Are we allowed to talk about the recent debate regarding female genital mutilation?

[Bert Notorius]

If you still had your foreskin would you let someone cut it off?

It would be just like a hangnail right?



LOL

Ehh it's 8 here....time for my multivitamin and a 6 hr snooze myself.

fuck no. that would hurt like a bitch, like when i had my tonsils out at 45.

besides they'd have to to use pruning shears or something.

 

[RoryN]

I'm not a surgeon, only an avid reader. You'd have to take up the number of occurrences with someone who's more familiar with it.

If you're going to bring it up, probably should be more familiar with it. Otherwise = red herring.

Now you can school me right here with facts like an adult, telling us all why male genital mutilation is beneficial to a mans health.

Google search. As everyone knows, there's info ad nauseam about the health benefits - legit or not - of circumcision, and anyone with a high-school education has heard them before.

Of course you can legitimately debate the pros (physical) vs. cons (physical & psychological) of the procedure but, again, as was my original beef, it's not the same issue as FGM, and that's what this thread is about. I'm sorry you're butthurt when it comes to that being the case, but efforts to equate the two aren't going to work past a non-conducive, base comparison level. They're not done for the same reason, nor have the same consequences on a societal level in the grand scope - they don't even have the same physical / mental consequences. Pushing this false equivalency is an attempt to diminish the level of the atrocity this is against women, whether you're willing to admit it or not. Changing the subject is obvious bullshit.

Now, go ahead and dismiss all the above. It's clearly the only thing you're equipped to do.

 

[Bert Notorius]

maybe i'll have my balls hemmed.

a couple inches should be good.

 

[Aella_]

I guess Rory is going with the *dodge question, talk shit then hide in the iggy bunker!* strategy.
Say hi to vetteman and ish for me! LOL

Google search. As everyone knows, there's info ad nauseam about the health benefits - legit or not - of circumcision, and anyone with a high-school education has heard them before.
Now, go ahead and dismiss all the above. It's clearly the only thing you're equipped to do.

You have to research your audience, BB.
After all, isn't Rory the one who started a thread about the fact that he got himself neutered?.

 

[lemonbread]

If you're going to bring it up, probably should be more familiar with it. Otherwise = red herring.

I don't need to be an expert on a subject to bring up points about it. It happens sometimes, regardless of the number of instances.

I know some people in my town own dogs. But I couldn't tell you the ratio of people who own dogs to people that don't, in my town. Does that mean it is this "red herring" for me to tell you some people in my town own dogs?

 

[Aglaopheme]

From the article:

But experts on medical ethics, commenting on the proposal, said procedures to modify girls' genitals could not be compared to male circumcision because they are designed to control women and curb their sexual desire.

Unless you can show me another reason why there is FGM your arguements are not only invalid, but offensive.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Google search. As everyone knows, there's info ad nauseam about the health benefits - legit or not - of circumcision, and anyone with a high-school education has heard them before.

If you're going to bring it up, probably should be more familiar with it.

Of course you can legitimately debate the pros (physical) vs. cons (physical & psychological) of the procedure

No, you really can't.

but, again, as was my original beef, it's not the same issue as FGM, and that's what this thread is about.

True because FGM isn't happening to a penis.

I'm sorry you're butthurt when it comes to that being the case, but efforts to equate the two aren't going to work past a non-conducive, base comparison level. They're not done for the same reason,

Why not?

I'm pretty sure 'God n' stuff' is the reason for a large majority of genital mutilation worldwide.

nor have the same consequences on a societal level in the grand scope - they don't even have the same physical / mental consequences.

Depends on who you're asking and what society, some forms of FGM are done at birth just like circumcision and the girls don't 'remember' it either so no biggie for them right?

I'm sure if we started doing circumcisions at 13 it wouldn't be so easy to dismiss.

Pushing this false equivalency is an attempt to diminish the level of the atrocity this is against women, whether you're willing to admit it or not. Changing the subject is obvious bullshit.

