American Academy of Pediatrics softens its stance on FGM

ZoZo wrote:

1. Hygiene: Teach your child how to fucking wash. Cleaning under a foreskin is quick and simple.

A long time ago (in Internet terms) on a board far far away (and now closed due to AIDS) I had some dude going on about how awful it was that his uncirc'd friend had to wash like all the time. Every time he went to the toilet. Every time they had gym and he got a little sweaty. I was like YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO WASH YOUR BITS AND PITS EVERY DAY. Methinks the friend wasn't exactly "washing" if you know what I mean.

Cyberwulf wrote:

A long time ago (in Internet terms) on a board far far away

USE THE FORESKIN - errr.... FORCE

Miss Prince wrote:

I am trying to figure out what about this conversation is pissing me off so badly, but I can't quite put my finger on it.

Perhaps because, like every other conversation started about female genital mutilation, it's suddenly completely devoted to talking about men and their penises?

Bamshalam wrote:

Miss Prince wrote:

I am trying to figure out what about this conversation is pissing me off so badly, but I can't quite put my finger on it.

Perhaps because, like every other conversation started about female genital mutilation, it's suddenly completely devoted to talking about men and their penises?

Well, let's get the topic back on-topic again. I'm fucking sick of arguing anyway. I do think that it's relevant, since I find it incredibly hypocritical (and frankly a bit racist/imperialist) for Americans who completely ignore our own past and current cultural history of genital cutting (on both sexes, occasionally) to try to tell people from other cultures that their practices are horrible barbaric works of Satan when we still do genital cutting of children that's likewise needless and personally violating.

AAP backs away from the "offering a ritual nick" shit.

^Actually the above is a pretty interesting article. I especially like the interview with the female doctor who was born in the Sudan and who works with parents who come from cultures that practice FGM - it offers some balance on the situation.

Bamshalam wrote:

Miss Prince wrote:

I am trying to figure out what about this conversation is pissing me off so badly, but I can't quite put my finger on it.

Perhaps because, like every other conversation started about female genital mutilation, it's suddenly completely devoted to talking about men and their penises?

Ah yes, that'd be it, thank you.

Miss Prince wrote:

Bamshalam wrote:

Miss Prince wrote:

I am trying to figure out what about this conversation is pissing me off so badly, but I can't quite put my finger on it.

Perhaps because, like every other conversation started about female genital mutilation, it's suddenly completely devoted to talking about men and their penises?

Ah yes, that'd be it, thank you.

Pretty much.

b... but what about the cismen

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

SirDixonDongs wrote:

b... but what about the cismen

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Thanks a lot. That picture just ruined my dinner.

trufax i drew a version of that pic with the goatmans balls danglin against becks forehead

Malganis wrote:

Bamshalam wrote:

Miss Prince wrote:

I am trying to figure out what about this conversation is pissing me off so badly, but I can't quite put my finger on it.

Perhaps because, like every other conversation started about female genital mutilation, it's suddenly completely devoted to talking about men and their penises?

Well, let's get the topic back on-topic again. I'm fucking sick of arguing anyway. I do think that it's relevant, since I find it incredibly hypocritical (and frankly a bit racist/imperialist) for Americans who completely ignore our own past and current cultural history of genital cutting (on both sexes, occasionally) to try to tell people from other cultures that their practices are horrible barbaric works of Satan when we still do genital cutting of children that's likewise needless and personally violating.

Oh for fuck's sake, did you read what Notanoni said? At all? Acting as if these two things are even remotely on the same plateau of severity is doing neither group any favors.

Malganis wrote:

AAP backs away from the "offering a ritual nick" shit.

^Actually the above is a pretty interesting article. I especially like the interview with the female doctor who was born in the Sudan and who works with parents who come from cultures that practice FGM - it offers some balance on the situation.

Awesome.

Bamshalam wrote:

Malganis wrote:

Well, let's get the topic back on-topic again. I'm fucking sick of arguing anyway. I do think that it's relevant, since I find it incredibly hypocritical (and frankly a bit racist/imperialist) for Americans who completely ignore our own past and current cultural history of genital cutting (on both sexes, occasionally) to try to tell people from other cultures that their practices are horrible barbaric works of Satan when we still do genital cutting of children that's likewise needless and personally violating.

