Female circumcision a problem in the UK

[lazur]

I don't get why this is called circumcision. If male circumcision was conducted in the same grotesque manner, it'd be the equivelant of a male having half his penis lopped off.

This isn't circumcision - this is female castration and nothing short of it. Those who force girls/women to do this should be taken out back and shot in the head and then shoved under a bulldozer.

 

[Dark Carnage]

Wouldn't castration technically involve a woman having her ovaries removed?

I get what you're saying and agree with you, but even though it's much more barbaric than it's Male counterpart, it's still a circumcision.

 

[zanos]

Read. Just read the damned article. It's not hard.

Male circumcision is not meant to curb sexual desire or sexual sensation or inflict pain. Female circumcision is. Christ. I wish people would just learn to...read.

Yes I also wish ppl would learn to read. Do you realize how long male circumcision has been around? Why do you think the church invented it?

 

[Carcharodon]

Yes I also wish ppl would learn to read. Do you realize how long male circumcision has been around? Why do you think the church invented it?

Excuse me? You said the intent was the same. Now, I don't know about your penis (...assuming you're a guy. ), but mine is pain-free and can still feel sensation. If the intent were the same, I'd be in constant pain and wouldn't feel any pleasure from sexual intercourse.

You did nothing to further your point with the last post...and seem to have furthered mine. Comprehension FTW!

 

[CyberFaust]

Excuse me? You said the intent was the same. Now, I don't know about your penis (...assuming you're a guy. ), but mine is pain-free and can still feel sensation. If the intent were the same, I'd be in constant pain and wouldn't feel any pleasure from sexual intercourse.

You did nothing to further your point with the last post...and seem to have furthered mine. Comprehension FTW!

sooo, your point is that any sort of medical intervention you don't NEED and don't consent to is OK as long as it doesn't hurt constantly and doesn't create that much damage?

Just to be clear, i can rip off one of your balls and you will still be sexually active and after a time it won't hurt. So by your definition that would be acceptible, right?

 

[Carcharodon]

sooo, your point is that any sort of medical intervention you don't NEED and don't consent to is OK as long as it doesn't hurt constantly and doesn't create that much damage?

Just to be clear, i can rip off one of your balls and you will still be sexually active and after a time it won't hurt. So by your definition that would be acceptible, right?

I've acknowledged my double-standard. I have no problems with it. Sorry if you do. I still think female circumcision is a much worse practice.

You can deal with smegma if you'd like. It stinks.

Oh, one more thing: ripping out one of my testicles wouldn't really impede my sex-life and would have no lasting effects, whereas female circumcision does. So go for it.

 

[Kritish]

How about we just stop letting in immigrants from areas where that’s practiced?

 

[Carcharodon]

How about we just stop letting in immigrants from areas where that’s practiced?

I don't like the practice at all, but...that's a bit extreme.

 

[Kritish]

I actually honestly don't have a problem with that.

I'm in by far in no position to judge the practices of other cultures, especially when ultimately none of their practices affect me.

That’s cute, so as long as it’s part of a culture you can murder, mutilate, rape and cannibalize as much as you want .
They can practice their circumcison as much as they want...in Africa.

 

[lazur]

I can't even believe anyone would compare male circumcision and female 'circumcision' (brutal mutilation) as the same thing.

 

[Kritish]

I don't like the practice at all, but...that's a bit extreme.

I’m just saying, female circumcision wouldn’t be a problem if that happened.

*waits to be called racist by ignorant people*

 

[Carcharodon]

I can't even believe anyone would compare male circumcision and female 'circumcision' (brutal mutilation) as the same thing.

I agree, but I totally understand their point: ethically, they think it's merely a question of will and consent.

I think it goes beyond that. When the entire point of a procedure is to induce harm or to reduce or eliminate something as basically fundamental to human nature as sexual pleasure, it separates itself from other, superficial, "mutilations" (and I use that term loosely).

 

[Kritish]

Male circumcision does reduce sensitivity in the penis, not at the same level it does to women though.

 

[lazur]

I agree, but I totally understand their point: ethically, they think it's merely a question of will and consent.

I think it goes beyond that. When the entire point of a procedure is to induce harm or to reduce or eliminate something as basically fundamental to human nature as sexual pleasure, it separates itself from other, superficial, "mutilations" (and I use that term loosely).

Then by your understanding, it would be completely okay for doctors to not only 'circumcize' boys, but to also completely remove the strip of skin that runs along the base of the penis, thus reducing sensitivity and pleasure so significantly that it would make the act of having sex for pleasure completely pointless.

That's the only way the two could be compared.

 

[Carcharodon]

Male circumcision does reduce sensitivity in the penis, not at the same level it does to women though.

*Bangs his penis against the bedpost*

...damn.

 

[Carcharodon]

Then by your understanding, it would be completely okay for doctors to not only 'circumcize' boys, but to also completely remove the strip of skin that runs along the base of the penis, thus reducing sensitivity and pleasure so significantly that it would make the act of having sex for pleasure completely pointless.

That's the only way the two could be compared.

...did you even read the goddamned post? The two can't truly be compared.

I agreed with you. Once again, I wish more people would actually read the damn posts before responding. Christ!

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Pretty sick stuff.

 

[comicgirl]

Then by your understanding, it would be completely okay for doctors to not only 'circumcize' boys, but to also completely remove the strip of skin that runs along the base of the penis, thus reducing sensitivity and pleasure so significantly that it would make the act of having sex for pleasure completely pointless.

That's the only way the two could be compared.

You just want to talk about your #$%#$%

 

[kainedamo]

So, are wel all agreed?

Female circumcision is ****ing awful. Male circumcision isn't as bad, but is still wrong.

 

[Kritish]

So, are wel all agreed?

Female circumcision is ****ing awful. Male circumcision isn't as bad, but is still wrong.

I blame the Jews...

 

[ShadowBoxing]

I blame the Jews...

Funny story...he is jewish.

 

[Holly]

this should be in the Soul Glo thread

 

[Kritish]

Funny story...he is jewish.

I know, that's what's so funny about him. t:

 

[ShadowBoxing]

I know, that's what's so funny about him. t:

Yeah Jews...Jews are so funny . I blame them for being so funny.

 

[zanos]

Excuse me? You said the intent was the same. Now, I don't know about your penis (...assuming you're a guy. ), but mine is pain-free and can still feel sensation. If the intent were the same, I'd be in constant pain and wouldn't feel any pleasure from sexual intercourse.

You did nothing to further your point with the last post...and seem to have furthered mine. Comprehension FTW!

Intent is the same, to curb sexual desire. What results from the surgery is irrelevant.