It's not a false equivalency and it in no way diminished the level of the atrocity against women to point out they aren't the only ones being mutilated.

Now, go ahead and dismiss all the above. It's clearly the only thing you're equipped to do.

It's not dismissal, it's refutation of your hysterical emotional knee jerk dipshittery.

 

[BotanyBoy]

From the article:



Unless you can show me another reason why there is FGM your arguements are not only invalid, but offensive.

God sayz so of course.

That doesn't invalidate shit or make genital mutilations of other kinds or GM for men any less fucked up.

 

[lemonbread]

From the article:



Unless you can show me another reason why there is FGM your arguements are not only invalid, but offensive.

That's largely the reason circumcision became increasingly popular, and graduation to full amputation of the foreskin in the middle ages. They believed it would stop men from masturbating and lessen their enjoyment of sex, and make intercourse a very short affair. Because they had much bigger things, like studying to worry about.

 

[BotanyBoy]

That's largely the reason circumcision became increasingly popular, and graduation to full amputation of the foreskin in the middle ages. They believed it would stop men from masturbating and lessen their enjoyment of sex, and make intercourse a very short affair. Because they had much bigger things, like studying to worry about.

GAWWWWWDUH!!!!

All pekkaz n' pussies must be cut up, cut off, sewed up, split n' chopped to stop all that evil fuckin'!

http://gremlindog.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/crazy-preacher.jpg

 

[Aglaopheme]

God sayz so of course.

That doesn't invalidate shit or make genital mutilations of other kinds for men any less fucked up.

Not God. Where did that mention God?

At least you finally got around to mentioning this practice is an atrocity.

Mutilation is one thing. I will grant you that each is a mutilation. However, the outcomes are very different. Do you not think that FGM is preformed on women purely to control their sexual desires?

 

[Aglaopheme]

That's largely the reason circumcision became increasingly popular, and graduation to full amputation of the foreskin in the middle ages. They believed it would stop men from masturbating and lessen their enjoyment of sex, and make intercourse a very short affair. Because they had much bigger things, like studying to worry about.

Okie dokie because we all know that actually happens.

Does that actually happen to woman? Yep

 

[lemonbread]

GAWWWWWDUH!!!!

All pekkaz n' pussies must be cut up, cut off, sewed up, split n' chopped to stop all that evil fuckin'!

[/IMG]

Religion is where the whole thing started. But they didn't remove the entire foreskin for religion in the beginning. That didn't start until much later.

Still, I don't think anyone should cut or have the genitals of another person cut, in any circumstance, unless it's a willing, educated, unbiased, procedure on a consenting adult.

 

[lemonbread]

Okie dokie because we all know that actually happens.

Does that actually happen to woman? Yep

We're doing in Africa to males right now.

Not that I think it's completely equated with FGM on a social level, but...

 

[RoryN]

I don't need to be an expert on a subject to bring up points about it. It happens sometimes, regardless of the number of instances

I know some people in my town own dogs. But I couldn't tell you the ratio of people who own dogs to people that don't, in my town. Does that mean it is this "red herring" for me to tell you some people in my town own dogs?

Depends. Are you going to tell me dog owners have as much prominence as cat owners in your town?

There's your problem.

It's not a false equivalency and it in no way diminished the level of the atrocity against women to point out they aren't the only ones being mutilated.

If a thread is about Subject A, and you immediately try to co-opt / usurp it with Subject B, you are diminishing Subject A. Black lives = gotta talk about white lives. Women inequalities = gotta talk about men inequalities. Gay discrimination = gotta talk about straight discrimination. Waah, waah, waah.

No. They're all worthy of discussion, but they can be separate. The only reason to co-opt the issues is to plead a case for the issues of both sides as being equal. They aren't always equal.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Religion is where the whole thing started. But they didn't remove the entire foreskin for religion in the beginning. That didn't start until much later.

Still, I don't think anyone should cut or have the genitals of another person cut, in any circumstance, unless it's a willing, educated, unbiased, procedure on a consenting adult.

