Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Doctors defend genital "nick" for girls

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Choice Donate to DU
 
shaayecanaan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 11:14 PM
Original message
Doctors defend genital "nick" for girls
good story at Salon:-

http://www.salon.com/life/violence_against_women/index....

"The American Academy of Pediatrics has suggested a new way to fight female genital mutilation in the
United States: Allow doctors to give girls a "nick" down there. In a policy statement titled "Ritual Genital Cutting of Female Minors," the Academy suggests that allowing such a ritual could serve as a way to "build trust" with immigrant families and prevent parents from sending their girls overseas for far more extensive, and potentially life-threatening, procedures. It's a "possible compromise to avoid greater harm," the statement says."

I always thought this was a commonsense solution to the problem. An Egyptian ex-gf of mine had been circumcised by having the clitoral hood removed (as an adult). Most women in Egypt get this done for hygienic reasons as much as anything - the clitoral hood secretes smegma in much the same way was the male foreskin does. It certainly didnt impair her in any way sexually, quite the opposite in fact.
Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
Zoeisright Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 11:16 PM
Response to Original message
1. Why do girls needed to be mutilated at ALL?
The whole thing is ridiculous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cronus Protagonist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Why does ANYONE need to be modified at all?
I think God/Nature knows better than a bunch of undereducated nutcases reading iron age texts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PanoramaIsland Donating Member (144 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-06-10 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #2
44. Just so long as you're not reflexively anti-body modification.
Non-coerced, safe, consensual and self-directed body modification for aesthetic reasons is perfectly legit. The "God/Nature" argument holds the danger that it rests in the Appeal to Nature argument, which is essentially a fallacy.

There's nothing wrong with getting a tattoo, piercing, brand, or cosmetic surgery.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 03:25 AM
Response to Reply #1
16. Why do boys need to be mutilated at ALL?
Make sure to look carefully at your cultural bias. In the United States, the vast majority of infant males have their foreskin surgically removed. Mutilation has become the norm in that situation. As horrified as we are by female circumcision, it is only a matter of degree.

I would rather see an infant girl "nicked" by a doctor than horribly mutilated (sometimes with glass shards) at home. We need to find a solution that stops this but it will need to be incremental just as the stopping of circumcision is going to be incremental. Just Say No didn't work for drugs and it won't work for infant genital mutilation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PanoramaIsland Donating Member (144 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-06-10 04:15 PM
Response to Reply #16
45. Sure, but circumcised men don't suffer the kind of consequences that circumcised women do.
I don't support circumcision of any kind, but I think we can all agree that female circumcision is a much more severe mutilation than male circumcision is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Crunchy Frog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-09-10 01:21 AM
Response to Reply #45
46. It depends on the TYPE of female circumcision.
The type described here is very much less severe than male circumcision, and it's very common amongst the Muslim population of Indonesia and Malaysia, making it one of the most common forms of female genital cutting that there is.

There is often a tendency to equate ALL female genital cutting with the most extreme examples that can be found. It actually exists at all different levels of severity. There is also a good deal of variation in the severity of male genital cutting and some men do experience some pretty severe consequences.

I do agree that the very worst forms of female genital cutting do not have any parallel in males
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
clockworkgirl21 Donating Member (4 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-29-11 03:48 AM
Response to Reply #46
66. Thanks!
So many people think all forms of female circumcisions are hacking off the clitoris with a piece of glass.

I believe all forms of circumcision on children should be illegal, but you CAN compare male circumcision to female if you know the different kinds.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Crunchy Frog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #1
30. Why do any children of any gender need to be mutilated?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ehrnst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-24-11 08:21 AM
Response to Reply #1
65. It continues with diets, plastic surgery and tanning.
Generally speaking anything throughout recent history that has been deemed to make women more desirable harms, deforms or restricts them in some way.

Foot binding, corsets, clothing that fastens in the back, short skirts, high heels, neck rings that permanently deform the neck, low cut blouses...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
CoffeeCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 11:19 PM
Response to Original message
3. We should be educating...
...people who want to mutilate girls and women, not offering some "mutilation lite" version
of this barbaric procedure.

