Circumcision in women?

**collegegirl2010** · 02-02-2011 11:27 AM

In my opinion, it is completely wrong. And I'm glad It's illegal and the U.S. and that I'm not circumsized myself. They say it's done to keep them pure for their husbands; I think that should be their choice. I mean I'm still a virgin(waiting until I get married), does that mean I will be unfaithful considering the fact that I'm not circumcized. Why are women in other countries judged upon like that? And I have seen pictures and they look scary, but why is it illegal in the US, and not in other countries?

And what are your views of it? Agree or disagree?

**Little.Chuck** · 02-02-2011 11:56 AM

It is also illegal in the UK.

**WildChild** · 02-02-2011 12:24 PM

We've had some discussion about this in the past. FGM is a nasty practice, born of ignorance and stupidity. In some parts of the world (Iraq being one) W.H.O. estimates that over 80% of the females have had this inflicted upon them. It is often performed without any anethesia and in very unsterile conditions. A broken piece of glass or knife may be used. Typically the child is held down while the mutilation it performed. In some, apparently very few cases, it is just the clitorus that is removed. More commonly the labia is also cut away, either partially or entirely and sewed closed, in many cases the inside of the vaginal walls may be scraped raw so that they will grow together as they heal. Just enough of an opening is made to allow menstural flow. In extreme cases the urethra may be cut or damaged as well. This will result in incontinence, UTIs and other problems.

Some victims are in pain 24 hours a day for the entirety of their lives. As preparation for marriage the opening has to be cut enough to allow for intercourse - we can only imagine what misery intercourse must be for some of these women. Again for childbirth they will have to cut open and restitched. Of course the likelihood of infections and complications with childbearing are high with the more extreme forms of this barbaric practice.

**WildChild** · 02-02-2011 12:42 PM

FGM and MGM sail under the banner of religion. For some strange reason that lends many otherwise illegal practices a mantle of untouchability. For example courts in Germany, the UK and the US (particular case I'm aware of was in New Jersey) muslim women who were victims of spousal abuse were told by the courts, in essence, that being beaten is part of your religion, so tough luck. That saying basically that we will only enforce these laws if you aren't part of a religion or at least a religion that doesn't react violently to any questioning of their practices.

**collegegirl2010** · 02-02-2011 04:29 PM

Originally Posted by WildChild

We've had some discussion about this in the past. FGM is a nasty practice, born of ignorance and stupidity. In some parts of the world (Iraq being one) W.H.O. estimates that over 80% of the females have had this inflicted upon them. It is often performed without any anethesia and in very unsterile conditions. A broken piece of glass or knife may be used. Typically the child is held down while the mutilation it performed. In some, apparently very few cases, it is just the clitorus that is removed. More commonly the labia is also cut away, either partially or entirely and sewed closed, in many cases the inside of the vaginal walls may be scraped raw so that they will grow together as they heal. Just enough of an opening is made to allow menstural flow. In extreme cases the urethra may be cut or damaged as well. This will result in incontinence, UTIs and other problems.

Some victims are in pain 24 hours a day for the entirety of their lives. As preparation for marriage the opening has to be cut enough to allow for intercourse - we can only imagine what misery intercourse must be for some of these women. Again for childbirth they will have to cut open and restitched. Of course the likelihood of infections and complications with childbearing are high with the more extreme forms of this barbaric practice.

Yea, I could only imagine what does women go through. I am very lucky and blessed to be born and raised in the U.S.

**Texinator** · 02-09-2011 07:08 AM

Originally Posted by collegegirl2010

Agree or disagree?

My thoughts? People who support female circumcision are [expletive deleted] morons. People who let others get away with female circumcision are [expletive deleted] morons. In fact, people who are supportive of labiaplasty because they think some women are "too big" - which I know isn't quite the same thing as female circumcision - are [expletive deleted] morons. Vulva is meant to be admired, not chopped up or chopped off.

I know, I should tell you how I really feel, huh?

**collegegirl2010** · 02-09-2011 12:17 PM

Originally Posted by Tex

My thoughts? People who support female circumcision are [expletive deleted] morons. People who let others get away with female circumcision are [expletive deleted] morons. In fact, people who are supportive of labiaplasty because they think some women are "too big" - which I know isn't quite the same thing as female circumcision - are [expletive deleted] morons. Vulva is meant to be admired, not chopped up or chopped off.

I know, I should tell you how I really feel, huh?

I completely agree...I think its just flat out cruel.

**Little** · 02-09-2011 05:19 PM

A question that often comes up when talking about FGM - is male circumcision any different? The medical "benefits" seem to weigh out between circumcised vs uncircumcised males. Elective cosmetic surgery on infants is wrong in my eyes, but others see it differently, or as a method to promote cleanliness (though my vulva would certainly be easier to clean without all those pesky labia flapping around ...)

**collegegirl2010** · 02-09-2011 06:39 PM

Originally Posted by Little

A question that often comes up when talking about FGM - is male circumcision any different? The medical "benefits" seem to weigh out between circumcised vs uncircumcised males. Elective cosmetic surgery on infants is wrong in my eyes, but others see it differently, or as a method to promote cleanliness (though my vulva would certainly be easier to clean without all those pesky labia flapping around ...)

This is just my opinion, but the way I was raised/taught is that male circumcision isn't wrong because in the old testament God required men to get circumcized because it made them cleaner and/or purer. Though, Its not really such a big issue anymore, its still not a sin or wrong to circumcize men, considering in my definition it makes the man more clean cut. But on the other hand I have a strong belief that female circumcision is totally different from males, because with males only that extra skin(fore skin) is removed, but with women its just simply mutilation...My beliefs may sound wierd but that's really how I feel about it. So if I had a son I would probably get him circumcized, but with my daughter not so much because this is what I truely believe. Not saying what you believe is wrong just stating what I believe. But I completely understand your point.

**ItsASecret** · 02-09-2011 07:00 PM

A question that often comes up when talking about FGM - is male circumcision any different?

Chop off the head of a penis because it is most sensitive part of the male sexual anatomy and then there is a viable comparison. To me, and maybe only to me, male circumcision would be liken to removing the clitoral hood of a woman....not the clitoris itself just the flap of skin that comprises the hood. IMO carving out a clitoris with a sharpened rock without anesthesia is not the same as removing a flap of skin with a sterilized blade done by a professional.