MI makes female genital mutilation a 15 yr felony. Circumcision still legal

[WinterBorn]

Then why allow them to mutilate the genitals of little boys...?

male circumcision isn't mutilation. I'm circumcised and my wang works just fine.

Actually... It is mutilation. And women's vaginas, also work after the circumcision. Not sure what your point was.

They don't actually orgasm due to the more severe forms of the procedures.

I orgasm just fine.

Do you have pre-circumcision orgasm references from which to draw your conclusions...?

The fact that he can have orgasms at all is reference enough, on this topic. FGM removes the ability to have an orgasm completely.

 

[WinterBorn]

If it's mutilation then it's a healthy form of mutilation. Fair enough?

No. Not really. "Fair" would be leaving their genitals intact, until they, themselves were old enough to make an informed decision, and decide for themselves.

So "no". Not fair enough...

Again, done to me, no complaints, non-issue.

I could be wrong but... I think the law in question had more people in mind than just you...

I have nothing against the law in question that makes FGM a felony crime in Michigan. What I have an issue with is comparing FGM with male circumcision. The two are not the same.

They're only not the same in that they're done to two different genders, ergo involve two different body parts. You can't very well cut the labia off a child that doesn't have them to cut.

No. The difference is also the reason the procedure is done. On males, it is also done for hygiene reasons. On females, the ENTIRE reason for the mutilation is to remove the woman's ability to orgasm or have pleasure from sex. I can think of no more explicit example of oppression.

 

[Vastator]

Then why allow them to mutilate the genitals of little boys...?

male circumcision isn't mutilation. I'm circumcised and my wang works just fine.

Actually... It is mutilation. And women's vaginas, also work after the circumcision. Not sure what your point was.

Yes, the vagina works fine. But the removal of the clitoris means there is little or no pleasure in sex afterwards. How about your circumcision? Is sex still pleasurable? Because removing pleasure from sex is the point of female genital mutilations.

I don't have a before, and after comparison. Neither do most men...

 

[WinterBorn]

Then why allow them to mutilate the genitals of little boys...?

male circumcision isn't mutilation. I'm circumcised and my wang works just fine.

Actually... It is mutilation. And women's vaginas, also work after the circumcision. Not sure what your point was.

Yes, the vagina works fine. But the removal of the clitoris means there is little or no pleasure in sex afterwards. How about your circumcision? Is sex still pleasurable? Because removing pleasure from sex is the point of female genital mutilations.

I don't have a before, and after comparison. Neither do most men...

But you are still talking about hypothetical differences in the quality of the orgasm. Not the complete removal of the ability to have them.

Whether you disagree with the hygiene claims, there is at least a basis for the procedure. The FGM has absolutely no other purpose than to remove a woman's ability to enjoy sex. It is barbaric.

 

[Call Sign Chaos]

If it's mutilation then it's a healthy form of mutilation. Fair enough?

No. Not really. "Fair" would be leaving their genitals intact, until they, themselves were old enough to make an informed decision, and decide for themselves.

So "no". Not fair enough...

Again, done to me, no complaints, non-issue.

I could be wrong but... I think the law in question had more people in mind than just you...

I have nothing against the law in question that makes FGM a felony crime in Michigan. What I have an issue with is comparing FGM with male circumcision. The two are not the same.

They're only not the same in that they're done to two different genders, ergo involve two different body parts. You can't very well cut the labia off a child that doesn't have them to cut.

Disgusting subhuman pig apologist for the systematic abuse of women burn in hell you disgusting piece of shit, **** you and everything you stand for die slowly and painfully you ******* reprobate.

 

[Godboy]

Then why allow them to mutilate the genitals of little boys...?

male circumcision isn't mutilation. I'm circumcised and my wang works just fine.

How do you know?

Aye, there's the rub.

If it's surgically ******* with nature, then yes it's mutilation. Regardless who it's done on.

Actually much as it pains me to admit it the OP makes a good point in his title. Mutilation for one gender is OK but we clamp down on the other gender. That's incongruous.

I guess you must be against surgery then. Nature gives people bad organs sometimes, so i suppose you weant to end our organ donation programs?

 

[fncceo]

The jew always gets special treatment.

Only special compared to some ...

 

[frigidweirdo]

The jew always gets special treatment.

Female genital mutilation now a 15-year felony in Michigan

july 11 2017 LANSING — Gov. Rick Snyder signed 13 bills Tuesday stemming from a case of female genital mutilation that happened in Livonia in April.

