First Female Genital Mutilation Charges In UK

[Jim K Global Moderator]

So it's okay for parents and doctors to inflict pain on an infant because "It would hurt too much to have done as an adult" ?

 

 

It does affect the head.  It can desensalize the head.  Your penis head is essentially just a giant calous.  Due to the head rubbing unprotected against boxers, breifs, pants, etc it becomes calloused.  Similar to if you walk everywhere with sandals.. your feet will callous.

 

 

There is no debate.. It's proven that it reduces the sensation and pleasure.  

 

 

 

Why are you glad it was done? What benefit has it given you? Aside from being fondled by a doctor when you were an infant and your parents making a choice on how your genitals should be for the rest of your life.  Not that either of those are beneficial.

 

 

Circumcision is circumcision sorry bud.

 

 

This I agree on.. with the addition of male genital mutilation.

 

Just saying you should be looking at the girl and not the dick.

 

One of the dumbest comments in this thread.  

 

You obviously think that female genital mutilation is the same as male circumcision...and I'm really not going to try and convince you that you're wrong.  Would be like trying to convince someone the world is round who is dead-sett that it is flat. 

[firey]

One of the dumbest comments in this thread.  

 

You obviously think that female genital mutilation is the same as male circumcision...and I'm really not going to try and convince you that you're wrong.  Would be like trying to convince someone the world is round who is dead-sett that it is flat. 

 

It's not the same.. but it's still genital mutilation.  Being hit by a car and breaking a leg, and being hit by a car and breaking your spine is still being hit by a car.

[McKay]

I'm sure you all want to know this, but i'm not circumcised :p

 

I totally agree that the removal of a human body part before that person can make the choice themselves, because the religion says so is ridiculous. Also, what do they play with when they're on the phone? :p

 

So ruling about botched "surgeries" done horribly for both genders, do you find it off its "barbaric" to circumcise a girl aged under 18, but completely fine and legal to circumcise a girl when she hits 18 at her request? But it's perfectly fine to circumcise a boy at any age, even when he's far too young to consent? This is the situation I mean when I talk about female circumcision, done in hospitals by professionals.

 

 

One of the dumbest comments in this thread.  

 

You obviously think that female genital mutilation is the same as male circumcision...and I'm really not going to try and convince you that you're wrong.  Would be like trying to convince someone the world is round who is dead-sett that it is flat. 

 

Yes he does, and so do I. There are many people that believe so too, and believe that both is "genital mutilation".  Why not offer a counter argument bout why it's worse other than just saying "your comment is dumb"

[HawkMan]

So in God's perfectness the bible reads

"And so God created man imperfect, so that other men could cut off parts of his body and make him perfect"

 

Well I'm no expert on the bible, but I'm pretty sure that's not in there.

 

male circumcision may not have quite as terrible damage as female, but it's still mutilation by a defenceless child who didn't get an option to choose. 

[McKay]

So in God's perfectness the bible reads

"And so God created man imperfect, so that other men could cut off parts of his body and make him perfect"

 

Well I'm no expert on the bible, but I'm pretty sure that's not in there.

 

male circumcision may not have quite as terrible damage as female, but it's still mutilation by a defenceless child who didn't get an option to choose. 

 

Christianity comes up the with Old Testament supporting circumcision, as part of what people had to do to atone for the original sin. When Jesus died on the cross it was so we could be forgiven from said sin, and no longer have to live by tonnes of stuff the old testament says, like no shellfish, no circumcision etc. Not that I'm a Christian, just remembering what I learnt in school from my Christian RE teacher raging at Christians still abiding by old testament rules, because in her eyes, following the old testament basically meant "Jesus dying on the cross for our sins wasn't good enough for me".

[firey]

Christianity comes up the with Old Testament supporting circumcision, as part of what people had to do to atone for the original sin. When Jesus died on the cross it was so we could be forgiven from said sin, and no longer have to live by tonnes of stuff the old testament says, like no shellfish, no circumcision etc. Not that I'm a Christian, just remembering what I learnt in school from my Christian RE teacher raging at Christians still abiding by old testament rules, because in her eyes, following the old testament basically meant "Jesus dying on the cross for our sins wasn't good enough for me".

 

From things I have read.. circumcision now is much more than circumcision biblically.  Previously the foreskin was simply slit (not removed) The skin would then heal back and the child would have nothing more than a scar but the foreskin would remain.

