Is female circumcision similar to male circumcision?
You know that female circumcision is deemed very wrong, why isn't male circumcision also seen as bad?
Original post by cheeriosarenice
You know that female circumcision is deemed very wrong, why isn't male circumcision also seen as bad?
Female circumcision or female genital mutilation as it's often referred to can involve the removal of all of the external genitalia and the sewing up of the vagina to only leave a small hole (for urine and menstrual fluid) that can be ripped apart when her husband consummates their marriage (there are different grades of severity depending on what's removed). As it's an illegal practice, quite often it's done abroad or in unsanitary conditions, sometimes a broken bottle is used as a scalpel to cut off the clitoris and other external parts.
Male circumcision on the other hand, is done for a few clinically indicated reasons such as phimosis, it's carried out in a clinical environment using surgical instruments. I personally don't agree with it being done for religious reasons to infants who cannot make the decision themselves. Female circumcision by comparison has no clinical use at all, if you were to have a surgical procedure that was the same on men then the removal of the glans of the penis would be a better comparison between the two.
(edited 9 years ago)
Circumcision, for both males and females, isn't a single distinct procedure for each gender. There are different types
This video illustrates the different types of circumcision.
This video illustrates the different types of circumcision.
(edited 9 years ago)
FGM is seen and is a terrible thing,a crime but male circumcision,assualt on little baby boys who cannot consent, is legal and cannot be criticised for fear of upsetting cultural and religious groups. I would make it a crime to assault young baby boys in this way unless for genuine certified medical reasons,, and by this, i dont mean an Asian or Jewish doctor faking the paperwork and taking a cash bung in his back street surgery to circumvent UK law.
Original post by Limpopo
FGM is seen and is a terrible thing,a crime but male circumcision,assualt on little baby boys who cannot consent, is legal and cannot be criticised for fear of upsetting cultural and religious groups. I would make it a crime to assault young baby boys in this way unless for genuine certified medical reasons,, and by this, i dont mean an Asian or Jewish doctor faking the paperwork and taking a cash bung in his back street surgery to circumvent UK law.
Its not that simple
Seriously, have a look at the video above. Some female circumcision is only pricking or piercing. How is that really worse than removing the foreskin?
The line should be drawn depending on severity, not necessarily between male and female.
Personally, I think any circumcison not done for medical purposes should be wrong to do on anyone not old enough to decide for themselves
Original post by Kabloomybuzz
Its not that simple
Seriously, have a look at the video above. Some female circumcision is only pricking or piercing. How is that really worse than removing the foreskin?
The line should be drawn depending on severity, not necessarily between male and female.
Personally, I think any circumcison not done for medical purposes should be wrong to do on anyone not old enough to decide for themselves
Seriously, have a look at the video above. Some female circumcision is only pricking or piercing. How is that really worse than removing the foreskin?
The line should be drawn depending on severity, not necessarily between male and female.
Personally, I think any circumcison not done for medical purposes should be wrong to do on anyone not old enough to decide for themselves
Does female circumcision remove all sexual pleasure?
I don't think the male one does.
Original post by cheeriosarenice
Does female circumcision remove all sexual pleasure?
I don't think the male one does.
I don't think the male one does.
Some forms do, but not all, again have a look at the video.
Its not about whether its performed on a male or female, its about what the procedure itself entails,
The most severe form of male circumcision removes all of the foreskin and the scrotum
The most severe form of female circumcison removes the clitoris, and labia majora and minora.
The least severe form of male circumcison removed part of the foreskin
The least severe form of female circumcison involves pricking or piercing the skin.
Original post by Kabloomybuzz
Some forms do, but not all, again have a look at the video.
Its not about whether its performed on a male or female, its about what the procedure itself entails,
The most severe form of male circumcision removes all of the foreskin and the scrotum
The most severe form of female circumcison removes the clitoris, and labia majora and minora.
The least severe form of male circumcison removed part of the foreskin
The least severe form of female circumcison involves pricking or piercing the skin.
Its not about whether its performed on a male or female, its about what the procedure itself entails,
The most severe form of male circumcision removes all of the foreskin and the scrotum
The most severe form of female circumcison removes the clitoris, and labia majora and minora.
The least severe form of male circumcison removed part of the foreskin
The least severe form of female circumcison involves pricking or piercing the skin.
The video's not working for me.
But I mean, the least severe male circumcision is not to reduce sexual pleause, whereas the female one 100% is.
Original post by cheeriosarenice
The video's not working for me.
But I mean, the least severe male circumcision is not to reduce sexual pleause, whereas the female one 100% is.
But I mean, the least severe male circumcision is not to reduce sexual pleause, whereas the female one 100% is.
Direct link to video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98f3IavuEgQ
How is a tiny prick or piercing to the skin in the least severe case, going to reduce sexual pleasure?
Also, male circumcison often DOES reduce sexual pleasure, The adult foreskin contains 20,000-70,000 nerve endings and makes up about half the skin on the penis. You take away those nerve endings, of course you're going to have a reduction to sexual pleasure.
This is the point: in all cases, its genital mutilation in my opinion, and unless there is a valid medical reason, it shouldn't be done to anyone not old enough to decide. But the difference isn't as simple as a male/female split. There are several different circumcison procedures, most of which do affect sexual pleasure to some degree, but when you look at the facts, the least severe form of female circumcision does not affect sexual pleasure.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Kabloomybuzz
How is a tiny prick or piercing to the skin in the least severe case, going to reduce sexual pleasure?
Also, male circumcison often DOES reduce sexual pleasure, The adult foreskin contains 20,000-70,000 nerve endings and makes up about half the skin on the penis. You take away those nerve endings, of course you're going to have a reduction to sexual pleasure.