“Those who commit these horrendous crimes should be held accountable for their actions, and these bills stiffen the penalties for offenders while providing additional support to victims,” Snyder said. “This legislation is an important step toward eliminating this despicable practice in Michigan while empowering victims to find healing and justice.”

Under the main bill, female genital mutilation would be considered a felony in Michigan, punishable by up to 15 years in prison. That's a harsher penalty than the 1996 federal genital mutilation law, which includes a sentence of up to five years in prison. Michigan will join at least 24 other states that have passed anti-genital cutting laws over the last two decades.

But there's a big difference between female genital mutilation and circumcision, isn't there? The equivalent would be cutting of the little Jew or Muslim's penis, they don't do that, do they?

 

[Pogo]

Then why allow them to mutilate the genitals of little boys...?

male circumcision isn't mutilation. I'm circumcised and my wang works just fine.

How do you know?

Aye, there's the rub.

If it's surgically ******* with nature, then yes it's mutilation. Regardless who it's done on.

Actually much as it pains me to admit it the OP makes a good point in his title. Mutilation for one gender is OK but we clamp down on the other gender. That's incongruous.

I guess you must be against surgery then. Nature gives people bad organs sometimes, so i suppose you weant to end our organ donation programs?

Complete non sequitur right there. ^^

There's nothing inherently "bad" about a foreskin or labia. That's superstitious bullshit. If an organ is found to be malfunctioning, that's a whole 'nother show. But instantly taking a knife just because you think you know better than what Nature (or if you prefer, God) created --- superstitioius bullshit.

 

[Pogo]

No. Not really. "Fair" would be leaving their genitals intact, until they, themselves were old enough to make an informed decision, and decide for themselves.

So "no". Not fair enough...

Again, done to me, no complaints, non-issue.

I could be wrong but... I think the law in question had more people in mind than just you...

I have nothing against the law in question that makes FGM a felony crime in Michigan. What I have an issue with is comparing FGM with male circumcision. The two are not the same.

They're only not the same in that they're done to two different genders, ergo involve two different body parts. You can't very well cut the labia off a child that doesn't have them to cut.

Disgusting subhuman pig apologist for the systematic abuse of women burn in hell you disgusting piece of shit, **** you and everything you stand for die slowly and painfully you ******* reprobate.

You realize you just posted a "note to self" on the board, right?

Dumb shit.

 

[Pogo]

Then why allow them to mutilate the genitals of little boys...?

male circumcision isn't mutilation. I'm circumcised and my wang works just fine.

How do you know?

Aye, there's the rub.

If it's surgically ******* with nature, then yes it's mutilation. Regardless who it's done on.

Actually much as it pains me to admit it the OP makes a good point in his title. Mutilation for one gender is OK but we clamp down on the other gender. That's incongruous.

There is a huge difference between the two mutilations. One is removing a small amount of skin. The other is surgically removing the central nerve center for sex. One is done for hygiene reasons as well. The other is done for the specific and expressed purpose of completely removing a female's ability to enjoy sex. One is a religious and hygienic procedure. The other is a patriarchal way of controlling women and women's sexual appetites or needs.

Sure, but irrelevant to the point that they both constitute bodily mutilations.

Actually neither one is a religious procedure, and "hygenic" is highly debatable. They're primitive social artifacts that long predate any religions common today. Patriarchal -- absolutely. No doubt about that.

 

[Correll]

It's good to see Michigan dealing strongly with this. There are a large number of Muslims living in Michigan. The practice of slicing up the genitals of little girls will continue to go on. Toss the butchers in prison.

Agreed.

This is the type of discussion we should have had BEFORE we left a bunch of third worlders move into our nation.

NOw, this will be a DOMESTIC ISSUE forever. In America.

Diversity. Yeah.

 

[Pogo]

It's good to see Michigan dealing strongly with this. There are a large number of Muslims living in Michigan. The practice of slicing up the genitals of little girls will continue to go on. Toss the butchers in prison.

Agreed.

This is the type of discussion we should have had BEFORE we left a bunch of third worlders move into our nation.

NOw, this will be a DOMESTIC ISSUE forever. In America.

Diversity. Yeah.

Actually feminist writers have been talking about this for over 40 years (the FGM term was coined in 1976) for anyone with ears to hear.