Oh for fuck's sake, did you read what Notanoni said? At all? Acting as if these two things are even remotely on the same plateau of severity is doing neither group any favors.

Bam, I love you, you're cool and all, but I didn't say they were on the same level of severity. I said that it's hypocritical for one society that practices widespread, involuntary, cosmetic alteration of children's genitals for no damn good reason to point fingers at another society that practices widespread, involuntary, cosmetic alteration of children's genitals for no good reason.

No, it's NOT the same as far as what's altered or how, or in what conditions, or by who. It's not about, say, 20% or 30% of a person's erogenous tissue removed as opposed to say, 70% or 80% or whatever. It's not numbers-crunching.

If you look at it, as I do, as a violation of a person's basic right to bodily integrity - the idea that anyone of whatever gender should have the right to decide how or if to alter their own body, especially their genitals - then, yes, it IS hypocritical, and I'd like to see my country stop this senseless practice before we as a nation try to tell other people in other cultures what they should do.

TL;DR: we should clean up the shit in our own backyard before telling other people their yards stink to high heaven. Because yes, they do fuckin' stink. But ours is pretty damn bad as well.

Nihilist wrote:

Question: what if the child wanted surgery on their genitals to make them more in line with who they were, but the parents didn't allow that? Is that good sense, or is that abusive in your view? I actually want to know what you think say the issue was turned, that the child wants modification.

If that's what they want, then yeah. That's their choice.

Ideally, I think that they'd have to comprehend the possible complications of the surgery they wanted to have, and that ability comes with age and varies from child to child. (Note: I'm saying this because I don't know the age of said kid - are they in grade school or are they close to puberty, or teenagers, or what.) If they could understand that and knew that what they were doing was essentially permanent and there was no going back from it once it was done... they would be able to make that choice for themselves.

Nihilist wrote:

Question: what if the child wanted surgery on their genitals to make them more in line with who they were, but the parents didn't allow that? Is that good sense, or is that abusive in your view? I actually want to know what you think say the issue was turned, that the child wants modification.

See, I feel like somehow there's no good answer to that. Because (try as hard as you can not to take this the wrong way) that the child could grow out of it- the kid may want modification now, but may grow to embrace their gender. For some children, it *can* be a phase. I sort of had a phase like that. Obviously, though, I'm not genderqueer and most genderqueer/transgender/sexual/I cant get the damn terms straight do not grow out of it and would not want to. But a parent can't really know for sure, and they have to do what they see best. If it were me (and I guess i'm different from most parents) is that i wouldnt necessarily do it for my child because god forBID they regret it. Not because I want a normal kid. But if the child was older and was more in tune with themselves, then I would definitely consider it abuse because the surgery serves a purpose and not letting them have it I can only imagine would be devastating.

Somehow, and I know there will be debate about it, I feel like it depends on the circumstances.

Malganis wrote:

Bamshalam wrote:

Oh for fuck's sake, did you read what Notanoni said? At all? Acting as if these two things are even remotely on the same plateau of severity is doing neither group any favors.

Bam, I love you, you're cool and all, but I didn't say they were on the same level of severity.

No, but you sure are saying it now:

Quote :

I said that it's hypocritical for one society that practices widespread, involuntary, cosmetic alteration of children's genitals for no damn good reason to point fingers at another society that practices widespread, involuntary, cosmetic alteration of children's genitals for no good reason.

Quote :

If you look at it, as I do, as a violation of a person's basic right to bodily integrity - the idea that anyone of whatever gender should have the right to decide how or if to alter their own body, especially their genitals - then, yes, it IS hypocritical, and I'd like to see my country stop this senseless practice before we as a nation try to tell other people in other cultures what they should do.

TL;DR: we should clean up the shit in our own backyard before telling other people their yards stink to high heaven. Because yes, they do fuckin' stink. But ours is pretty damn bad as well.

"We cut off foreskins so we'd better all shut up about people who hack off little girls' clitorises with sharp rocks and then sew what's left of their labia shut!"

Are you fucking kidding me. Are you.

Nihilist wrote:

Are you against a grown person going out and say, getting circ'd because they always wanted it?

