Female Genital Mutilation?

**** knows.

Not in the UK it's not FGM is illegal in the UK, and it is also illegal to take someone from the UK to another country to perform FGM, it can carry a sentence of up to 14 years in prison.

**** knows.

Indeed!

Well millions of people seem to engage in male genital mutilation and there is hardly any outcry about that...

There are more important things in life than hedonism.

Ultimately, it is a traditional cultural practice. So long as someone who comes from one of these cultures gets a job works hard, is not a benefit scrounger and contributes to society, then whatever they do in their own home is up to them.

We are a moderate, tolerant country. This is the 21st Century,
where our capital city is now less than 50% white and the most tolerant
and diverse on earth, where gay marriage is not just accepted but
celebrated, and where our greatest Olympic hero (Mo Farah) is a black
Muslim man of Somali background.

We would upset the immigrant community if we start banning things.

And I doubt most right wingers care about what happens to Muslim women.

Mo Farah is not the greatest Olympic hero, in terms of British athletes, it would be Chris Hoy. If it needs to be banned (which I do not believe it does need to be), then I could care less about upsetting the immigrant population, I want facts, the physiological damage done. Generally, I would agree though, Islam is a ridiculously backward religion but I am in favour of leaving them to rot in their ignorance. In regards to FGM I am neutral and open to hearing both sides.

Though I completely and utterly disagree with male circumcision they are not comparable in terms of the damage done. It's like comparing a punch in the face to a stab wound, both are wrong but they are not comparable.

Though once again to make it clear, I DO NOT agree with MGM.

If it works for these cultural communities, maybe we should just let them get on with it?

Like FGM there are different types of MGM though, circumcision is probably comparable to type I or possibly type IV (definitely not type III though - I agree with you there), but there are more drastic forms of MGM such as sub-incision. Though both practices seem to stem from the same motive: the control of human sexuality.

Question.
Would you be cool with the ritual sacrafice of animals in streets?

If it works for these cultural communities? Tell me how dying of sepsis from a stupid barbaric procedure works? I see you also haven';t commented on my post that basically broke down what FGM is and the complications that can and most often do arise from it.

No, I do not want to see animals hurt.

You guys seem to be unaware of the law... FGM is very much illegal within the UK and taking someone from the UK to do it abroad as per the FGM Act 2003. The maximum sentence for taking part in FGM is 14 years. I'm sure others will put forward the reasons for this better than me, I just wanted to clarify the legal position.

And for the record I'm against FGM and MGM.

Edit: and "could care less" means you do actually care. The phrase you're looking for is "couldn't care less".

But you're okay for girls to be hurt and mutilated?

I fail to see how they are that different. I have heard people say that FGM denies women sexual pleasure but that is not really a good argument for banning it. There are more important things in life than hedonism.

I think it actually is a very good argument against it, you may not find a healthy sex life important or pleasure from sex important but many people do and FGM takes that choice away from the people affected.

FGM along with completely ruining a woman's ability to enjoy sex also:

-means the removal of all the outer genitalia (clitoris and labia) this can cause serious infections and even sepsis as well as significant pain.
- sometimes the entrance to the vagina is narrowed by repositions and cutting into the labia, this would make sex extremely painful, could also cause serious infections and sepsis.
-victims are also sometimes cut and burned in the vaginal area
- the vagina will also sometimes literally be sewn shut and the stitches will then be ripped open on the wedding night by the husband, a type of pain I cannot even imagine

complications include:
-shock
-infections including tetanus, HIV, hepatitis b and c
-sepsis
- the woman is sometime also left unable to urinate
damage to the urethra and bowel can also occur and

- long term chronic infections to the vaginal urinary area
-abnormal periods
-possible kidney damage and failure
-infertility
-psychological damage
-flashbacks to the procedure (which often done when the woman is a child around 15)
-the need for surgery to open the vagina further during childbirth or sex as it is too damaged
-cysts and scar tissue

please tell me again how FGM is anything like MGM

The difference is that the ritualistic murder of animals is horrific and intended purely to devalue the life of an animal and reduce it to an object. Anyone who would hurt an animal like that should be slowly and painfully executed.

Whereas with FGM it could be argued that it is an act of love, to make sure that the woman is able to find a suitor.

What I really want is an open debate, one side against, one side for. The reasons why they support or oppose it.

Whereas with FGM it could be argued that it is an act of love, to make sure that the woman is able to find a suitor.

Complications of MGM include:
- Bleeding
- Sepsis
- Fistula
- Meatal Stenosis
- Sexual Complications
- Psychological issues

But dont take my word for it, the British Journal of Surgery is a better source of information.

http://www.cirp.org/library/complications/williams-kapila/

Im not actually arguing that MGM is as bad as FGM. The way FGM is practiced would suggest it would lead to far more complications and problems. But the issue of MGM should not be trivialised because it isn't deemed to be 'as damaging' as FGM. Im sure for men who have suffered serious damage to their penis at a few days old due to a botched circumcision, and have to live their entire life that way, its a very serious issue.