5,700 female mutilations in 1 year found by UK study, *not performed in the UK

[Londo_Jowo]

I'm as disgusted by it as the next person, however I do find the outrage somewhat amusing, considering how prevalent male genital mutilation is here in the west...

Yeah I know it's not exactly a fair comparison, but it does fit the general description - being changed("mutilated") for no reason but tradition.

In some cases it is similar. The ones that remove the clitoral hood is quite similar to a male being circumcised. Removal of the clitoris on the other hand is nothing less than barbaric.

 

[Artdeco]

The CDC suggests 500K women have had the procedure or are at significant risk of having it performed in the US

UK Parlament says another 500K in Europe

WHO says 200 million worldwide.

Exact numbers are difficult because of the nature and criminality of the mutilation, and the number of mutilations performed in the Middle East/Africa is unavailable.

There is no data indicating the % of Christian VS non Christian performance of this mutilation, the first objection to the practice was from Christian missionaries in Africa. It's a cultural mutilation, not a specific religious practice.

 

[Artdeco]

I'm as disgusted by it as the next person, however I do find the outrage somewhat amusing, considering how prevalent male genital mutilation is here in the west...

Yeah I know it's not exactly a fair comparison, but it does fit the general description - being changed("mutilated") for no reason but tradition.

Come on, a little skin removed from the penis versus having the head of your penis lopped off?

i don't agree with circumcision, but it is in no way comparable to FGM, and to the best of my knowledge, removing of the clitoral hood isn't what we're discussing here, it's the removal of the clitoris or a similar procedure to make sex and masturbation less pleasureable.

From the WHO:

Procedures
Female genital mutilation is classified into 4 major types.

Type 1: Often referred to as clitoridectomy, this is the partial or total removal of the clitoris (a small, sensitive and erectile part of the female genitals), and in very rare cases, only the prepuce (the fold of skin surrounding the clitoris).
Type 2: Often referred to as excision, this is the partial or total removal of the clitoris and the labia minora (the inner folds of the vulva), with or without excision of the labia majora (the outer folds of skin of the vulva ).
Type 3: Often referred to as infibulation, this is the narrowing of the vaginal opening through the creation of a covering seal. The seal is formed by cutting and repositioning the labia minora, or labia majora, sometimes through stitching, with or without removal of the clitoris (clitoridectomy).
Type 4: This includes all other harmful procedures to the female genitalia for non-medical purposes, e.g. pricking, piercing, incising, scraping and cauterizing the genital area.

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en/

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Come on, a little skin removed from the penis versus having the head of your penis lopped off?

i don't agree with circumcision, but it is in no way comparable to FGM, and to the best of my knowledge, removing of the clitoral hood isn't what we're discussing here, it's the removal of the clitoris or a similar procedure to make sex and masturbation less pleasureable.

Removal of the clitoral hood is considered FGM and documented as such so you have no clue how many of either are done.

 

[Artdeco]

Removal of the clitoral hood is considered FGM and documented as such so you have no clue how many of either are done.

Not according to the WHO, where are you resourcing the removal of the clitoral hood as FGM? I've seen it done and been part of the team doing "female circumcision" here in the US, as well as labiaplasty, which has become quite popular in the US.

I posted the definitions from the WHO, happy to read where you're referencing clitoral hood removal as FGM, which the urologists I know suggests enhances sexual pleasure, not diminishing it, because of an overgrowth of tissue, inhibiting clitoral stimulation. (Do you even sex bro?)

And once again, the WHO says 200 million women have had FGM.

 

[Eli]

Come on, a little skin removed from the penis versus having the head of your penis lopped off?

i don't agree with circumcision, but it is in no way comparable to FGM, and to the best of my knowledge, removing of the clitoral hood isn't what we're discussing here, it's the removal of the clitoris or a similar procedure to make sex and masturbation less pleasureable.

From the WHO:



http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en/

I'm fully aware and agree for the most part, but certainly you can understand the analogs. It's mutilation for the sake of tradition, period.

I don't really want to start a circumcision thread as there have been plenty of those here over the years, but it's easy and logical to argue that the keratinization of the head in a circumsized man causes a loss of sensation compared to an uncircumcised man. Of course it doesn't matter to the individual, since that's all they know. You could argue the same thing for women who have had FGM, as long as it's done when they are very young as is typical with male circumcision?

All forms of genital mutilation should be shunned, IMO. Not just woman.

 

[Artdeco]

I'm fully aware and agree for the most part, but certainly you can understand the analogs. It's mutilation for the sake of tradition, period.