 

[Correll]

It's good to see Michigan dealing strongly with this. There are a large number of Muslims living in Michigan. The practice of slicing up the genitals of little girls will continue to go on. Toss the butchers in prison.

Agreed.

This is the type of discussion we should have had BEFORE we left a bunch of third worlders move into our nation.

NOw, this will be a DOMESTIC ISSUE forever. In America.

Diversity. Yeah.

Actually feminist writers have been talking about this for over 40 years (the FGM term was coined in 1976) for anyone with ears to hear.

In relation to the implications of immigration of Third Worlders?

I've never heard any major feminists or liberal, make any such connection, and if they did, I would expect the mob to turn on them the next day.


Thanks to third world immigration, the problems of the Dark Ages are once again, OUR PROBLEMS.

 

[Pogo]

It's good to see Michigan dealing strongly with this. There are a large number of Muslims living in Michigan. The practice of slicing up the genitals of little girls will continue to go on. Toss the butchers in prison.

Agreed.

This is the type of discussion we should have had BEFORE we left a bunch of third worlders move into our nation.

NOw, this will be a DOMESTIC ISSUE forever. In America.

Diversity. Yeah.

Actually feminist writers have been talking about this for over 40 years (the FGM term was coined in 1976) for anyone with ears to hear.

In relation to the implications of immigration of Third Worlders?

I've never heard any major feminists or liberal, make any such connection, and if they did, I would expect the mob to turn on them the next day.


Thanks to third world immigration, the problems of the Dark Ages are once again, OUR PROBLEMS.

Ever heard of Gloria Steinem? She published an article called "The International Crime of Female Genital Mutilation" in Ms.Magazine, 1979 which exposed it to a wide audience. That's where I first caught wind of it. A feminist scholar named Fran Hosken had coined the term after extensive studies in 1976 (some of the details of which can be read here --- warning, you'll need a strong stomach).

That said, how egocentric is it to start whining "OUR PROBLEM"? This is a women's problem, and it's still going on in Africa.

 

[Correll]

It's good to see Michigan dealing strongly with this. There are a large number of Muslims living in Michigan. The practice of slicing up the genitals of little girls will continue to go on. Toss the butchers in prison.

Agreed.

This is the type of discussion we should have had BEFORE we left a bunch of third worlders move into our nation.

NOw, this will be a DOMESTIC ISSUE forever. In America.

Diversity. Yeah.

Actually feminist writers have been talking about this for over 40 years (the FGM term was coined in 1976) for anyone with ears to hear.

In relation to the implications of immigration of Third Worlders?

I've never heard any major feminists or liberal, make any such connection, and if they did, I would expect the mob to turn on them the next day.


Thanks to third world immigration, the problems of the Dark Ages are once again, OUR PROBLEMS.

Ever heard of Gloria Steinem? She published an article called "The International Crime of Female Genital Mutilation" in Ms.Magazine, 1979 which exposed it to a wide audience. That's where I first caught wind of it. A feminist scholar named Fran Hosken had coined the term after extensive studies in 1976 (some of the details of which can be read here --- warning, you'll need a strong stomach).

That said, how egocentric is it to start whining "OUR PROBLEM"? This is a women's problem, and it's still going on in Africa.

1. I read your link. THere was nothing in it to indicate that she mentioned the issue in relation to immigration at all.

2. It is our problem, thanks to Third World immigration. Your desire to marginalize my opinion because I am not a woman, is noted and rejected as sexist bullshit.

3. My point stands. THis is the conversation we should have had in 1965, before massive Third World Immigration.

 

[Pogo]

1. I read your link. THere was nothing in it to indicate that she mentioned the issue in relation to immigration at all.

Correct. Because "immigration" has nothing to do with it. This is a thousands-of-years-old cultural custom specific to certain ethnic groups in certain geographies. Especially, but not limited to, Africa.

2. It is our problem, thanks to Third World immigration. Your desire to marginalize my opinion because I am not a woman, is noted and rejected as sexist bullshit.

Again, it's got zero to do with "immigration", despite these flaccid attempts to change the subject. And that inability to address the subject has nothing to do with your gender. It has to do with your intellect.

3. My point stands. THis is the conversation we should have had in 1965, before massive Third World Immigration.

Third time now ---- this has nothing to do with "immigration". This has to do with women. This has to do with patriarchy. This has to do with ancient barbaric cultural practices. It has to do with basic human rights. Your lack of interest in any and all of those is duly noted and logged.

