98% of Somali Girls are put Through Female Genital Mutilation

Your argument is with the doctor's at the Mayo clinic, not with me.


Circumcision might have various health benefits, including:

  • Easier hygiene. Circumcision makes it simpler to wash the penis. Still, boys who haven't been circumcised can be taught to wash regularly beneath the foreskin.
  • Lower risk of urinary tract infections (UTIs). The risk of UTIs in males is low. But these infections are more common in males who haven't been circumcised. Serious infections early in life can lead to kidney problems later.
  • Lower risk of sexually transmitted infections. Men who have been circumcised might have a lower risk of certain sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. But it's still key to have safe sex, which includes use of condoms.
If you know of medical information showing the benefits of female genital mutilation, I'll be happy to look at it.
Why do you not reference the trauma male genital mutilation causes?
 
Nearly all of the girls who are put through this are not old enough to consent.

It is absurd to even talk about teen girls choosing this.

Where FGM is most prevalent, communities may deem it a prerequisite for marriage or inheritance. This makes it difficult for parents to abandon the practice. Families who don’t participate face ostracism, their daughters at risk of becoming ineligible for marriage.

Yeah. Voluntary.

:rolleyes:
Why did you ignore this bit?

Some societies see it as a rite of passage. Others use it to suppress a girl’s sexuality or ensure her chastity. FGM is not endorsed by Islam or Christianity, but religious texts are commonly deployed to justify it.

Do you not know about rites of passage?
 
Why did you ignore this bit?

Some societies see it as a rite of passage. Others use it to suppress a girl’s sexuality or ensure her chastity. FGM is not endorsed by Islam or Christianity, but religious texts are commonly deployed to justify it.

Do you not know about rites of passage?
"Rite of Passage" is how they pressure women to do this to their daughters.
 
Yes, if its culturally imperative. Feet binding, neck stretching, etc., are more important than pain.
Okay, so it's a cultural thing.

Do you approve or disapprove of a culture that requires an active sexual violence causing permanent disability be committed on every teenage girl?
 
Okay, so it's a cultural thing.

Do you approve or disapprove of a culture that requires an active sexual violence causing permanent disability be committed on every teenage girl?
I'm not sure it is for me to decide. Personally, I am against requiring it.
 
I'm not sure it is for me to decide. Personally, I am against requiring it.
That's fine. Nothing much you could do about it anyway.

Both the united nations and the world health organization have condemned it.

It is against the law in the United States. But since it is often done by "traditional practitioners," i.e. some sort of female shaman, it is difficult to police.
 
They've been as brainwashed as are Americans.
But what about the Brainwashed English or Germans ?
I'm not sure it is for me to decide. Personally, I am against requiring it.
some one must decide if Kiddy diddling is just a Cultural thing or a Religious thing or a Crime
 
But what about the Brainwashed English or Germans ?

some one must decide if Kiddy diddling is just a Cultural thing or a Religious thing or a Crime
My grand mom and aunt got married at 15. Today, that would be illegal(I think)

In reality, each individual society decides what its morality is.
 
My grand mom and aunt got married at 15. Today, that would be illegal(I think)

In reality, each individual society decides what its morality is.
Thank G-d you did not say they were married at 11 or 13 ( Even in 1920s Appalachia. That was verboten )
 
I am uncircumcised. in the past, women I have been with, who had previous partners that were circumcised, did report some minor differences.

ie, they had to adjust their technique, to account for a difference in sensitivity.

I discussed it with a couple of long term partners. From their reports, the differences were very minor.

I defer to their much wider experience with... penises.


That being said, my understanding is that FEMALE genital mutilation, is a far more... harmful practice.


Not everything is equal, and in this case, I think brining up the MALE equivalent, is not reasonable.
 
I am uncircumcised. in the past, women I have been with, who had previous partners that were circumcised, did report some minor differences.

ie, they had to adjust their technique, to account for a difference in sensitivity.

I discussed it with a couple of long term partners. From their reports, the differences were very minor.

I defer to their much wider experience with... penises.


That being said, my understanding is that FEMALE genital mutilation, is a far more... harmful practice.


Not everything is equal, and in this case, I think brining up the MALE equivalent, is not reasonable.
If I had to guess, if you took a poll, most men would say they were happy with whatever they had.
 
15th post
If I had to guess, if you took a poll, most men would say they were happy with whatever they had.

Most....

BUT, some people like to have shit to complain about.


In this case, the issue of FEMAL GENITAL MUTILATION, is serious issue, one that should not be deflected by the far less serious male "equivalent"
 
Most....

BUT, some people like to have shit to complain about.


In this case, the issue of FEMAL GENITAL MUTILATION, is serious issue, one that should not be deflected by the far less serious male "equivalent"
Of course.

No teenage girl is happy to be cut up like that.

This is just the left defending the indefensible. They dress in Handmaids Tale Costumes because some states restrict abortion, but they think FGM is kewl?
 
Of course.

No teenage girl is happy to be cut up like that.

This is just the left defending the indefensible. They dress in Handmaids Tale Costumes because some states restrict abortion, but they think FGM is kewl?

Yes. Quite disgusting.

Imo, I want to take action to fight this cultural practice.

ESPECIALLY in this country.

IMO, this should NEVER happen in this country, and if it does, I want the person who does it, to be locked up.

And then deported. And blacklisted forever.
 
Thank G-d you did not say they were married at 11 or 13 ( Even in 1920s Appalachia. That was verboten )
Search Assist


Yes, girls were often married at the age of 13 in the 1800s, although the specific age could vary based on location and social circumstances. In some cases, marriages were arranged for economic or social reasons rather than for love.
 
Back
Top Bottom