Ugh, circumcision threads. These always end up with people getting pissed at each other, and I kind of get it... I mean, it ticks me off with people comparing female genital mutilation (where the clitoris is removed and women are rendered incapable of feeling most sexual pleasure) and male circumcision. I remember reading once that the two would be similar if the head of the penis and most of the shaft were to be totally removed on the male, it is that detrimental. It's like comparing apples and oranges.
I disagree. I guess we all have different ideas of what is barbaric and unacceptable. Removing the female clitoris would be nothing like removing the head and most of the shaft of the penis. Think about where the female's urethra is. How would men urinate if you removed the head of their penis? I think that removing the clitoris vs. the foreskin would be similiar ideas and could be compared. Either way, cutting off any part of a male's or female's sex organ seems wrong to me (unless, of course, it is medically necessary).
From the WHO:
Female genital mutilation is classified into four major types:
Clitoridectomy: partial or total removal of the clitoris (a small, sensitive and erectile part of the female genitals) and, rarely, the prepuce (the fold of skin surrounding the clitoris) as well.
Excision: partial or total removal of the clitoris and the labia minora, with or without excision of the labia majora (the labia are "the lips" that surround the vagina).
Infibulation: narrowing of the vaginal opening through the creation of a covering seal. The seal is formed by cutting and repositioning the inner, and sometimes outer, labia, with or without removal of the clitoris.
Other: all other harmful procedures to the female genitalia for non-medical purposes, e.g. pricking, piercing, incising, scraping and cauterizing the genital area.
FGM has no health benefits, and it harms girls and women in many ways. It involves removing and damaging healthy and normal female genital tissue, and interferes with the natural functions of girls' and women's bodies.
Immediate complications can include severe pain, shock, haemorrhage (bleeding), tetanus or sepsis (bacterial infection), urine retention, open sores in the genital region and injury to nearby genital tissue.
Long-term consequences can include:
-recurrent bladder and urinary tract infections;
-cysts;
-infertility;
-the need for later surgeries. For example, the FGM procedure that seals or narrows a vaginal opening (type 3 above) is surgically changed to allow for sexual intercourse and childbirth, and sometimes stitched close again afterwards;
-an increased risk of childbirth complications and newborn deaths.
From womenshealth.gov:
Who performs FGC?
FGC is usually carried out by traditional practitioners or lay persons who use a variety of instruments, which range from a scalpel to a piece of glass, to conduct the procedure. Harsh, unsterile conditions under which FGC occurs are not conducive to accurate, hygienic cutting.1 With the increasing awareness of the health consequences of FGC, health providers have erroneously utilized more hygienic techniques to conduct FGC and "improve" the practice. However, this medicalization of FGC has been condemned by the World Health Organization and is considered to perpetuate and promote FGC rather than to prevent or reduce its practice.2
What are the consequences of FGC?
The potential physical complications resulting from the procedure are numerous. Because FGC is often carried out without anesthesia, an immediate effect of the procedure is pain.
Short-term complications, such as severe bleeding, which can lead to shock or death, are greatly affected by the type of FGC performed, the degree of struggle by the woman or girl, unsanitary operating conditions, and inexperienced practitioners or inadequate medical services once a complication occurs. There is a very high risk of infection, with documented reports of ulcers, scar tissue and cysts. Female genital cutting may also interfere with a woman's pregnancy or labor. Other lasting effects that commonly result from FGC procedures include urine retention, resulting in repeated urinary infections and obstruction in menstrual flow, which may lead to frequent reproductive tract infections, infertility1,2,3 and chronic pelvic pain.3 FGC is also thought to facilitate the transmission of HIV through several mechanisms. Significant psychological and psychosexual consequences of FGC exist, but these factors have not been adequately studied.1,2,3
-------------------------------
THAT is why the comparison is offensive to me. You would be hard-pressed to find any legitimate medical source that would disagree that the two procedures (FGM and male circumcision) are very, very different. I honestly don't mind at all if people choose to have their child circumcised or not. I don't even care if people believe male circumcision to be 'mutilation'. It's just that FGM and circumcision are
so vastly different that the comparison bothers me.
Ahh, no more circumcision talk! I'm going to go worry about packing my hospital bags again.