 

Another thing to remember.. the foreskin is FUSED to the glans of the penis, it naturally detaches after a few years.  So in order for the circumcision to occur, the foreskin must be separated (think of something akin to pulling a hangnail.. but actually pulling the skin off) from the glans.  Where it is then slit lengthways (so the tool can fit) where it is then crushed and cut off.  It's not a simple snip snip.

 

edit: Here is the stuff I read regarding my first point:  http://www.drmomma.org/2010/07/biblical-circumcision-information.html

[Turk.]

Female mutilation and male circumcision are different entities in terms of anatomy and functionality. Female mutilation morally is a punishment, anatomically dis functioning the clitoris and legally prohibited.

However, as for boys circumcision, morally irrelevant, functionally I am very happy with my circumcised duck, so is my partner, and legally free. It is easier hygienically better to keep it clean, (Im not saying uncircumcised ducks are not clean, just saying easier to keep it clean and dry ) :) Smegma in the foreskin is precancerous for cervical carcinoma of females. foreskin keeps smegma, there is no smegma problem with circumcised duckies.

All muslims/muslim born and most of Jewish and significant number of Christians have their boys circumcised. thus, This is a fragile and also religious subject.

Saying boys should not be circumcised is similar to saying everyone should eat pork in the similar religious sense, as theirs practise based on same/similar religious belief/roots.

[McKay]

 

Female mutilation and male circumcision are different entities in terms of anatomy and functionality. Female mutilation morally is a punishment, anatomically dis functioning the clitoris and legally prohibited.

However, as for boys circumcision, morally irrelevant, functionally I am very happy with my circumcised duck, so is my partner, and legally free. It is easier hygienically better to keep it clean, (Im not saying uncircumcised ducks are not clean, just saying easier to keep it clean and dry )  :) Smegma in the foreskin is precancerous for cervical carcinoma of females. foreskin keeps smegma, there is no smegma problem with circumcised duckies.

All muslims/muslim born and most of Jewish and significant number of Christians have their boys circumcised. thus, This is a fragile and also religious subject.

Saying boys should not be circumcised is similar to saying everyone should eat pork in the similar religious sense, as theirs practise based on same/similar religious belief/roots.

 

 

What Im saying is, it's perfectly legal for Women to go and have surgery once they hit 18 to have the outside skin around their genitals cut off. Yet it's illegal and "barbaric" to have this done on an underage girl without her consent. Yet its perfectly fine for boys of all ages to have the skin on the end of their penis cut off. Done for religious or non religious reasons. Even if its for religion I strongly disagree with it. Forcing such a big religious practice onto somebody who may never become part of that religion. I think it should be considered just as barbaric to perform that practice on underage boys as it is on underage girls.

[Turk.]

Boy circumcision is not barbaric, I was born as Muslim, never practised religion, even I am an atheist from 10 y/o, I am still happy with my duck circumcised, if it was not circumcised, I would have it circumcised later on, it is offensive and insulting by saying it is barbaric referring/implying to Muslims. All my -Christian- partners here were and now is very happy with my bare duck, I have inadvertently heard their confessions to their best girl friends several times. My partners in the mainland already knew it is circumcised. Women like circumcised ducks. Medically, smegma is precancerous.

This thread's boy circumcision part is going to be insulting and offensive for Muslims and Jewish and some Christians, boy circumcision is purely based on religious, though none of them is wrong.

[Ian S.]

So it's okay for parents and doctors to inflict pain on an infant because "It would hurt too much to have done as an adult" ?

Is it ok to let a kid die because you didn't want to hurt him/her by poking him/her with a needle containing a life-saving vaccine?

[McKay]

Boy circumcision is not barbaric, I was born as Muslim, never practised religion, even I am an atheist from 10 y/o, I am still happy with my duck circumcised, if it was not circumcised, I would have it circumcised later on, it is offensive and insulting by saying it is barbaric referring/implying to Muslims. All my -Christian- partners here were and now is very happy with my bare duck, I have inadvertently heard their confessions to their best girl friends several times. My partners in the mainland already knew it is circumcised. Women like circumcised ducks. Medically, smegma is precancerous.

This thread's boy circumcision part is going to be insulting and offensive for Muslims and Jewish and some Christians, boy circumcision is purely based on religious, though none of them is wrong.

