anyone and a lot of people including her partner sometimes will try and talk her out of it. I was a late developer and I didn't really have large boobs until I was about 17 or 18. I was pretty much flat chested until I was 16 and I wanted a boob job. That wasn't to please boys or because I felt I had to, that was because I wanted to feel womanly and I thought having larger boobs would look better in clothes and things. I would imagine that's the same for most women who have boob jobs.
Now if you compare that FGM where I would imagine practically all the girls are forced into it, held down by people, whilst no pain relief is given, they are mutilated without their consent for no justifiable reason, in poor conditions with many dying or suffering complications, you can see it is totally different to women having boob jobs.
The girls that have FGM are also only about 4 or 5!
After reading this thread it seems there is a lot of ignorance about FGM, with people likening it to getting a boob job and male circumcision, here is some info from wikipedia
FGM is typically carried out on girls from a few days old to puberty. It may take place in a hospital, but is usually performed, without anaesthesia, by a traditional circumciser using a knife, razor, or scissors. According to the WHO, it is practiced in 28 countries in western, eastern, and north-eastern Africa, in parts of the Middle East, and within some immigrant communities in Europe, North America, and Australia.[2] The WHO estimates that 100–140 million women and girls around the world have experienced the procedure, including 92 million in Africa.[1]
The WHO has offered four classifications of FGM. The main three are Type I, removal of the clitoral hood, almost invariably accompanied by removal of the clitoris itself (clitoridectomy); Type II, removal of the clitoris and inner labia; and Type III (infibulation), removal of all or part of the inner and outer labia, and usually the clitoris, and the fusion of the wound, leaving a small hole for the passage of urine and menstrual blood—the fused wound is opened for intercourse and childbirth.[3] Around 85 percent of women who undergo FGM experience Types I and II, and 15 percent Type III, though Type III is the most common procedure in several countries, including Sudan, Somalia, and Djibouti.[4] Several miscellaneous acts are categorized as Type IV. These range from a symbolic pricking or piercing of the clitoris or labia, to cauterization of the clitoris, cutting into the vagina to widen it (gishiri cutting), and introducing corrosive substances to tighten it
Please don't compare female genital mutilation with circumcision. You clearly don't understand what FGM entails. I agree, I hate the very thought of circumcision but it is something that is tolerable (or even irrelevant) to the man, whereas this is agonising, disfiguring, potentially fatal and will cause the woman life-long health problems.
I understand the difference between a surgical proceedure where consent is given, and a surgical proceedure where no consent is given.
Don't ever try and tell me what I do and don't understand.
I understand the difference between a surgical proceedure where consent is given, and a surgical proceedure where no consent is given.
Don't ever try and tell me what I do and don't understand.
but you were the one who compared male and female circumcision.
it's not just about the lack of consent either - the lack of anesthesia is a major factor too.
And the main point has to be that while after male circumcision the man is left with a fully functioning working organ capable of feeling sexual pleasure while the woman isn't.
Doesn't stop them getting pregnant. I'm crossing my legs as I write this.
Sown up fanny so it's tight for the mans pleasure. Cut open to have the child, sewn back up afterwards... repeat.
and this anecdote just for good measure: I once knew a young woman who worked as a nurse in Cairo. She told me about a female (older) patient who had terrible sores and infections around her back passage because the husband found - after years of normal sex and loads of children - that the front end was too "slack" - back end was tighter.
After reading this thread it seems there is a lot of ignorance about FGM, with people likening it to getting a boob job and male circumcision, here is some info from wikipedia
FGM is typically carried out on girls from a few days old to puberty. It may take place in a hospital, but is usually performed, without anaesthesia, by a traditional circumciser using a knife, razor, or scissors. According to the WHO, it is practiced in 28 countries in western, eastern, and north-eastern Africa, in parts of the Middle East, and within some immigrant communities in Europe, North America, and Australia.[2] The WHO estimates that 100–140 million women and girls around the world have experienced the procedure, including 92 million in Africa.[1]
The WHO has offered four classifications of FGM. The main three are Type I, removal of the clitoral hood, almost invariably accompanied by removal of the clitoris itself (clitoridectomy); Type II, removal of the clitoris and inner labia; and Type III (infibulation), removal of all or part of the inner and outer labia, and usually the clitoris, and the fusion of the wound, leaving a small hole for the passage of urine and menstrual blood—the fused wound is opened for intercourse and childbirth.[3] Around 85 percent of women who undergo FGM experience Types I and II, and 15 percent Type III, though Type III is the most common procedure in several countries, including Sudan, Somalia, and Djibouti.[4] Several miscellaneous acts are categorized as Type IV. These range from a symbolic pricking or piercing of the clitoris or labia, to cauterization of the clitoris, cutting into the vagina to widen it (gishiri cutting), and introducing corrosive substances to tighten it
I understand what the procedure entails, I am not comparing the procedures at all. I am comparing the ideals behind them, and feel that, we as a western society, are far from being able to shake our heads in smug disbelief that we would never allow something like that to happen.