This is the point: in all cases, its genital mutilation in my opinion, and unless there is a valid medical reason, it shouldn't be done to anyone not old enough to decide. But the difference isn't as simple as a male/female split. There are several different circumcison procedures, most of which do affect sexual pleasure to some degree, but when you look at the facts, the least severe form of female circumcision does not affect sexual pleasure.
Also, male circumcison often DOES reduce sexual pleasure, The adult foreskin contains 20,000-70,000 nerve endings and makes up about half the skin on the penis. You take away those nerve endings, of course you're going to have a reduction to sexual pleasure.
This is the point: in all cases, its genital mutilation in my opinion, and unless there is a valid medical reason, it shouldn't be done to anyone not old enough to decide. But the difference isn't as simple as a male/female split. There are several different circumcison procedures, most of which do affect sexual pleasure to some degree, but when you look at the facts, the least severe form of female circumcision does not affect sexual pleasure.
But what is the point of the least severe female circumcision?
With male circumcision, it can be for medical reasons - such as a tight forskin etc. Cant affect sexual pleasure to much as most porn stars are circumsised.
Original post by cheeriosarenice
But what is the point of the least severe female circumcision?
With male circumcision, it can be for medical reasons - such as a tight forskin etc. Cant affect sexual pleasure to much as most porn stars are circumsised.
With male circumcision, it can be for medical reasons - such as a tight forskin etc. Cant affect sexual pleasure to much as most porn stars are circumsised.
Aesthetics/culture. Most circumcisions - male or female, are for this purpose.
Of course, if as a last resort in males, a circumcision is medically needed, no issue.
In all other cases, it is mutilation, and if you know that circumcison isn't one blanket procedure for males and one blanket procedure for males, you understand that the line shouldn't really be between male and female, it should be a scale of most to least severe.
Vid should be working now btw
If female circumcision truly was an equivalent to male circumcision, then all that would involve would be removing the foreskin of the clitoris.
The clitoris is aesthetically very similar looking to a penis only, of course, a lot smaller. The foreskin is commonly called the ''hood'', but serves the same function -- to cover the glans and to provide pleasure when moved up and down the clitoral head.
In reality, female circumcision is not just removal of the foreskin, but amputation of the clitoris -- the equivalent of removing a penis. So, it's horrifyingly cruel.
The clitoris is aesthetically very similar looking to a penis only, of course, a lot smaller. The foreskin is commonly called the ''hood'', but serves the same function -- to cover the glans and to provide pleasure when moved up and down the clitoral head.
In reality, female circumcision is not just removal of the foreskin, but amputation of the clitoris -- the equivalent of removing a penis. So, it's horrifyingly cruel.
Original post by Anonymous
If female circumcision truly was an equivalent to male circumcision, then all that would involve would be removing the foreskin of the clitoris.
The clitoris is aesthetically very similar looking to a penis only, of course, a lot smaller. The foreskin is commonly called the ''hood'', but serves the same function -- to cover the glans and to provide pleasure when moved up and down the clitoral head.
In reality, female circumcision is not just removal of the foreskin, but amputation of the clitoris -- the equivalent of removing a penis. So, it's horrifyingly cruel.
The clitoris is aesthetically very similar looking to a penis only, of course, a lot smaller. The foreskin is commonly called the ''hood'', but serves the same function -- to cover the glans and to provide pleasure when moved up and down the clitoral head.
In reality, female circumcision is not just removal of the foreskin, but amputation of the clitoris -- the equivalent of removing a penis. So, it's horrifyingly cruel.
See above
Circumcision is not a single blanket procedure for either sex, there are different forms and severities. Some much less and much more severe than you mention here.
Original post by cheeriosarenice
You know that female circumcision is deemed very wrong, why isn't male circumcision also seen as bad?
on a man its the fore skin cut off , this makes it cleaner for the woman and is done some times because it wont go over the helmet too tight
butt a woman has the clit cut off to stop her having a **** ! so you work it out ! any way what god would want that cut off when he put it there for her to have a good time 
Actually FGM is an extremely cruel and painful experience for girls to go through.
I do not agree with male circumcision for any reason other than medical reasons where it's necessary.
FGM has different types like people have said but they are all pretty severe, hence the fact it's illegal. People have died from unclean procedures and infection because it's usually done by elderly women of the community, with no proper medial training.
FGM is purely for control reasons. To stop women from having sex and orgasms in particular. Then when they are married their husband can painfully open up the sewing as someone described earlier so they can have children.
It's not really comparable in my opinion.
Posted from TSR Mobile
I do not agree with male circumcision for any reason other than medical reasons where it's necessary.
FGM has different types like people have said but they are all pretty severe, hence the fact it's illegal. People have died from unclean procedures and infection because it's usually done by elderly women of the community, with no proper medial training.
FGM is purely for control reasons. To stop women from having sex and orgasms in particular. Then when they are married their husband can painfully open up the sewing as someone described earlier so they can have children.
It's not really comparable in my opinion.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Prefer circumcised or not circumcised?
- Sex and masturbation after adult cirumcision
- Circumcision
- Boyfriend needs circumcision
- Circumcision
- I have anxiety about getting circumcision
- Advice for tight foreskin sufferers (phimosis)
- Can you have sex without pulling back the foreskin?
- Revision circumcision
- Cannot ejaculate during sex
- My boyfriend's ****
- girls prefer circumcised or uncircumcised man?
- Frenulectomy
- Circumcision or not
- Uncircumcised: How do you masturbate
- Bleeding a week after circumcision
- Circumcision Fetish
- I think I have a frenulum breve?
- Phimosis/frenulum breve - sex with condom possible?
- Penis head sensitive to touch when erect