I'm disgusted with this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shaayecanaan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. Thats fine...
but as Greenwald notes in his article, we allow the cutting of baby boys' penises. Are you willing to similarly educate people who want to mutilate boys and men?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
petersjo02 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 11:33 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. The penis itself is not cut in circumcisions,
merely some of the foreskin that covers it. Not to say that doesn't hurt, but no one is chopping off any little boy's actual tallywhacker.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shaayecanaan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. And no one is actually cutting off any girl's whissybits...
merely some of the skin that surrounds it. The clitoral hood is the exact analogy of the male prepuce - its the same piece of skin you're talking about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
libodem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-12-11 08:04 PM
Response to Reply #11
61. Oh wrongo
They often cut off the entire thing off, scrape the labia, press it together, so it will shut. The women are sewn shut as well so menstrual flow is trapped and child birth rips them apart.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shaayecanaan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-01-11 07:30 AM
Response to Reply #61
62. Thats not whats being advocated here...
if you read above, you'll notice that what is being advocated is a ritual nick.

Male genital mutilation is practised in some cultures, notably sub-incision:- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penile_subincision

If you can accept that someone can support male circumcision without advocating male genital mutilation, then at least have the honesty to concede that the same position can be held vis-a-vis the female genitalia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 03:37 AM
Response to Reply #9
18. It's a matter of degree
Think about it. If we can get immigrants to accept the small nick to an infant girl's labia, thereby sparing her clitoris, that is great progress. Maybe, eventually, we can get people to accept just a small nick on the foreskins of baby boys.

Have you seen an infant boy circumcised? Have you changed the dressings? I'm guessing not. It is the height of hypocrisy and quite ethnocentric to be horrified by these foreigners mutilating their baby girls and not being the least bothered by what we do here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Crunchy Frog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #9
31. The female genitals are not cut either in this symbolic "nick"
Only the skin that covers the clitoris and is homologous to the foreskin.

They are not talking about cutting off the actual clitoris, or even the clitoral prepuce; just making a small incision. That's actually a far cry from the 1/2 to 2/3 of a boy's penile skin system that is typically removed in a conventional American newborn circ.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #9
51. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 03:30 AM
Response to Reply #3
17. Be disgusted. That's an okay response
That said, this is a teachable moment for you, if you let it.

first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye (sermon on the mount)

In the United States, we still practice male infant genital mutilation - it's called circumcision. And no, it's not different. Done skillfully, it isn't as damaging as what is done to infant girls but it is what it is and just because we're used to the way a circumcised penis looks doesn't mean it isn't mutilation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 11:20 PM
Response to Original message
4. While it's preferable to the massive surgery done with a piece of glass
and with no anesthetic, if it's not done in infancy the way male circumcision is, it can cause a great deal of pain.

See: Dr. James Burt: http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,2011988...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shaayecanaan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 11:24 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Circumcision in male infants causes quite a large amount of pain...
Due to the fact that the glans is still stuck to the prepuce, it must first be ripped off in order to extend the prepuce past the tip of the penis. Its roughly the equivalent of tearing a fingernail off a baby with a pair of pliers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 11:26 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Fortunately, enough uproar from nurses who assisted
finally got the doctors to start using anesthetic.

Your description is in error. There is no ripping involved, just a shallow cut.

I have seen them. Apparently you have not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shaayecanaan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 11:38 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. Gee, its a good job we have women here to tell us how a penis works...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreskin

"At birth, the foreskin is usually still fused with the glans.<5> As childhood progresses the foreskin and the glans gradually separate, a process that may not be complete until late puberty.<6> Thorvaldsen and Meyhoff reported that average age of first foreskin retraction in Denmark is 10.4 years.<7> Wright argues that forcible retraction of the foreskin should be avoided and that the child himself should be the first one to retract his own foreskin.<8> Premature retraction may be painful, and may result in infection."

If circumcised before the prepuce separates from the glans, the foreskin will need to be forcibly retracted, separating it from the glans.

