Conquer Club

Is there a reason why female circumcision is illegal, but with boys it's fine to snip them up?

e.g. in America

It's believed the foreskin serves no useful purpose, and removal is therefore purely cosmetic. That attitude is gradually changing. Many critics believe the foreskin enhances sexual pleasure and is not just a decoration. Personally, I wouldn't want to part with mine.

Female "circumcision" on the other hand, is a euphemism. What exactly it means varies from culture to culture, but most variations are not benign. In some it's a relatively harmless trimming of the clitoral hood, but in others it's complete removal of the clitoris, or the sewing shut of the labia majora. Both of the latter two are fairly brutal procedures that definitely are not just cosmetic. They are a deliberate attempt to prevent female orgasm, in the belief that its indecent for a woman to enjoy sex.

Dukasaur wrote: They are a deliberate attempt to prevent female orgasm, in the belief that its indecent for a woman to enjoy sex.

And I just can't see any thing that makes aborting a guy that thinks such a thing wrong. To me he is just tissue that will never become a human.

Male circumcision is a brutal act! This must stop!

Dukasaur wrote:It's believed the foreskin serves no useful purpose, and removal is therefore purely cosmetic. That attitude is gradually changing. Many critics believe the foreskin enhances sexual pleasure and is not just a decoration. Personally, I wouldn't want to part with mine.

Female "circumcision" on the other hand, is a euphemism. What exactly it means varies from culture to culture, but most variations are not benign. In some it's a relatively harmless trimming of the clitoral hood, but in others it's complete removal of the clitoris, or the sewing shut of the labia majora. Both of the latter two are fairly brutal procedures that definitely are not just cosmetic. They are a deliberate attempt to prevent female orgasm, in the belief that its indecent for a woman to enjoy sex.

Well said, Duk. A lot of it is cultural. Male circumcision is occasionally for medical reasons. There was a push a while back for a symbolic "nick" to satisfy cultural norms for females. but it got shut down pretty quickly.

I'm generally in favour of only performing surgery on infants when it's medically necessary.

Need to really define the terms accurately. Female "circumcision" is different to FGM which is female genital mutilation. Some sects of the Shia practise female circumcision where there are small ritual cuts made on the labia majora and the cliterol hood. No tissue is removed, there is minimal scarring, and allows for greater clitorial stimulation later in life. This is vastly different to the radical cliterictomy practised by the medieval deviants in pakistan, north africa, etc. This btw is not a muslim practise, is a cultural practise and seen in christian communities, animist communities, and even some hindu communities. Male circumcision has some cleanliness benefits. Can prolong sexual pleasure and duration through cutting down somewhat on sensation.
Need to address the issue whether any body modification is morally acceptable. Waxing, piecing, plucking, plastic surgery(including boob jobs, butt implants, penile implants etc), hair dye......

never heard of "piecing" before. sounds painful...

Neither seem acceptable unless medically necessary.