I don't really want to start a circumcision thread as there have been plenty of those here over the years, but it's easy and logical to argue that the keratinization of the head in a circumsized man causes a loss of sensation compared to an uncircumcised man. Of course it doesn't matter to the individual, since that's all they know. You could argue the same thing for women who have had FGM, as long as it's done when they are very young?

All forms of genital mutilation should be shunned, IMO. Not just woman.

Respectfully, Eli, I disagree, and perhaps male circumcision deserves a different thread. The purpose and practice of FGM is vastly different.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Not according to the WHO, where are you resourcing the removal of the clitoral hood as FGM? I've seen it done and been part of the team doing "female circumcision" here in the US, as well as labiaplasty, which has become quite popular in the US.

I posted the definitions from the WHO, happy to read where you're referencing clitoral hood removal as FGM, which the urologists I know suggests enhances sexual pleasure, not diminishing it, because of an overgrowth of tissue, inhibiting clitoral stimulation. (Do you even sex bro?)

And once again, the WHO says 200 million women have had FGM.

Maybe you should read it again.

http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/fgm/overview/en/

Classification of FGM (2007)

Female genital mutilation comprises all procedures involving partial or total removal of the external female genitalia or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons (WHO, UNICEF, UNFPA, 1997).

The WHO/UNICEF/UNFPA Joint Statement classified female genital mutilation into four types. Experience with using this classification over the past decade has revealed the need to sub-divide these categories to capture more closely the variety of procedures.

Although the extent of genital tissue cutting generally increases from Type I to III, there are exceptions. Severity and risk are closely related to the anatomical extent of the cutting, including both the type of FGM performed and the amount of tissue that is cut, which may vary between the types.

Type IV comprises a variety of practices that do not involve removal of tissue from the genitals. Though limited research has been carried out on Type IV FGM, in general, these forms appear to be less associated with harm or risk than the types I, II and III, that all involve removal of genital tissue.


The complete typology with sub-divisions is described below:

Type I — Partial or total removal of the clitoris and/or the prepuce (clitoridectomy). When it is important to distinguish between the major variations of Type I mutilation, the following subdivisions are proposed:
Type Ia, removal of the clitoral hood or prepuce only;
Type Ib, removal of the clitoris with the prepuce.

Type II — Partial or total removal of the clitoris and the labia minora, with or without excision of the labia majora (excision). When it is important to distinguish between the major variations that have been documented, the following subdivisions are proposed:
Type IIa, removal of the labia minora only;
Type IIb, partial or total removal of the clitoris and the labia minora;
Type IIc, partial or total removal of the clitoris, the labia minora and the labia majora.

Type III — Narrowing of the vaginal orifice with creation of a covering seal by cutting and appositioning the labia minora and/or the labia majora, with or without excision of the clitoris (infibulation). When it is important to distinguish between variations in infibulations, the following subdivisions are proposed:
Type IIIa, removal and apposition of the labia minora;
Type IIIb, removal and apposition of the labia majora.

Type IV — All other harmful procedures to the female genitalia for non-medical purposes, for example: pricking, piercing, incising, scraping and cauterization.

 

[Eli]

Respectfully, Eli, I disagree and perhaps male circumcision deserves a different thread.

What exactly do you disagree with though? Do you disagree that it's mutilation? Because it most certainly is. Do you disagree that all genital mutilation should be shunned? Because it most certainly should be.

I do agree that circumcision is not the same as a woman losing her clitoris. I'm not really trying to lump them together at all. I'm just saying I can see the irony in the whole thing.

As in, it's really easy to put yourself in a 3rd parties shoes and see them call anyone who practices any form of genital mutilation barbaric.

 

[Artdeco]

Londo, please reference me where removal of the clitoral hood is a cultural practice. I'm unaware it's performed for the purposes that the WHO suggests FGM are primarilarily performed. NSFW wiki link describing the procedure: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clitoral_hood_reduction



Eli, you seem determined to make your point, please consider it made, thank you for your contribution to the thread about F(Female)GM. I'm sure the women with their vaginas sewn shut and clitoris's removed agree with you that it's all genital mutilation.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

Londo, please reference me where removal of the clitoral hood is a cultural practice. I'm unaware it's performed for the purposes that the WHO suggests FGM are primarilarily performed. NSFW wiki link describing the procedure: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clitoral_hood_reduction

Just because you're unaware doesn't mean it doesn't happen. If that were the case it wouldn't be mentioned by the WHO.

 

[Artdeco]

Just because you're unaware doesn't mean it doesn't happen. If that were the case it wouldn't be mentioned by the WHO.

I honestly can't understand your argument Londo, you're saying a procedure done to enhance sexual pleasure and for looks done in the western culture under medical supervision to a consenting adult is analogous to having a clitorectomy or the vagina sewn shut? And you've failed to produce a single reference to prove it's done traditionally as FGM.

Agree to disagree and snicker at how you fail to concede you're wrong, seems you're never wrong, huh?

NSFW: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_mutilation#/media/File:FGC_Types.svg

The specific types of FGM, images.

 

[Londo_Jowo]

I honestly can't understand your argument Londo, you're saying a procedure done to enhance sexual pleasure and for looks done in the western culture under medical supervision is analogous to having a clitorectomy or the vagina sewn shut? And you've failed to produce a single reference to prove it's done traditionally as FGM.

Agree to disagree and snicker at how you fail to concede you're wrong, seems you're never wrong, huh?

NSFW: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_mutilation#/media/File:FGC_Types.svg

The specific types of FGM, images.

This procedure removing the clitoral hood when done by Muslims is not to enhance sexual pleasure. No doubt the WHO considers it as being FGM. It's also clearly show in your examples (B. Type 1)

As for the not conceding when one's wrong, you may want to look in the mirror.

 

[Artdeco]

This procedure removing the clitoral hood when done by Muslims is not to enhance sexual pleasure. No doubt the WHO considers it as being FGM. It's also clearly show in your examples (B. Type 1)

As for the not conceding when one's wrong, you may want to look in the mirror.

If you'd read any of the links, you'd realize it's not a "Muslim" problem.

Thanks for your contribution to the thread, Londo.

 

[Subyman]

In 18 newly recorded cases, the FGM was reported to have been undertaken in the United Kingdom, including 11 women and girls who were also reported to have been born in the UK. Where the nature of the UK procedures was known, around 10 were reported with FGM Type 4 – Piercing.

Looking at this line, it would seem over half of the FGM cases performed in the UK were piercing. I'm curious to know if this means a voluntary piercing like a belly ring, but on the genitalia.

The most frequent age range at which the FGM was carried out was between 5 and 9 years old

And

90 per cent of women and girls with a known country of birth were born in an Eastern, Northern or Western African country, and 6 per cent were born in Asia.

These two facts would have me believe the majority of cases are from immigrants coming to the UK after they were the victims of FGM. I understand some may be vacation cutting, but knowing that most immigrants likely couldn't afford such an expensive trip, I'd stick behind most being mutilated as a child, coming to the UK later in life, and then being reported.

Most parts of FGM are horrible. I'm not sure what to do about it since it is already illegal in the western world, for the most part.

 

[realibrad]

Looking at this line, it would seem over half of the FGM cases performed in the UK were piercing. I'm curious to know if this means a voluntary piercing like a belly ring, but on the genitalia.



And



These two facts would have me believe the majority of cases are from immigrants coming to the UK after they were the victims of FGM. I understand some may be vacation cutting, but knowing that most immigrants likely couldn't afford such an expensive trip, I'd stick behind most being mutilated as a child, coming to the UK later in life, and then being reported.

Most parts of FGM are horrible. I'm not sure what to do about it since it is already illegal in the western world, for the most part.

From what I know, its not just cutting off the clit. They also remove part of the labia and then sew up the hole to make it smaller to make sure there is a bloody reaction to prove virginity. They might be talking about the sewing up because you would need to pierce the labia to do that. Not sure though.

 

[alien42]

i've sat in a cow dung hut and listened to a Masai woman explain how she and all the other women were "circumcised". to them it is perfectly normal, as is drinking cows blood, building stick walls to defend themselves and their cows from lions, and men having a dozen wives.

the vast majority of civilizations in the world see the practice as horrible and wrong and it isn't a significant problem globally. reality is that FGM will not completely end until the remaining small cultures that still practice it have been wiped out.

 

[Joepublic2]

Come on, a little skin removed from the penis versus having the head of your penis lopped off?

It's hardly "just a little bit of skin".

The foreskin is specialised tissue that is packed with nerves and contains stretch receptors.[6][26][27] Sorrells et al. (2007) reported the areas of the penis most sensitive to fine touch are on the foreskin.[28]

Queue up all the cut guys saying "well I was mutilated at birth and MY PENIS IS JUST FINE."

Removing or modifying parts of anybody's genitals without serious medical reasons for doing so is fucking retarded bronze age hocus pocus bullshit.

 

[Artdeco]

i've sat in a cow dung hut and listened to a Masai woman explain how she and all the other women were "circumcised". to them it is perfectly normal, as is drinking cows blood, building stick walls to defend themselves and their cows from lions, and men having a dozen wives.

the vast majority of civilizations in the world see the practice as horrible and wrong and it isn't a significant problem globally. reality is that FGM will not completely end until the remaining small cultures that still practice it have been wiped out.

200 million women (according to the WHO) is a fairly large number.