FWIW, I have a penis myself. I do remember that I was about ten years old when the foreskin retracted (by itself). Not sure if that holds any sway with you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 11:50 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. No. When you've observed a few circumcisions, get back to me.
Until then, you're just projecting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shaayecanaan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 11:57 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. I have observed one. But if anyone is projecting, it is your good self...
Simply watching a circumcision doesnt allow you to judge whether the infant under the knife is suffering a lot of pain or a little. Likewise, I wouldnt watch a female circumcision and hasten to guess how much pain the girl is suffering.

Your statements are rather like sheep farmers and dog breeders who claim that docking the tails of dogs and sheep is a painless exercise.

FWIW, the Turkish men that I know (who are circumcised at 12 years of age) tell me that the process is quite painful indeed. One such person's prepuce still hadnt separated and needed to be pulled back by force.

But obviously you know much better than them, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
speltwon Donating Member (699 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-05-11 06:14 PM
Response to Reply #14
55. One of the ways that doctors are taught to help gauge pain
is by looking at physical signs. In a baby, that's about all they have, since the baby can't verbalize. I can say that from what I saw, the baby experienced less pain from a circumcision than from 3 shots he had to have in his thigh. Yes, there was anesthetic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 08:29 PM
Response to Reply #13
25. I have and it depends. Often the foreskin is still attached to penis and gets shoved or ripped
loose when applying that cone to protect the penis before cutting the foreskin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 03:45 AM
Response to Reply #6
19. Most of the doctors I work with don't wait long enough
for the anesthetic to help. And they won't give even tylenol for the pain afterward. I will not proselytize to the parents because I think that is inappropriate behavior for me as their caregiver. That said, in this forum, I will state with no reservation, it is genital mutilation. With or without anesthetic.

As an interesting aside, I was almost supportive of pharmacists who wanted to refuse to give the morning after pill. Almost. And do you know why? Because for twenty years, I have refused to assist with circumcisions (I always made sure someone else was available to cover for me, and I have always helped with the EMLA and post circ care). I could see their argument from the angle of my own ethical issues. But, in the end, they failed because part of refusing to assist includes making sure the patient has someone willing to assist them. And if there is no one else, you just have to suck it up and in too many of the cases, those pharmacists were the only ones around, so.......
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Crunchy Frog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 09:30 PM
Response to Reply #6
32. My OB does them in his office and ostensibly uses anesthetic.
I was in that office ALOT (having a high risk twin pregnancy) and was around for some of them. I even got to hear one taking place while I was waiting in an exam room. There was definitely extreme pain involved.

Clearly there are plenty of doctors who do not use anesthetic effectively.

Also, there is ripping involved, aka "lysing of adhesions". The foreskin and glans are normally tightly fused at birth and it is necessary to insert a blunt probe to tear the tissues apart. That is why the newly circed glans generally looks like a bloody piece of raw liver. Anybody with a strong enough stomach can see this being done in online videos.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
petersjo02 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 11:30 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. I've been present for a number of hospital-performed circumcisions.
Edited on Thu May-06-10 11:35 PM by petersjo02
In all cases the glans was not stuck to the prepuce at all. Nothing had to be ripped. Prepuce was very friable and was easily extended beyond the tip. That's not to say the actual removal of the foreskin doesn't hurt, but not all the extra tortuous pain in advance that you describe.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-06-10 11:47 PM
Response to Original message
12. OK - Great - we argue about cutting clitoris vs cutting penis
It's OK to cut the little boys but don't touch the girls.

Turn the argument around ladies and actually hear the words coming out of your mouth
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 03:50 AM
Response to Reply #12
20. Ethnocentrism is very hard to get around
Theirs is mutilation, ours is normal.

No one will be swayed by this conversation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Scout Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 08:41 PM
Response to Reply #12
28. "hear the words coming out of your mouth"
at least we aren't pulling them out of our asses....

