Livonia doctor's defense denies female genital mutilation; calls it religious removal

[FrodosNewPet]

Patriarchal, exclusionary, apocalyptic religions and/or cultural practices suck slime covered rocks.
[hr]
Livonia doctor's defense denies female genital mutilation; calls it religious removal

http://www.fox2detroit.com/news/local-news/249102342-story

By: Hannah Saunders | Updated:Apr 17 2017 08:57PM EDT

(WJBK) - As the hearing Monday revealed disturbing new details, the judge denied bond for the local doctor charged with mutilating the genitals of little girls.

Inside a federal courtroom, 44-year-old Dr. Jumana Nargarwala, a mother of four, stood before a judge handcuffed, dressed in an orange jumpsuit and a long hijab draped down her arms and shoulders, appearing emotionless as the prosecution and defense divulged gruesome details of what allegedly went on in her Livonia clinic after hours.

~ snip ~

It was there where the FBI says they tracked two 7 year olds in February, as they had sensitive tissue painfully removed by Nargarwala, believing many more families in Michigan and other states have also had the procedure performed but have managed to keep it secret.

~ snip ~

The judge, believing Nargarwala is possibly both a flight risk and a danger to the community, ordered her detained without bond until further notice.

[janterry]

1. Does she have daughters?

She has four kids, the article says. She probably has at least one girl? I wonder if she has performed this on her own children...............

[Ilsa]

3. If her reasoning is religious,

I would bet on it. People do cruel, strange, unhealthy things in the name of religion.

[HoneyBadger]

50. Guessing her argument would fly in the ancestral homeland

But not in the US

[treestar]

68. Yes, the women are the ones that do it

in those cultures, and it was done to them.

[superpatriotman]

2. I am against this practice

And do not think it is wise.

[colsohlibgal]

4. I Call It Evil

Crazy is on a roll lately. How about we mutilate this guy's genitalia.

[angstlessk]

5. Of which 'guy' do you refer?

The mutilator is a woman!

[mopinko]

7. they do it to make them marriageable.

[angstlessk]

8. Let the girl grow up THEN allow HER to make that decision.

This is child abuse, plain and simple!

[mopinko]

10. oh absolutely. it is reprehensible.

didnt mean to imply it was acceptable on any level. just that it is men who demand it.

[cstanleytech]

14. You mean "some" men demand it just some clearly there are "some" women who are ok with

performing it but I suspect the vast majority of both men and women are opposed to it otherwise it would be a common and accepted practice by the majority of people.

[hatrack]

6. Mutilate children, and defend it because Gaw-duh told you to do it?

FUCK YOU

[Initech]

18. [phone]

[luvMIdog]

9. sad thing is the right wing will use this to spread more Muslim hatred even though

this is not a common practice.

If the doctor did this for religious reasons then she should still be jailed. She knew what was and was not legal before doing so.

[leftynyc]

29. Not a common practice here

but plenty common in many international communities. It's barbaric and if we can show we know it's barbaric by putting this piece of dung in prison for the rest of her miserable life, that's a good first step in showing it's UNACCEPTABLE in a civilized society. I couldn't possibly care less what the right wing does with the facts, I'm far more concerned about the girls getting butchered.

[luvMIdog]

35. I lived in the middle east for many years this is not common among the majority

Yes it's horrible. Yes it should be shown for being a barbaric practice. Yes people should be educated about it far and wide. I think it's more of a cultural interpretation of religion rather than mainstream. It is horrible nonetheless and needs to be stopped. I agree.

The thing is every single time one nutty Muslim does something the entire Muslim community gets blanketed with the backlash of it. Christians here do not know what that feels like because their community as a whole is not blamed for any nutty thing that any smaller Christian group does. This is why I brought that up.

[leftynyc]

42. There are many

majority Muslim countries NOT in the middle east. Here's a link for you:

http://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/topics/fgm/prevalence/en/

These countries have 80%+ of their women mutiliated and they're ALL majority Muslim (except for Eritrea which is 48% Muslim)
Mali, Egypt, Guinea, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Somalia, Eritrea. And more between 50-80% of their daughters mutilated - Mauritania. The only two Christian countries that do it to that extent are Liberia and Ethiopia. So it may very well be "cultural" but it's one culture that are the predominant culprits.

[luvMIdog]

45. thank you for the stats. I appreciate that.

[jberryhill]

48. "it's one culture that are the predominant culprits"

Yes, Northwest African cultures.

Like a lot of things that people think are "Christian" - e.g. Christmas trees, Easter Bunny, etc. - these are pagan practices which pre-date the introduction of the present day prevailing religion.

To identify this as a "Muslim" practice is like saying that hanging mistletoe during Winter Solstice is a "Christian" one.

