If I had boys, there’s no way I would agree to them being circumcised at all, but you need to know that FGM is much, much worse than circumcision. Most circumcised men can perform happily sexually, but need lube to masturbate. Not so women who have endured FGM.
There are 4 main types of FGM:
type 1 (clitoridectomy) – removing part or all of the clitoris
This is the equivalent of removing the glans or dickhead. Its purpose is to remove pleasure from sex.
type 2 (excision) – removing part or all of the clitoris and the inner labia (the lips that surround the vagina), with or without removal of the labia majora (the larger outer lips)
Includes 1
type 3 (infibulation) – narrowing the vaginal opening by creating a seal, formed by cutting and repositioning the labia
This makes sex very painful. There isn’t a deliberate equivalent for men, but men with severe phimosis also experience pain. Phimosis is usually treatable without surgery, and even after surgery (circumcision) sex is pleasurable. Paraphimosis is an urgent medical emergency where the foreskin is trapped behind the glans, cutting off blood supply, but no one is doing phimosis or paraphimosis to people deliberately.
other harmful procedures to the female genitals, including pricking, piercing, cutting, scraping or burning the area
I.e. botched, deliberately or accidentally.
So…
The normal outcome of circumcision, “I wish wanking were easier” isn’t the same as the normal outcome of FGM, “I wish sex wasn’t traumatisingly painful”.
Pretending that circumcision is as bad as, or equivalent to FGM, or even that they’re bad for the same reason, REALLY undermines your case to the point of making you look heartless or ill-informed.
I had actually researched both types of genital mutilation and “corrective” mutilation of intersex folks; and totally agree with what you’re saying. I didn’t mean to justify FGM in any capacity. I can’t speak to the effects of MGM or FGM exactly, but I find the idea of mutilating the genitals of someone unable to consent for aesthetic or “religious” reasons absolutely vile. I wasn’t trying to pick favorites here. I would not want FGM to be legal, even if MGM remained legal; or vise-versa.
If I had boys, there’s no way I would agree to them being circumcised at all, but you need to know that FGM is much, much worse than circumcision. Most circumcised men can perform happily sexually, but need lube to masturbate. Not so women who have endured FGM.
This is the equivalent of removing the glans or dickhead. Its purpose is to remove pleasure from sex.
Includes 1
This makes sex very painful. There isn’t a deliberate equivalent for men, but men with severe phimosis also experience pain. Phimosis is usually treatable without surgery, and even after surgery (circumcision) sex is pleasurable. Paraphimosis is an urgent medical emergency where the foreskin is trapped behind the glans, cutting off blood supply, but no one is doing phimosis or paraphimosis to people deliberately.
I.e. botched, deliberately or accidentally.
So…
The normal outcome of circumcision, “I wish wanking were easier” isn’t the same as the normal outcome of FGM, “I wish sex wasn’t traumatisingly painful”.
Pretending that circumcision is as bad as, or equivalent to FGM, or even that they’re bad for the same reason, REALLY undermines your case to the point of making you look heartless or ill-informed.
I had actually researched both types of genital mutilation and “corrective” mutilation of intersex folks; and totally agree with what you’re saying. I didn’t mean to justify FGM in any capacity. I can’t speak to the effects of MGM or FGM exactly, but I find the idea of mutilating the genitals of someone unable to consent for aesthetic or “religious” reasons absolutely vile. I wasn’t trying to pick favorites here. I would not want FGM to be legal, even if MGM remained legal; or vise-versa.