Maybe you should go find a thread that has something to do with "immigration".

 

[Correll]

1. I read your link. THere was nothing in it to indicate that she mentioned the issue in relation to immigration at all.

Correct. Because "immigration" has nothing to do with it. This is a thousands-of-years-old cultural custom specific to certain ethnic groups in certain geographies. Especially, but not limited to, Africa.

THe OP has to do with a law passed here in America to deal with a problem that should not exist in a FIrst World Nation.


I stated that I had never heard the issue mentioned by feminists in connection to immigration, and that is the post you replied TO.

2. It is our problem, thanks to Third World immigration. Your desire to marginalize my opinion because I am not a woman, is noted and rejected as sexist bullshit.

Again, it's got zero to do with "immigration", despite these flaccid attempts to change the subject. And that inability to address the subject has nothing to do with your gender. It has to do with your intellect.[/QUOTE]

Save your arrogance for someone that might be impressed.

This problem would not be an issue in America if not for Third World Immigration. It would thousands of miles away.

3. My point stands. THis is the conversation we should have had in 1965, before massive Third World Immigration.

Third time now ---- this has nothing to do with "immigration". This has to do with women. This has to do with patriarchy. This has to do with ancient barbaric cultural practices. It has to do with basic human rights. Your lack of interest in any and all of those is duly noted and logged.

Maybe you should go find a thread that has something to do with "immigration".[/QUOTE]



Blah, blah, patriarchy. Blah, blah human rights.


THe op is about MICHIGAN. IMO, it is a freaking tragedy that this "ancient and barbaric cultural practice" is happening in the US.

Your desire to exclude men from this discussion is noted and rejected, again.

Your sexism has been established. You do not have to beat a dead horse.

 

[Godboy]

Then why allow them to mutilate the genitals of little boys...?

male circumcision isn't mutilation. I'm circumcised and my wang works just fine.

How do you know?

Aye, there's the rub.

If it's surgically ******* with nature, then yes it's mutilation. Regardless who it's done on.

Actually much as it pains me to admit it the OP makes a good point in his title. Mutilation for one gender is OK but we clamp down on the other gender. That's incongruous.

I guess you must be against surgery then. Nature gives people bad organs sometimes, so i suppose you weant to end our organ donation programs?

Complete non sequitur right there. ^^

There's nothing inherently "bad" about a foreskin or labia. That's superstitious bullshit. If an organ is found to be malfunctioning, that's a whole 'nother show. But instantly taking a knife just because you think you know better than what Nature (or if you prefer, God) created --- superstitioius bullshit.

It has zero to do with superstition for most people who have it done. Its a medical procedure that is so minor it can be done by a guy wearing funny robes. The benefit of course is to help prevent STDs, including HIV. The benefit outweighs the risk. Thats why its so commonly practiced.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

The jew always gets special treatment.

Female genital mutilation now a 15-year felony in Michigan

july 11 2017 LANSING — Gov. Rick Snyder signed 13 bills Tuesday stemming from a case of female genital mutilation that happened in Livonia in April.

“Those who commit these horrendous crimes should be held accountable for their actions, and these bills stiffen the penalties for offenders while providing additional support to victims,” Snyder said. “This legislation is an important step toward eliminating this despicable practice in Michigan while empowering victims to find healing and justice.”

Under the main bill, female genital mutilation would be considered a felony in Michigan, punishable by up to 15 years in prison. That's a harsher penalty than the 1996 federal genital mutilation law, which includes a sentence of up to five years in prison. Michigan will join at least 24 other states that have passed anti-genital cutting laws over the last two decades.

One day male genital mutilation will be banned as well. Its barbaric and disgusting and violent. We only have 1 son but he was not mutilated and at 8.5 years old has NEVER had any issues with the decision. We got bullshit from my mother and grandmother but it was all noise....glad we made that decision,I remember sitting in the room after our last child was born and hearing a newborn next door being mutilated and it was absolutely awful.

Why ban it? It's harmless. If you don't want to do it to your kids, don't do it.

If I have a son, he's getting snipped.

The most sensitive part of a tiny newborn is cut off and that little baby is not anesthetized.

Who is more cruel?

The doctors or the parents?

It's possible that its not done without anesthesia any more but, if it were me, I sure as hell wouldn't allow an unnecessary mutilation of my child. But that's just me and I'm a knee jerk liberal and you know how we are about not harming defenseless children.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com