 

Different Women like different ######. And why isn't it barbaric? The boy is strapped down against his will, and without anaesthetic has his foreskin sliced off.  Again I'm not talking about 3rd world countries doing it with rusty hacksaws when I mention it, Im asking why its barbaric, even if done in a hospital by a professional? It's fine for a boy to have his skin removed, why aren't Labiaplastys performed on girls at birth? 

 

 

Is it ok to let a kid die because you didn't want to hurt him/her by poking him/her with a needle containing a life-saving vaccine?

 

A vaccine is a discomfort. Being strapped down and having your foreskin sliced or lasered off must be agony. 

[The Evil Overlord]

Seriously stop allowing immigrants that practice Islam.

So many messed up issues come from them.

More developed nations enjoy sex and find it healthy and a fun activity so they cannot approve of genital mutilation.

... And how do you propose to do that without being branded a racist?

to be honest, if you're free to practise your beliefs, then so should the other person be

[firey]

Is it ok to let a kid die because you didn't want to hurt him/her by poking him/her with a needle containing a life-saving vaccine?

 

that's a whole other topic.. and there are plenty of things to say otherwise.. but either way..

[Praetor]

Seriously stop allowing immigrants that practice Islam.

So many messed up issues come from them.

More developed nations enjoy sex and find it healthy and a fun activity so they cannot approve of genital mutilation.

 

Actually that's quite offensive because one the biggest countries that do circumcision in a very active manner is the US.

And this has nothing to do with Islam; female genital mutilation exists only to remove from her the pleasure she might have, relegating her in a inferior level then man.

[McKay]

Seriously stop allowing immigrants that practice Islam.

So many messed up issues come from them.

More developed nations enjoy sex and find it healthy and a fun activity so they cannot approve of genital mutilation.

 

The Qu'ran doesn't support female circumcision. It just so happens that a majority of people doing it are Muslim.

[+Red King Subscriber²]

... And how do you propose to do that without being branded a racist?

to be honest, if you're free to practise your beliefs, then so should the other person be

Yes political correctness gets in the way.

So I should be free to practice mutilation? Beatings? Bombings? Etc?

Trying to accept toxic cultures / religious due to political correctness is like playing Russian roulette and calling yourself an intellectual.

[The Evil Overlord]

Yes political correctness gets in the way.

So I should be free to practice mutilation? Beatings? Bombings? Etc?

Trying to accept toxic cultures / religious due to political correctness is like playing Russian roulette and calling yourself an intellectual.

I didn't say you had to accept any toxic culture, but you have to concede what's right for one isn't necessarily right for everyone else

The whole bombing thing is for another thread, as Islam is a peace loving religion, just as Christianity is, (or any other faith for that matter)  And no I'm not a Muslim, I just don't like extremism no matter what form it appears in

[Praetor]

Yes political correctness gets in the way.

So I should be free to practice mutilation? Beatings? Bombings? Etc?

Trying to accept toxic cultures / religious due to political correctness is like playing Russian roulette and calling yourself an intellectual.

 

well i guess that if you lived in Jerusalem in 1099 then your opinion would be the same but for Christians; did all of them were like that?

 

Nope.

[FloatingFatMan]

Female mutilation and male circumcision are different entities in terms of anatomy and functionality. Female mutilation morally is a punishment, anatomically dis functioning the clitoris and legally prohibited.

However, as for boys circumcision, morally irrelevant, functionally I am very happy with my circumcised duck, so is my partner, and legally free. It is easier hygienically better to keep it clean, (Im not saying uncircumcised ducks are not clean, just saying easier to keep it clean and dry ) :) Smegma in the foreskin is precancerous for cervical carcinoma of females. foreskin keeps smegma, there is no smegma problem with circumcised duckies.

All muslims/muslim born and most of Jewish and significant number of Christians have their boys circumcised. thus, This is a fragile and also religious subject.

Saying boys should not be circumcised is similar to saying everyone should eat pork in the similar religious sense, as theirs practise based on same/similar religious belief/roots.

 

Religious nonsense should NEVER be allowed sway when it comes to mutilating an infant.

 

Also, duck? Say penis. It's what it is.

 

As for smegma, never heard of soap & water?

Boy circumcision is not barbaric, I was born as Muslim, never practised religion, even I am an atheist from 10 y/o, I am still happy with my duck circumcised, if it was not circumcised, I would have it circumcised later on, it is offensive and insulting by saying it is barbaric referring/implying to Muslims. All my -Christian- partners here were and now is very happy with my bare duck, I have inadvertently heard their confessions to their best girl friends several times. My partners in the mainland already knew it is circumcised. Women like circumcised ducks. Medically, smegma is precancerous.

