FGM "party"?

[Gob]

Is the UK slipping back into barbarism?

Girls are being taken to female genital mutilation (FGM) "parties" in cities across England, a charity has warned.

The Black Health Initiative in Leeds says midwives from Africa are being flown into the country to carry out the illegal practice.

West Yorkshire Police said they were aware girls were being subjected to FGM locally.

Latest NHS figures show more than 8,000 women across England have recently been identified as being victims of FGM.

FGM is an illegal practice in the UK and carries a sentence of up to 14 years in jail. It is defined by the World Health Organisation (WHO) as the partial or total removal of the female external genitalia, for non medical reasons.

Heather Nelson, Chief Executive of the Black Health Initiative, said: "We know of parties happening here in England, and in West Yorkshire we recently had to break one up, and we've stopped another from taking place.

A recent report by the Home Affairs Select Committee said it was a "national scandal" that no one in the UK had ever been successfully prosecuted for a FGM offence.

There are no definitive figures that detail exactly how many women in England have actually been a victim of FGM.

A study by the City University of London published in 2015 estimated there were 137,000 women who have been subjected to the practice in England and Wales.

Meanwhile, NHS Digital began collating data in April 2015 about the number of women and girls coming into contact with the NHS who have been a victim of FGM at some point in their lives.

These figures show that 8,718 woman have been identified as FGM victims, with 68 females saying the procedure had been carried out in the UK.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-38290888

[Econoline]

Talking Heads say, "This ain't no party, this ain't no disco, this ain't no foolin' around."

[Bicycle Bill]

How about 'Male Genital Mutilation', a/k/a circumcision?

-"BB"-

[Sean]

How about 'Male Genital Mutilation', a/k/a circumcision?

-"BB"-

Spot on! A ridiculous and barbaric practice unless done for health reasons.

[Guinevere]

You're seriously comparing female genital mutilation to circumcision?

[Big RR]

I can't speak for Sean, but where do you draw the line? Granted circumcision is not genital removal or a practice designed to make sexual relations less/not pleasurable, but it is a mutilation of male genitalia for a religious reason (which female genital mutilation also is) and it is usually done on the young or powerless who have no choice in the matter (as is FGM). Certainly it is nowhere near the mutilation that females suffer, and I have never heard of men being psychologically damaged by circumcision, but both raise a serious question of which religious practices should be tolerated and which should not.

[Lord Jim]

You're seriously comparing female genital mutilation to circumcision?

I agree, that's a ridiculous comparison...

What Elena Bobbitt did to John would be a much more accurate analogy...

[Burning Petard]

I think it is more appropriate to compare FGM to castration or gelding. If FGM is to be ascribed to religious practices, please define religion for me. I think both circumcision and FMG as a community practice or tradition can be historically traced back to before the time of Moses or Abraham. Current religions are used to justify traditions that extend back before the current religious precepts --just like 'the Christmas Tree' is a pagan tradition that has been adopted by many present day Christians. The behavior continues but the rationale changes. That kind of continuation/change tells me the real purpose is hidden. In the case of FGM, IMNSHO, it is male domination.

snailgate

[Big RR]

You raise a good point BP--circumcision is described as a religious precept in the Bible and in Jewish tradition. Is FGM required in the same way in Islam?

[RayThom]

Speaking of circumcision. Did you hear about the foreskin purse, when rubbed, turns into a tote bag?

[Sean]

You're seriously comparing female genital mutilation to circumcision?

Yes I am! Please note that I am not saying that they are equal, just that they both involve genital mutilation for no good reason. A big difference between the two is that the mutilation of male genitalia is accepted in western society.

[Crackpot]

Then you are ignorant of the reality of FGM.

[Lord Jim]

A big difference between the two is that the mutilation of male genitalia is accepted in western society one involves removing the orgasm stimulating part of the sex organs and the other does not.

Fixed

Calling circumcision "mutilation" would be like calling a nose job or a face lift "mutilation". It's cosmetic surgery.

FGM is a helluva lot more than cosmetic.

[Sean]

A big difference between the two is that the mutilation of male genitalia is accepted in western society one involves removing the orgasm stimulating part of the sex organs and the other does not.

Fixed

Calling circumcision "mutilation" would be like calling a nose job or a face lift "mutilation". It's cosmetic surgery.

FGM is a helluva lot more than cosmetic.

I disagree completely Jim. It's not the same as a nose job. If you were slicing part of the nose off then it would be comparable... and I bet you'd describe that as mutilation!

[Sean]

Then you are ignorant of the reality of FGM.

Actually I'm not CP. Having a different opinion to you does not automatically make me ignorant in any way.

Okay, once more for the benefit of you, Jim and anyone else who hasn't understood this yet:

I am NOT saying that circumcision (or MGM (pun intended?)) is as bad as FGM. I know that there is a HUGE difference. I am not stupid. What I AM saying is that MGM is, by definition, mutilation. That is all. Some will agree, some won't.

[wesw]

there are some medical reasons for circumcision.

apparently it helps to prevent some infections.

that s what my teachers said anyway.....

I suspect that the religious prohibitons on eating pork had similar, health related, origins and were incorporated into religion as well.

[Big RR]

There can be health-related reasons for the removal of just about any organ or tissue (even the NT says "If they right eye offend thee, pluck it out"), but that doesn't make doing it as a religious rite something done with health in mind.

[Guinevere]

Thank you Jim, and CP.

Sean and BB, whatever circumcision is, it is not akin to FGM and, by comparing it to FGM, you are diminishing and normalizing FGM, which is absolutely wrong. 1/3 of the men of the world are circumcized. Would you like 1/3 of the woman to be mutilated, too?

[Bicycle Bill]

Thank you Jim, and CP.

Sean and BB, whatever circumcision is, it is not akin to FGM and, by comparing it to FGM, you are diminishing and normalizing FGM, which is absolutely wrong. 1/3 of the men of the world are circumcized. Would you like 1/3 of the woman to be mutilated, too?

I will stand partially corrected, Guin.  Circumcision, while it is genital mutilation if you follow a strict definition of the term 'mutilation', does not compare to what is currently being meant as FGM.  For that matter, the oddity known as a "Prince Albert" among men (which would compare to the piercing of the clitoris or the labia majora in females) would fit the definition of "genital mutilation" as well.

Maybe I should have compared it to the Middle Eastern custom of making men into eunuchs, thus rendering them 'fit' to guard the hareem, or the 17th century Italian practice of castrati to ensure that a young male's singing voice would not change.

[Guinevere]

You're completely missing the point. Try moving out of a white-male-centric view of the world some time, ok?