You won't find a bigger atheist than me but stating "religion is where the whole thing started" is neither entirely accurate nor is it productive. At least with circumcision there are known studies proving the health benefits. At least if you trust the World Health Organization. Up to 60% protection against HIV/AIDS and while I can't find other studies I presume it's similar for other STDs. There are also hygeinic reasons.

I'm not sure about his consenting adult thing that we are trying to push here. There are epic fuck tons of decisions we simply do not allow children to have a say in for various reasons. Now if you want to argue that in the US our access to clean water and our hygiene are in general more than adequate then I'm not going to say your wrong, because you're not.

So once again does anybody even know what "mild FGM" even is since the article suggests maybe allowing that will prevent more barbaric practices. Which is a moral and legal hazard all on its own but I don't know what mild means, nor do I know of any health benefits associated with FGM and that's kind of an important part of whether or not something should be even discussed.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Not God. Where did that mention God?

It doesn't have to, that's the default justification for pretty much all of it.

None of it has a health reasons, that's why Rory can't come up with a single fucking one.

At least you finally got around to mentioning this practice is an atrocity. Mutilation is one thing. I will grant you that each is a mutilation.

At least you were able to acknowledge it's a people issue not a female issue.

However, the outcomes are very different.

How exactly is one genital mutilation different from another other than the fact that one is a penis and the other is a vagina?

Do you not think that FGM is preformed on women purely to control their sexual desires?

Not anymore than MGM is about health.

Okie dokie because we all know that actually happens.

It happens all day every day in M'uricuh.

Does that actually happen to woman? Yep

No one is saying it doesn't....just that genital mutilation isn't a female problem. No matter how accepting of male genital mutilation you might be.

 

[lemonbread]

You won't find a bigger atheist than me but stating "religion is where the whole thing started" is neither entirely accurate nor is it productive. At least with circumcision there are known studies proving the health benefits. At least if you trust the World Health Organization. Up to 60% protection against HIV/AIDS and while I can't find other studies I presume it's similar for other STDs. There are also hygeinic reasons.

I'm not sure about his consenting adult thing that we are trying to push here. There are epic fuck tons of decisions we simply do not allow children to have a say in for various reasons. Now if you want to argue that in the US our access to clean water and our hygiene are in general more than adequate then I'm not going to say your wrong, because you're not.

So once again does anybody even know what "mild FGM" even is since the article suggests maybe allowing that will prevent more barbaric practices. Which is a moral and legal hazard all on its own but I don't know what mild means, nor do I know of any health benefits associated with FGM and that's kind of an important part of whether or not something should be even discussed.

Very true, I wasn't fully going back in history when making that statement. Genital cutting goes back before religion. I think religion set it off as a big reason why people began to do it ritualistically, but not necessarily the first reason.

I have a hard time believing the studies claiming any benefits from circumcision. I have looked into several heavily, and they were deeply biased and skewed.

The "minor" FGM here was a visible "nick" of the clitoris. The only benefit would be that by allowing it, it could save girls from having their genitals largely removed.

 

[RoryN]

How exactly is one genital mutilation different from another other than the fact that one is a penis and the other is a vagina?

Let me impart knowledge upon you that everyone else already knows:

Removing a woman's clitoris would be like removing a man's glans. A glans is not removed during circumcision. It 's uncovered - which has ramifications - but it's not taken away.

And thus ends your ridiculously stupid equivalency argument. Have a nice day.

 

[BotanyBoy]

If a thread is about Subject A, and you immediately try to co-opt / usurp it with Subject B, you are diminishing Subject A. Black lives = gotta talk about white lives. Women inequalities = gotta talk about men inequalities. Gay discrimination = gotta talk about straight discrimination. Waah, waah, waah.

No. They're all worthy of discussion, but they can be separate. The only reason to co-opt the issues is to plead a case for the issues of both sides as being equal. They aren't always equal.

It's not a co-opting or usurping in that sense.