This thread's boy circumcision part is going to be insulting and offensive for Muslims and Jewish and some Christians, boy circumcision is purely based on religious, though none of them is wrong.

 

Good, I'm glad you find it offensive. I have zero problem with being offensive to people who practice barbaric religious rituals on defenseless babies.

 

And smegma is not precancerous. Where the hell did you hear THAT nonsense?

... And how do you propose to do that without being branded a racist?

to be honest, if you're free to practise your beliefs, then so should the other person be

 

Everyone should be free to practice whatever they believe in except where doing so causes harm to others. Then it should be prohibited.

 

If you want to harm yourself, go for it. Quit harming others.

[Turk.]

Circumcision, and sacrifice an animal are not barbaric, they are part of religious practices, you are offending my religious culture, even if I am not practising, still my my culture. I will not respond these insults. I probably know a lot more than you when it comes to Medicine and Law :) though my knowledge is limited on M$, windows, and nearly zero on Apple, Mac. and its on this forum duck, perhaps ###### better :)

[FloatingFatMan]

Yes. Absolutely yes, I am offending your religious culture. I will offend ANY culture that brings suffering to the innocent, especially children and babies.  Your practices offend ME greatly, so I will return that offence in equal measure.

 

As for knowledge, who cares what you may or may not know? It's irrelevant to the discussion.

 

And you're the only person here calling it a duck.  Ducks are aquatic birds, not male sexual organs.  It's a penis; grow up a bit and use its proper name.

[Turk.]

that is why I don't like ignorant and arrogant western, that is why I do not like dominating invading imperialist west. BTW, I am more western than you, but definitely I am not pro-western at all. As I said, when it comes to Medicine and Law there is no one here can give me any advice. Good luck in your future ignorant and disrespectful life. yes it is dick, duck, ######.

[HawkMan]

Is it ok to let a kid die because you didn't want to hurt him/her by poking him/her with a needle containing a life-saving vaccine?

 

You mean like all the kids who die during circumcision ? like the two DOCTORS on trial in Norway, or where they sentenced already, because the baby died while they circumcised.

 

I think you'll find that more people die from circumcision than from not having the elective surgery that doesn't have any real effect. sure jewish doctors in america claim there's benefits. But there are no proven benefits. the only "proof" they have is rather dubious numbers from Africa about how circumcised males have less std based cancer and disease. the problem with these numbers is that they're dubious at best and even then, they don't prove causation. Mostly they just prove that the circumcised ones are more religious and less likely to rape all the random women with aids. 

 

In fact if they claims that non circumcisition le to all these diseases an cancers, europe would be overrun by then... guess what. we probably have better stats than America on those. 

[HawkMan]

Circumcision, and sacrifice an animal are not barbaric, they are part of religious practices, you are offending my religious culture, even if I am not practising, still my my culture. I will not respond these insults. I probably know a lot more than you when it comes to Medicine and Law :) though my knowledge is limited on M$, windows, and nearly zero on Apple, Mac. and its on this forum duck, perhaps ###### better :)

 

Vikings had a religion, some of it's traditions where barbaric... you can call outdated religious practices barbaric without being a racist or offensive. 

[FloatingFatMan]

that is why I don't like ignorant and arrogant western, that is why I do not like dominating invading imperialist west. BTW, I am more western than you, but definitely I am not pro-western at all. As I said, when it comes to Medicine and Law there is no one here can give me any advice. Good luck in your future ignorant and disrespectful life. yes it is dick, duck, ######.

 

More western than me? Bwahahahaha!!  Yeah.. Right.

 

Why is it ignorant or arrogant to despise barbaric practices?  To me, you're the one being ignorant and arrogant by presuming that your beliefs take precedence over mine. My beliefs don't cause me to bring harm to innocents.

 

And again, who gives a damn what you might think you know more of than I? It's completely irrelevant to the topic at hand.  You could be the worlds leading penis expert and your knowledge still wouldn't have any greater relevance to mine.  Besides which, IF you knew a damned thing about medicine as you appear to be claiming, you'd use the correct words.  That immediately disproves any claimed expertise.

 

By the way. This is a picture of a duck.

 

 

If you have one of these between your legs, I suggest you see a doctor, quickly. :p