[leftynyc]

52. Yes, I'm sure it's simply a

coincidence that ALL the countries (not all African countries) that have 80%+ of their girls mutilated are Muslim majority countries. Those hoops you're jumping through don't impress me in the slightest.

[jberryhill]

59. Given that there are Muslim majority countries in which this practice does not exist...

Then the conclusion that it has "something to do with Islam" is absurd.

It is an odious tribal practice which pre-dates Islam in those places where it is done, in much the way that pre-existing pagan practices were incorporated into 'Christian' observances in areas where it was more convenient to syncretize them.

[leftynyc]

66. So you consider it

simply a coincidence that ALL the countries that have 80% of their girls mutilated are Muslim majority. Noted.

[jberryhill]

71. Roman Catholics and Protestants in the same region ALSO do it

What is your explanation for this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevalence_of_female_genital_mutilation_by_country

According to a 2011-12 survey, 7.3% of Benin women have been subjected to FGM. This is a decline over the 2001 survey, which reported 17%.[50] The prevalence varies with religion in Benin; FGM is prevalent in 49% of Muslim women, 15% of Protestants, 12% of traditional religions and 7% of Roman Catholic women.

-----

So, is it your belief that Roman Catholic women in Benin are actually Muslim?

Burkina Faso - 69% of Roman Catholics and 65% of Protestants.

Ethiopia is a majority Christian country, among several other majority Christian countries where this occurs. How does your implicit assertion about this being a "Muslim" practice explain FGM there?

[leftynyc]

73. Are you REALLY doing this?

Comparing 7.3% of the mutilated women in Benin with the over 80%+ mutilated in Egypt (and the other countries I listed)? Your own post shows it's FAR more prevalent in Muslim homes than the other religions - why is that? The REALITY is that while it's not SOLELY a Muslim problem, it's FAR more prevalent in Muslim households worldwide than any other religion and pretending otherwise doesn't help anyone and certainly not the girls being mutilated. You can pretend all things are equal but you're only fooling yourself.

[jberryhill]

74. Burkina Faso - 69% of Roman Catholics and 65% of Protestants.

Eritrea - 89% of Catholic and 85% of Protestant women

Ethiopia is not a majority Muslim country, nor are several other countries where this practice is prevalent.

I do not agree with you. The incidence is clearly independent of religion, and is more highly correlated with geography and social class.

The fact that someone does not agree with you is not an occasion for making personal comments.

[leftynyc]

75. I'm done with this

That you refuse to see it's FAR more prevalent in Muslim countries is not my problem.

[jberryhill]

76. Does Islam require eating falafel?

No, it is not common in a majority of majority Muslim countries. It is common in some majority Christian countries. The common thread appears to be certain African cultures which have practiced this long before Islam came along.

But, yes, having to confront data which does not support your implicit thesis, you must go. Bye.

[treestar]

70. Yes, and it existed before Islam

and before Christianity. It's not those religions where it originated.

[jberryhill]

72. Which is why Christians in those same countries ALSO do it

[demmiblue]

11. I wonder how many other young girls she mutilated.

Asshole.

[bullwinkle428]

12. The parents of these girls belong in an adjacent prison cell. They drove

them from Minnesota to Michigan with the specific purpose of having them undergo this particular "surgery".

[demmiblue]

13. Yep. n/t

[cstanleytech]

15. I almost want to have them sterilized however once you go down that road its hard to find

the exit ramp.

[get the red out]

62. Yes they do!

They should at the very least have their children taken from them.

I HATE people who harm their own children due to ridiculous "customs". Fuck customs that do harm, and fuck the people who follow them.

[demmiblue]

17. Go away.

[ProfessorGAC]

19. What Demmi Said!

What a dumb post! (Not your post, the one to which you replied.)

[hatrack]

20. You're not even remotely close to an analogy . .

[Lee-Lee]

21. It's not even remotely close to the same

And I'm sure your not so dense as to think it is.

[MineralMan]

23. Looking downward, I see that I am a "victim" of that.

There is no equivalency. Not at all.

[MineralMan]

32. I'm pretty sure my parents made their choice on the advice

of a physician. I don't believe any of those other things you mentioned came up at all, since my parents are both atheists.

However, the removal of some skin is hardly equivalent to removal of an organ of the body. Not in any way.

The discussion you are attempting to open is a common one. It has been started many, many times on this political forum. It always devolves into name-calling and attacks against one thing or another.

The topic of this thread is involuntary clitoridectomies. That is a far, far more life-changing thing that the removal of the prepuce, for whatever reason.

Often, the people who bring this issue into the discussion end up being misogynists, in the end. They use this false equivalency to inject an entirely different topic of conversation. Not always, but often. I hope that is not the case today.