More like if black lives matter they need to matter more than just when white cops take them. You need to include the other major contributors to unnecessary death in the black community such as the shitty diets, gang violence, unsafe sex practices etc. other wise it's not #blacklivesmatter it's #pissedatwhitepeople trying to pretend black lives matter.

Gays discrimination....what about LBT's being discriminated against by the same mother fuckers hating on gays? Hmm?

You can't just cherry pick part of a problem and be like "ahhh fuck the rest of em' I'm cool with the hate/abuse/discrimination they get!" without being a douche.

You won't find a bigger atheist than me but stating "religion is where the whole thing started" is neither entirely accurate nor is it productive. At least with circumcision there are known studies proving the health benefits. At least if you trust the World Health Organization. Up to 60% protection against HIV/AIDS and while I can't find other studies I presume it's similar for other STDs. There are also hygeinic reasons.

See a link!!

Looks like circumcision might be good if you refuse to practice safe sex and can't manage to wipe your dick off every now and then.

 

[Vagina_Dentata]

Religion is where the whole thing started. But they didn't remove the entire foreskin for religion in the beginning. That didn't start until much later.

Still, I don't think anyone should cut or have the genitals of another person cut, in any circumstance, unless it's a willing, educated, unbiased, procedure on a consenting adult.

So you must be pro life because if you shouldn't be cutting off a little penis tissue without the organism's consent, then sucking it out and killing it should not be attempted either.

 

[Aglaopheme]

It doesn't have to, that's the default justification for pretty much all of it.

None of it has a health reasons, that's why Rory can't come up with a single fucking one.



At least you were able to acknowledge it's a people issue not a female issue

So, please tell me if you think that MGM and FGM have equal results when performed on people?

How exactly is one genital mutilation different from another other than the fact that one is a penis and the other is a vagina?

The differences have been pointed out repeatedly.

It happens all day every day in M'uricuh.

. They believed it would stop men from masturbating and lessen their enjoyment of sex, and make intercourse a very short affair. Because they had much bigger things, like studying to worry about.
__________________

That happens everyday in America? Really?

No one is saying it doesn't....just that genital mutilation isn't a female problem. No matter how accepting of male genital mutilation you might be.

Genital mutilation isn't a female problem?

Did I say I was accepting of male genital mutilation? Yeah, no.

 

[Aglaopheme]

If a thread is about Subject A, and you immediately try to co-opt / usurp it with Subject B, you are diminishing Subject A. Black lives = gotta talk about white lives. Women inequalities = gotta talk about men inequalities. Gay discrimination = gotta talk about straight discrimination. Waah, waah, waah.

No. They're all worthy of discussion, but they can be separate. The only reason to co-opt the issues is to plead a case for the issues of both sides as being equal. They aren't always equal.

Exactly!

 

[RoryN]

You can't just cherry pick part of a problem and be like "ahhh fuck the rest of em' I'm cool with the hate/abuse/discrimination they get!"

"If you're only talking about your problems, you must be neglecting / dismissing / ignoring the relevance of mine! That's discrimination!"

This is political correctness. You're embracing it.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Let me impart knowledge upon you that everyone else already knows:

Removing a woman's clitoris would be like removing a man's glans. A glans is not removed during circumcision. It 's uncovered - which has ramifications - but it's not taken away.

Not all FGM involves the removal of the clit.

And considering the internal size of the clitoris and is related nerve system I highly doubt many if any of these 3rd world barbarians are actually doing full removals.

Not to mention the clit has about 8,000 nerve endings that run to about 15,000 nerve fibers in the pelvic region.

Male foreskin alone has over 20,000 nerve endings.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clitoris
http://thecircumcisiondecision.com/20000-nerve-endings/


Soooooooooo you're wrong as fuck........

And thus ends your ridiculously stupid equivalency argument. Have a nice day.

And you look like a total douche bag in the process....

It's not an equivalency argument to point out that genital mutilation is not gender specific no matter how comfortable you are mutilating one gender over the other.