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
pansypoo53219 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 01:25 AM
Response to Original message
15. if this can end the stupidity of the full female mutilation.
MAKE IT SO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Scout Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 09:29 AM
Response to Original message
21. why can't we ever have a thread about a wrong done to women....
without some man coming in and saying "but they do it to men too!" TALK ABOUT ME!!!! TALK ABOUT MEN!!!!

if you want to talk about male circumcision, start a fucking thread about it.


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. Women can't handle real equality
that is what you are saying
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Scout Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 05:08 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. oh bullshit
i can handle it just fine ... i'm just fucking sick of every time people try to talk about women, some childish man (usually) has to come in the thread and stamp his foot and say "LOOK AT ME!!!! LOOK AT MEEEEEEE! TALK ABOUT MEEEEEEEE!"

why can't they just start their own fucking thread about their topic, instead of trying to derail the one that's not about them?

it happens every time....

you want to talk about male circumcision instead of female, go right ahead and start a thread about it and talk all you want ... and if someone comes in and starts talking about female circumcision you go right ahead and tell them to start their own thread.

you've got a big old case of projection there bub :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
FreakinDJ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 07:30 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. The OP was a MAN - Honey
and he even thought the Female circumcision had some very positive results

An Egyptian ex-gf of mine had been circumcised by having the clitoral hood removed (as an adult). Most women in Egypt get this done for hygienic reasons as much as anything - the clitoral hood secretes smegma in much the same way was the male foreskin does. It certainly didnt impair her in any way sexually, quite the opposite in fact.


Maybe you should try it - never know it could relieve all the pent up frustration you seem to be experiencing
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Scout Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. classic assholishness....
i need to have my clitoris cut to relieve pent up frustration?? :rofl: still angry 'cuz daddy let mommy cut your pee pee sweetums?

i was not discussing the pros and cons of either male or female circumcision.

it doesn't matter that the op was a man ... that's why i said (emphasis added this time) "every time people try to talk about women"

and why i said this: "some childish man (usually) has to come in the thread"


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shaayecanaan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-08-10 05:34 AM
Response to Reply #27
35. I think its fairly relevant that male circumcision is practised...
female prepucectomy (removal of the clitoral hood) is no more invasive than male circumcision and indeed probably less given the relative sizes of the tissues involved. I think its reasonable to discuss why one is considered legitimate and one not.

Having said that, my original point was made in good faith. I think that legalisation of prepucectomy for girls is probably best for the girls themselves, rather than risk them undergoing the procedure in a non-hospital environment. I dont think prohibition of either male or female prepucectomy is a realistic objective given the historical and cultural issues that pertain to both.

i was not discussing the pros and cons of either male or female circumcision.

Well, thats rather the intention of the thread. Perhaps you'd like to venture your opinion.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-05-11 11:51 PM
Response to Reply #23
54. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Jax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-26-10 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #22
47. The forum is called CHOICE genius
you can't make up this kind of misogynist stupid.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ismnotwasm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-08-10 10:50 PM
Response to Reply #21
36. I think it's a lack of knowledge about anatomy
The clitoris is not in any way analogous to the foreskin of the penis, but I've never seen a FGM thread yet where someone seems to think that it is. Nor is the practice of FGM analogous to male circumcision for that matter. It might seem so if one doesn't understand the difference between female and male genitalia or bother to learn that difference.

I'm thinking of the Labor and delivery nurses who watch young mothers rip apart and bleed, or have chronic infections revolving around childbirth if not the practice itself or any practitioner that deal with fistulas and abscesses and prolapses from FGM-- all horror stories, stories that are happening as I type this.





Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shaayecanaan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-09-10 01:26 AM
Response to Reply #36
37. No one is advocating removal of any part of the clitoris
The clitoral hood *is* essentially the same piece of tissue as the male foreskin. Depending on the gender of the foetus, that piece of tissue either becomes a clitoral hood or a male prepuce. Indeed in the case of an intersexual person or a female exposed to high levels of androgens the clitoral hood and clitoris will grow to more explicitly resemble a penis and foreskin.

I think we can all agree that radical female circumcision (which causes the fistulae to which you refer) is abhorrent and should under no circumstances be tolerated. But again, no one here is advocating any tolerance of type-3 FGM.