[unblock]

54. your own statement about hygiene shows why it is still worth considering

"proper hygiene" is necessary with your turtleneck.
no such special attention is needed for a circumcised penis.

the reality is that there are people who do not do proper maintenance and suffer the consequences. that's nothing i have to worry about, myself.



if you're looking for an equivalency for male circumcision, perhaps piercings or tattoos might work. female circumcision is in a completely different ballpark. the male equivalent wouldn't be cutting off the foreskin, it would be more like cutting off the entire shaft.



finally, while i respect that others may disagree with this practice, if you want to have a nice, friendly debate about it, i'd recommend backing off the anti-semitic shit.

except that it looks to me like your goal is, instead, to be provocative and offensive.

[DarleenMB]

24. You need some human anatomy schooling

The clitoris (which is what they are removing) has the same number of nerve endings as the head of the penis. It is NOT the same thing as removing the hood of the penis (which, btw, is NOT the "end of their dick(s)." Now if the glans were removed then it would be equivalent.

THAT is why it is a 'big deal.'

[Act_of_Reparation]

33. Yeah, wow. That's fascinating.

I think I'll start representing people in medical consent cases. I'm not a lawyer, but that shouldn't be a problem. If they want my credentials I'll just drop trou and show them "muh dick".

Good call, brosef.

[demmiblue]

34. Lol!

[MineralMan]

43. +100

[hatrack]

53. "Your honor, I'd like to introduce Muh Dick for the jury's inspection."

"Please proceed, Mr. Tuit."

[Act_of_Reparation]

55. Objection, your honor: In the absence of a foreskin, Muh Dick serves no purpose!

[hatrack]

60. "This demonstration would only engorge, uh, enflame the jury!"

[MineralMan]

40. "muh dick?"

That sort of tells me everything I need to know. You apparently have one. So do roughly half the people on the planet. And they're all pretty much the same, since we're all human animals.

I have one, too. It's not all that special. I'm a male, so there it is. I find it useful and worth having, but it's just one appendage on my body.

Enjoy...

[hatrack]

56. I think it's from Frank Herbert - an early "Dune" manuscript used "Muh Dick" instead of "Muad Dib"

[MineralMan]

64. Well, apparently, the excitement is over.

What's his name and his appendage have been shown the door.

[Equinox Moon]

25. Male circumcision is a form of mutilation, but nothing compares to the atrocity of female...

circumcision. There are varying degrees of severity that could include the entire female genitalia removed and sewed shut. The woman, or child's, first sexual encounter is a surgical procedure in a very barbaric manner.

Women that have these procedures have severe scaring, sex and childbirth are agony for these women.

Alice Walker wrote a book about these horrible practices.
"Possessing the Secret of Joy"
Quote from book: "Torture is not culture."

Here are the different types:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_mutilation

[leftynyc]

30. Yawwwwwnnnnnn

Go compare apples and oranges elsewhere, newbie.

[leftynyc]

44. Isn't it funny

that I ONLY mention post counts when it's OBVIOUS the poster is merely trying to stir up trouble or make stupid analogies that don't hold up under light? I wonder why that is, newbie.

[demmiblue]

46. "Eventually, I too, shall have "cred""...

[Coventina]

47. Especially if he keeps talkin' 'bout "muh dick"

[demmiblue]

57. Lol... some of the responses to Mr. Muh Dick in this thread are hilarious!

(We have another couple of Mr. Muh Dicks in a similar thread).

[demmiblue]

65. Seems he won't be getting his cred after all.

RIP, Mr. Muh Dick.

[Coventina]

67. Here lies Muh Dick....

[hatrack]

69. . . . flaccid, dribbling and receding rapidly into digital oblivion. . .

[Coventina]

36. Very happy to "flame away". Your comment shows incredible ignorance.

If you are a straight man, I pity any woman you've ever been with, sexually.
You clearly know nothing about female sexual anatomy if you think male circumcision is in any way comparable to female circumcision.

Please educate yourself before you embarrass yourself further.

And, just for the record, I am against circumcision for either gender, but to compare the two is insensitive and borderline misogyny.

[Coventina]

39. Now you are just babbling nonsense.

You can easily find the information you lack for free on the internet.

I have no interest in funding the education of someone who clearly isn't interested in learning.

[Duppers]

58. Member here since 2008.

Wow. Sad.

[greenman3610]

26. hoping they throw the book at this

monstrous bitch

[leftynyc]

31. Not just her

but the parents of any child taken to her for the procedure. Take away ALL of their children and jail them. No mercy.

[Lucky Luciano]

41. I pray that the doctor goes to prison! nt

[PsychoBabble]

49. Holy crap. Literally.

Religion needs to stop being a public policy reason to do bad things to/for human beings. Hobby Lobby, etc. helped start this ... now leaking from Christians to Muslims.

[ancianita]

61. Human history is littered with human mutilation and death in the name of some god. Fuck ALL that.

[get the red out]

63. And even in this country

when someone harms their children for their religion, they are often left alone. I'm actually surprized this women was even arrested, since she claimed "religion".