I agree male circumcision is a slightly different matter, although the consent issue is there too.
Comments
Women in Britain might get vaginal surgery to make it look neater, and boob implants, etc, but at least there's no suggestion that our mothers will force this on us when we are 11, or that it's to stop us from enjoying sex. It is messed up though that women can be made to feel so neurotic.
Please don't compare female genital mutilation with circumcision. You clearly don't understand what FGM entails. I agree, I hate the very thought of circumcision but it is something that is tolerable (or even irrelevant) to the man, whereas this is agonising, disfiguring, potentially fatal and will cause the woman life-long health problems.
I just think its crazy that i can look smugly down on these 'poor uneducated women' while I've got friends who's boyfriends have paid for them to have boob jobs. We're supposed to be the developed forward thinking nation here.
I'm not knocking any of the posters here, female circumcision is indeed shocking and wrong.
Alice Walker who wrote the Colour Purple also wrote a book on this subject called Possessing the Secret of Joy... Very interesting read but I had my legs crossed most of the time I was reading it!
Couldn't agree more!
I don't really think you can compare a boob job for female genital mutilation. For one, most men don't like boob jobs, in the vast majority of cases it's the woman's wish alone to get a boob because she wants it for herself, she's not being forced to by anyone and a lot of people including her partner sometimes will try and talk her out of it. I was a late developer and I didn't really have large boobs until I was about 17 or 18. I was pretty much flat chested until I was 16 and I wanted a boob job. That wasn't to please boys or because I felt I had to, that was because I wanted to feel womanly and I thought having larger boobs would look better in clothes and things. I would imagine that's the same for most women who have boob jobs.
Now if you compare that FGM where I would imagine practically all the girls are forced into it, held down by people, whilst no pain relief is given, they are mutilated without their consent for no justifiable reason, in poor conditions with many dying or suffering complications, you can see it is totally different to women having boob jobs.
The girls that have FGM are also only about 4 or 5!
FGM is typically carried out on girls from a few days old to puberty. It may take place in a hospital, but is usually performed, without anaesthesia, by a traditional circumciser using a knife, razor, or scissors. According to the WHO, it is practiced in 28 countries in western, eastern, and north-eastern Africa, in parts of the Middle East, and within some immigrant communities in Europe, North America, and Australia.[2] The WHO estimates that 100–140 million women and girls around the world have experienced the procedure, including 92 million in Africa.[1]
The WHO has offered four classifications of FGM. The main three are Type I, removal of the clitoral hood, almost invariably accompanied by removal of the clitoris itself (clitoridectomy); Type II, removal of the clitoris and inner labia; and Type III (infibulation), removal of all or part of the inner and outer labia, and usually the clitoris, and the fusion of the wound, leaving a small hole for the passage of urine and menstrual blood—the fused wound is opened for intercourse and childbirth.[3] Around 85 percent of women who undergo FGM experience Types I and II, and 15 percent Type III, though Type III is the most common procedure in several countries, including Sudan, Somalia, and Djibouti.[4] Several miscellaneous acts are categorized as Type IV. These range from a symbolic pricking or piercing of the clitoris or labia, to cauterization of the clitoris, cutting into the vagina to widen it (gishiri cutting), and introducing corrosive substances to tighten it
I understand the difference between a surgical proceedure where consent is given, and a surgical proceedure where no consent is given.
Don't ever try and tell me what I do and don't understand.
but you were the one who compared male and female circumcision.
it's not just about the lack of consent either - the lack of anesthesia is a major factor too.
And the main point has to be that while after male circumcision the man is left with a fully functioning working organ capable of feeling sexual pleasure while the woman isn't.
and this anecdote just for good measure: I once knew a young woman who worked as a nurse in Cairo. She told me about a female (older) patient who had terrible sores and infections around her back passage because the husband found - after years of normal sex and loads of children - that the front end was too "slack" - back end was tighter.
I understand what the procedure entails, I am not comparing the procedures at all. I am comparing the ideals behind them, and feel that, we as a western society, are far from being able to shake our heads in smug disbelief that we would never allow something like that to happen.
I agree male circumcision is a slightly different matter, although the consent issue is there too.