And as far as I can tell, the only genital ignorance witnessed in this thread seems to have been exhibited by women who were unaware that the glans of the penis is joined to the foreskin at birth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ismnotwasm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-10 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #37
38. Not my take on it.
What women are saying is the male and female circumcision aren't the same thing at all. To bring male circumcision up in a discussion of FGM is disingenuous. At best.

And, no the clitoral hood is not the 'same piece of tissue.' The clitoris is much smaller small and far more packed with nerves than the penis, the hood protecting it while allowing enough exposure for sexual pleasure.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shaayecanaan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-10 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #38
39. I think you're being disingenuous, to be honest...
One can be in favour of male circumcision without favouring male genital mutilation (such as sub-incision). Equally, one can be in favour of female circumcision without approving of female genital mutilation. I think its dishonest to try and conflate those positions as you attempted to do in your earlier post.

And please don't start sentences off with "what women are saying". You're no more entitled to speak on behalf of women than I am on behalf of men. As you can see from this thread there are a number of women who are inclined to disagree with you.

"The clitoris is much smaller small and far more packed with nerves than the penis."

Well, the glans/frenulum of the penis and clitoris have about the same amount of nerve endings, so the nerves of the clitoris are going to be more tightly packed as a consequence of its being smaller. On the other hand, the foreskin is obviously larger so the amount of nerve endings it encompasses would be roughly the same as the clitoral hood, on balance. Of course, whether circumcision causes loss of sensation is quite contested - certainly as yet there isn't clear evidence to that effect.

But more broadly - obviously, if you object to cutting the clitoral hood because it protects the nerves of the clitoris, you're going to have to object to cutting the foreskin because it protects the nerves of the penis. I don't think the relative density of nerve endings of the clitoris and penis is a very persuasive argument in terms of whether cutting off bits of genitalia is right or wrong.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Crunchy Frog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-10 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #38
40. IMO, the issue is child genital cutting
and I don't believe that is should be segregated by gender. I think that the degree of damage or severity of a particular procedure regardless of gender should be the focus.

I'm not aware of any histological studies that have been done on the clitoral hood. I do know that some adult women choose to have it surgically removed and believe it to improve their sexual sensation. The clitoral hood is also nicked or partially removed in the majority of women in Indonesia and Malaysia, and it does not apparently have a major impact on their sensitivity.

There have been some good histolgogical and sensory studies done on the male foreskin that have shown that its inner layer contains the highest concentration and largest numbers of nerve ending of the entire penis.

It's not certain, but it's entirely possible, that male circumcision removes more nerve endings and sensitivity than a comparable operation on women.

I am a woman but since I'm the mother of two sons I feel that I have some stake in the issue of male genital cutting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Jax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-26-10 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #37
48. Thanks, you are transparent. This is the CHOICE forum
You are looking for the 'misogynists are us' forums.

Pathetically transparent bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shaayecanaan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-26-10 09:47 PM
Response to Reply #48
49. Actually I am looking for the hypocritical white racists forum.
Can't find that one either. You'd think they'd get a crowd there.

Ive tried looking for the limerick forum. Can't find that one either. If I did I'd post the following:-

There was a young lady named Alice
Who peed in a Catholic chalice.
The Padre agreed
Twas done out of need,
And not out of Protestant malice.

But there isn't, so I won't.

I like purple polka dots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 08:31 PM
Response to Original message
26. about smegma, use a washcloth or simply wash in the shower or bath.
seriously, it isn't that difficult or that "nasty" of a substance. Rather like ear wax, it serves a purpose but unlike ear wax is easy to remove in shower or bath. You don't need to cut off bits to make it not exist.

How about cutting off the ends of toes so you don't have to deal with toenails?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Crunchy Frog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 09:38 PM
Response to Reply #26
33. TMI, but we girls get a similar substance that builds up between our folds.
At least I do. I get pretty damn ripe down there if I don't wash for a couple of days. TMI, I know. :blush: I'm not contemplating going through labiaplasty either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 11:14 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. By the way, I'm female, realize rereading my post I didn't make that clear
wash cloth, give a rub in the shower or bath. If I don't wash my armpits every couple days, or brush my teeth, they get buildup also. Maybe I should pull all me teeth? Not sure what to do about the pits though.

