Anthropologist performs female circumcision on herself and is now an advocate for it...

[Annie999]

But they did "mutilate" me. Not to the same degree, but they did. Can one wish otherwise? Of course. And naturally, I prefer my own culture's choices to those of Sub-Saharan Africa. But given that no important life processes were affected, and assuming it was a parental or personal decision, who are we to get up in arms about it?

I believe it's a basic human right to keep people's organs as they are, specially one that is so important like the clitoris, which is the center of sexual pleasure (I see you don't understand the importance of it right now but maybe in the future you will).

Just because there are cultures out there forcing this practice into their women doesn't mean we have to accept it, we have the right to condemn such practice and it comes from basic decency and empathy from an more evolved society.

[Colonel Frank Grimes]

I'm not sure that's a woman in the video.

[Dandelion]

Fuambai Ahmadu, reminds me about a post made by an East African girl on a (Dutch) forum about sexuality I visited in the early 2000s. She's wrote 'I'm circumcised and I think it's no big deal'. Always found that curious. I believe many East African girls think this.

However, I still oppose their practice. I'm no cultural relativist. They have still lost much of their ability to enjoy sex (not entirely though).

[Smitty]

I believe it's a basic human right to keep people's organs as they are, specially one that is so important like the clitoris, which is the center of sexual pleasure (I see you don't understand the importance of it right now but maybe in the future you will). Just because there are cultures out there forcing this practice into their women doesn't mean we have to accept it, we have the right to condemn such practice and it comes from basic decency and empathy from an more evolved society.

But why is it our affair? Let them evolve their own society, if they care to. So some women won't have sexual pleasure in their lives. They also won't have the freedom to drive or choose their husbands. For that matter, they'll probably be lucky if they live to 50, due to starvation and war. It just seems we're focusing on a very minor issue here.

But to build on Danielion's point, do you believe my parents violated my basic human rights? Are you crusading against the (yet) widespread barbarity here in First World America?

[crazyladybutterfly]

Fuambai Ahmadu, reminds me about a post made by an East African girl on a (Dutch) forum about sexuality I visited in the early 2000s. She's wrote 'I'm circumcised and I think it's no big deal'. Always found that curious. I believe many East African girls think this.

However, I still oppose their practice. I'm no cultural relativist. They have still lost much of their ability to enjoy sex (not entirely though).

it depends how it is done
im more concerned about deadly infections than loss of sexual pleasure

[MissMischief]

So her point is that if it's so inherently wrong to do it on girls, why is it allowed to be done on boys? As a person who is strongly against male circumcision, one has to admit that FGM is way more barbaric and crippling.

Female genital mutilation involves cutting off the clit (the female equivalent to the head of the penis), removing the inner and outer labia, and often sewing up the vagina, leaving a hole large enough to allow for the period to flow through. Male circumcision involves cutting off the skin surrounding the head of the penis.

That's quite a big difference.

[Dandelion]

So her point is that if it's so inherently wrong to do it on girls, why is it allowed to be done on boys? As a person who is strongly against male circumcision, one has to admit that FGM is way more barbaric and crippling.

Female genital mutilation involves cutting off the clit (the female equivalent to the head of the penis), removing the inner and outer labia, and often sewing up the vagina, leaving a hole large enough to allow for the period to flow through. Male circumcision involves cutting off the skin surrounding the head of the penis.

That's quite a big difference.

Depends. Most woman 'only' have their clitoris partly removed, sometimes only the prepuce of the clitoris. Of course, I realise a clitoris is not just 'a tiny part'.

A foreskin is also quite a large part to remove from a penis though, but I admit it's no the head of the penis.

[Annie999]

Alright. I noticed that men and woman from cultures practising it tend to defend it and those who don't tend to oppose it, interesting even expert (physicians). Dutch physicians reach a consensus that it's unnecessary, while US American ones go out of their way to highlight supposed benefits.

I remember an old thread about a US American boyfriend you had. You might be dating another man now and not every US American is circumcised. But women tend to 'stand by their men' very often. Hence my curiosity.

I only dated the guy, never even "saw" what he had LOL. But regardless of my partner I would never support it. The custom here is not to be circumcised (only Jews do it) and we have this view; it's unnecessary and nerves get cut.

I agree that views regarding this depend where people are from. For example in USA people have the misconception that being circumcised is "cleaner" or more healthy while in here we think they're nuts for doing that to their children because they just don't know any better (as they were also mutilated as kids and just take it as the natural thing to do).

[Smitty]

So her point is that if it's so inherently wrong to do it on girls, why is it allowed to be done on boys? As a person who is strongly against male circumcision, one has to admit that FGM is way more barbaric and crippling.

Female genital mutilation involves cutting off the clit (the female equivalent to the head of the penis), removing the inner and outer labia, and often sewing up the vagina, leaving a hole large enough to allow for the period to flow through. Male circumcision involves cutting off the skin surrounding the head of the penis.

That's quite a big difference.

Yes, that is pretty grotesque.

[Dandelion]

I only dated the guy, never even "saw" what he had LOL. But regardless of my partner I would never support it. The custom here is not to be circumcised (only Jews do it) and we have this view; it's unnecessary and nerves get cut. I agree that views regarding this depend where people are from. For example in USA people have the misconception that being circumcised is "cleaner" or more healthy while in here we think they're nuts for doing that to their children because they just don't know better (as they were also mutilated as kids and just take it as the natural thing to do).

Truth to be told, a man with a circumcised penis probably really has a reduced the risk of contracting a UTI in his lifetime. Still not worth having my foreskin removed for to me.

I had a UTI once myself. Ten days of antibiotics (healed on day one, but you have to keep taking antibiotics to the end once you start a treatment). I'm very hygienic though.