Nope. Not in the slightest. Dude, you know how fascinated I am with bizarre, extreme stuff. I honestly don't care if someone takes their entire set of junk off. If a person wants to be completely nullified sexually, then that should be their right (though I think in those cases they should be legally an adult to have that performed on them).

In fact, I'm actually very cautious about laws that are binding on extreme bodily or genital alteration because they tend to crack down on stuff like voluntary castration and whatnot, which I think is wrong.

My point being, you have the complete right to do what you want to yourself, and live with whatever happens. You don't have the right (at least to me, morally speaking) to strap a child or an infant down and do what you want to their genitals, thereby making them live with whatever happens for the rest of their lives.

I just.. I honestly, deeply feel that my country has this incredible moral blind spot on this issue. We can say "it's not as bad as FGM, it's not as damaging", and yes, that may be coldly, factually true. But is that making us as a nation take a hard look at what we're doing, or is that just a way for the American people to bury their heads in the sand over our own past and present history of genital alteration (not just of boys, but of girls, and intersex people), a culture of forcing people to fit this mold of what's acceptable and what's pretty, and what's male and what's female? I'm NOT saying that anyone here is doing that, I'm speaking about America as a nation. It's always easier to say that someone else is worse about whatever, rather than admit that you were wrong, that you've wronged someone. We as a nation can do that about so many issues - couldn't circumcision be one of them?

Read about David Reimer; his whole life was defined by what his culture said was the right thing to do: first he was circumcised as a baby, got his entire penis burned off, was castrated and raised as a girl, and then finally took back his male identity. And just think - it started with his genitals being altered first by circumcision - one of the circumcisions that went horribly wrong.

I'd think that if you were really so out of tune with your kid that you can't tell whether the kid is going through a phase or really genuine about something, your parenting could use some review and improvement. The only reason why I can think of a parent insisting something genuine is "just a phase" has more to do with not wanting to accept it than anything else.

In any case, I'd still say "wait" on the genital cutting even if the child expressed a desire for it. Maybe not until 18, because kids are perfectly capable of understanding these things long before then (also: dreaded puberty urrurrggg if I could have skipped that and had more of a say in what would happen...)

Permanent changes to the body of any kind need consideration anyway.

Jesus. wrote:

Obviously, though, I'm not genderqueer and most genderqueer/transgender/sexual/I cant get the damn terms straight

Transgender, Genderqueer, Intersexual? :p

[quote="Verandering"]I'd think that if you were really so out of tune with your kid that you can't tell whether the kid is going through a phase or really genuine about something, your parenting could use some review and improvement. The only reason why I can think of a parent insisting something genuine is "just a phase" has more to do with not wanting to accept it than anything else.

Malganis wrote:

I just.. I honestly, deeply feel that my country has this incredible moral blind spot on this issue. We can say "it's not as bad as FGM, it's not as damaging", and yes, that may be coldly, factually true. But is that making us as a nation take a hard look at what we're doing, or is that just a way for the American people to bury their heads in the sand over our own past and present history of genital alteration (not just of boys, but of girls, and intersex people), a culture of forcing people to fit this mold of what's acceptable and what's pretty, and what's male and what's female?

...could it...could it possibly be about the barbaric treatment of little girls? At all?

You know what I'd really like Western society to examine about itself when it condemns FGM? The fucked up way we treat our own little girl cubs. The shitty messages we force them to internalise earlier and earlier. The way we teach them that to look older they have to dress a certain way, only to punish them for looking slutty. We give little girls baby dolls to play with and then castigate them if they have a baby too young, if they give the baby up for adopion, if they have an abortion, if they keep it and aren't married to the father. We raise hell about the hijab and declare the burqa barbaric, all the while implementing moronic dress codes that make sure women look sexy without being "distracting". That's what I'd like us Westerners to talk about. ONE CONVERSATION PLEASE where we don't focus on the penis-havers.

but mai male privilege

btw cy not all men are penishavers and some women fall under the penishaver category so

Malganis wrote:

Nihilist wrote:

Are you against a grown person going out and say, getting circ'd because they always wanted it?

Nope. Not in the slightest. Dude, you know how fascinated I am with bizarre, extreme stuff. I honestly don't care if someone takes their entire set of junk off. If a person wants to be completely nullified sexually, then that should be their right (though I think in those cases they should be legally an adult to have that performed on them).

In fact, I'm actually very cautious about laws that are binding on extreme bodily or genital alteration because they tend to crack down on stuff like voluntary castration and whatnot, which I think is wrong.

My point being, you have the complete right to do what you want to yourself, and live with whatever happens. You don't have the right (at least to me, morally speaking) to strap a child or an infant down and do what you want to their genitals, thereby making them live with whatever happens for the rest of their lives.

I just.. I honestly, deeply feel that my country has this incredible moral blind spot on this issue. We can say "it's not as bad as FGM, it's not as damaging", and yes, that may be coldly, factually true. But is that making us as a nation take a hard look at what we're doing, or is that just a way for the American people to bury their heads in the sand over our own past and present history of genital alteration (not just of boys, but of girls, and intersex people), a culture of forcing people to fit this mold of what's acceptable and what's pretty, and what's male and what's female? I'm NOT saying that anyone here is doing that, I'm speaking about America as a nation. It's always easier to say that someone else is worse about whatever, rather than admit that you were wrong, that you've wronged someone. We as a nation can do that about so many issues - couldn't circumcision be one of them?

Read about David Reimer; his whole life was defined by what his culture said was the right thing to do: first he was circumcised as a baby, got his entire penis burned off, was castrated and raised as a girl, and then finally took back his male identity. And just think - it started with his genitals being altered first by circumcision - one of the circumcisions that went horribly wrong.

I got circumsized against my will when I was a baby. Does that mean my parents have grossly violated my rights? If so, than I'm, like, totally taking them to court for assault and battery. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Seriously, getting circumsized is no big deal. When compared to FGM, which is typically a sexist, repressive practice designed to make most sex acts uncomfortable (if not impossible or painful) for the woman, and are often performed in dirty settings, with rocks, by men who typically don't much give a shit about the little girl they're operating on (not to mention the lack of medical training), it's really no big deal. Like super-duper no big deal. Standing next to the issue of FGM and complaining about how evil male circumcision is just makes you look absurd. Because that's what you're being. And to be frank, like Cyberwulf, I find it rather annoying that you're using the issue of FGM as a soap box for you to stand on and preach about male circumcision.

We didn’t even get to the bottom of PAGE ONE without the thread derailing into the evils of male circumcision.

Malganis was “done” at the top of page TWO, and then proceeded to argue for another three pages, most hilariously with guys who’ve been circumcised, never had a problem with it, and kept telling her to stop comparing it to FGM.

It is now page six. Apart from the first page, the only discussion of FGM that’s happened in this thread has taken place in the context of how barbaric male circumcision is and whether it should be done away with, too.

Most of the people in favour of banning male circumcision were women.

Take a moment to think about that.

The problem with discussing female circumcision is that I think everyone agrees that it's fucking horrible, including the AAP, now that they've extracted their heads from their asses. A discussion doesn't really have many places to go.

Hey,

Just wanted to say that I want to apologize for, as Cyber and others have said, derailing the original point of the thread with my own cause, and for, again as Cyber and others have said, conflating male circ and FGM together (and to a certain extent, intersexual genital alteration).

I never meant to put down the opinions of guys like gaijin, Penguin, and Mr. Doobie - that was not my intent at all. They have a perfect right to feel how they feel about their own bodies, and I never intended to challenge or try to change that. If I did come across like that, I sincerely apologize to you guys. Minimizing the feelings of others was never my intent.

I do feel that my conflation of male circ with FGM was in error - thanks for pointing that out, fellow WGWers. I still think that both are very wrong and are against human rights of bodily integrity, but they are separate issues, practiced by separate cultures and in different circumstances. If I seem to minimize the horror of one issue by maximizing my feelings of outrage against the other, for that, I apologize.

You all know why I feel the way I feel, so I'm not gonna bore you with that again. I just wanted to say that I've thought about how I come across here, I realize that my arguments are offensive to some people here, and, as Notanoni said earlier, am doing damage to my own cause. For that, I need to step back and think about what I'm saying, and apologize for it.

Thanks for reading yet another post filled with teal deer dancing through meadows and frolicking in the sunshine.