Simply hygiene with soap and water does wonders. No need to cut off bits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Crunchy Frog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-07-10 09:15 PM
Response to Original message
29. It's not inconsistent, given that our culture pretty thoroughly endorses
much more severe genital cutting for male children, largely for cultural reasons. That said, I think it is horrible, as I think any non-consensual, non-therapeutic genital cutting is horrible.

Perhaps this statement will help some people in this country examine a bit more critically some of our own cultural baggage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
VermeerLives Donating Member (287 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-08-10 06:55 PM
Response to Original message
41. The AAP has reversed its recommendation on this
This came out several weeks ago, and the AAP back away from this recommendation, thankfully. In the countries where genital mutilation (and that's what it is) is performed on females, they don't have a choice. I seriously doubt it's performed for "hygienic reasons."
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shaayecanaan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jun-09-10 09:03 PM
Response to Reply #41
43. Generally the boys don't have a choice, either (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Safya Donating Member (17 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jun-08-10 08:47 PM
Response to Original message
42. No. They have to prevent this stupid unfair act
They molest girls.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shaayecanaan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jan-13-11 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #42
52. And we molest boys, right? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
uppityperson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jan-14-11 03:15 PM
Response to Reply #52
53. He's dead, Jim.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 04:51 PM
Response to Original message
50. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-11 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
56. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
shaayecanaan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-06-11 10:41 PM
Response to Reply #56
57. Well, most American plastic surgeons perform labiectomies (designer vaginas)
so female genital cutting is indeed commonplace in the United States, as well as most other Western countries these days. However, like many other things, it is something that only seems to generate moral panic when Muslims do it.

Anyway, to get back to your question, Egypt is the birthplace of circumcision (both male and female), so its practice is very deeply ingrained there. Both Muslims and Coptic Christians circumcise their children, both male and female.

Wealthy Egyptians, including most expatriate Egyptians, tend to go to upscale private hospitals to have the procedure done. When done in this setting, the procedure is predictable and safe, the hospitals either remove just the top of the clitoral hood, or the entire fold of skin, but not the clitoris.

Ordinary Egyptians either get the local barber or doctor to do the procedure. This is not safe, nor predictable - however since circumcision is illegal it has had the tendency of driving circumcision underground.

Personally, I think it would be much more preferable to have these kinds of procedures done in hospitals, but I am in the minority it seems. It appears that most of the posters here are quite prepared to sacrifice the welfare of women at the altar of high principle rather than consider what might actually be in their best interests.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
The Liberal Ohioan Donating Member (4 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-07-11 01:14 PM
Response to Original message
58. Yep. I'm disgusted.
Is "nick" the new cool name for mutilation?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Runework Donating Member (141 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-23-11 04:14 AM
Response to Original message
59. maybe I'm culturally insensitive
but this sounds sick to me. another case of bending over backwards for religious bs


and I want my own foreskin back
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Crunchy Frog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Mar-30-11 11:02 PM
Response to Reply #59
60. If it were up to me, there would be equal rights for both genders
in that department. It seems hypocritical to me for the law to differentiate between genders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Sadena Meti Donating Member (332 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-02-11 12:14 PM
Response to Original message
63. This is way off topic but interesting...
There is a body-mod (body modification) procedure which involves surgically retracing / removing the clitoral hood to expose more of the clitoris, and thus drastically increase (so those who have had it say) sexual pleasure.


Medically it is on par with trepanning or extreme piercing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
shaayecanaan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-02-11 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #63
64. Indeed, some doctors do quite a significant trade in this kind of surgery...
like this chap for instance:-

http://www.labiaplastycenters.com/clitoral_reducation.h...

I don't have a problem with this personally. Its a woman's body and her right to decide, after all.

Other people here, on the other hand...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Oct 24th 2014, 06:10 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Choice Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC