Ethiopians protest against U.S. circumcision jailing (2-year-old girl was "circumcised")

[FernBell]

Hundreds of Ethiopians took to the streets of Addis Ababa on Saturday calling for a retrial of an Ethiopian jailed in the United States for circumcising his daughter.

In what was believed to be the first such case in the United States, a Georgia judge sentenced Khalid Adem to 10 years in prison this month for removing his two-year-old daughter's clitoris with scissors in 2001.

.......

An estimated 3 million girls and women are mutilated or cut each year on the African continent, the U.N.'s children's charity UNICEF says, in a custom viewed in many traditional cultures as a necessary rite of passage.

Circumcision is also used to control or reduce women's sexual desire to lessen the chance of promiscuity in marriage.

Opponents say it disfigures and sometimes kills, causes psychological harm, complicates childbirth in life and reduces sexual pleasure for women.



http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2006-11-18T105416Z_01_L18322808_RTRUKOC_0_US-ETHIOPIA-CIRCUMCISION.xml&WTmodLoc=IntNewsHome_C2_worldNews-3

[Deja Q]

1. Barbaric. What's left to say?

I mean, snipping it off with scissors is barbaric.

We also put people in jail for cruelty to animals; where are those Christians that sacrifice a goat or cat or whatever complaining when one of their own gets caught?

[leesa]

29. It is. Do you know that some circumcisions are also done like this?

I remember the first one I watched as a nursiong student. The doctor didn't think infants should receive anesthetic and didn't think they needed it. Did that little boy howl!

I wonder if parents know how that little procedure is being performed.

[rpannier]

2. And I really don't care what the hundreds in Addis Ababa think or want

It's a barbaric practice that should be punished.

[William769]

3. Let them take to the streets.

Barbaric assholes.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

4. I have a solution:

For every female "circumcision", the father must undergo a full amputation of his penis.

It's only fair. Same damn organ, only different hormonal and genetic application during gestation.

That would cool some jets.

[rodeodance]

5. umm. only 10 years??

[Rose Siding]

19. Good question

[WinkyDink]

6. And I'm sure anaesthetic was administered. Not. This is not only

barbaric; this particular case---a MAN, a FATHER---is extreme SADISTIC PERVERSION.

[iamjoy]

7. A Woman Enjoy Sex...Heaven Forbid!

oh, yes, making sure a woman can't enjoy sex will make sure she remains a virgin until marriage. Don't bother talking to her like a reasonable person capable of choosing abstinence on her own, or worry about having to accept the fact that she may not make that choice. And what happens when these mutilated women get married? Do they sudenly enjoy sex because it is with their husband? No, they only submit and endure. Is this really what some men want? Are they so egotistical and/or focused on their own pleasure that they don't care about the woman? I think the answer is - yes, some men are.

10 years is too light a sentence for this man. I favor medical treatments that will ruin his sex life like he ruined his daughter's future sex life. His daughter has a life sentence but is free to walk around, so should he.

[Don_1967]

8. Sick Bastards

He should get his balls cut off

[conscious evolution]

9. wrong

He should be sentenced to a KICK in the balls everyday for the rest of his life.

[Frank Cannon]

59. Actually, it should be his penis that is removed

Or at least the end third of it or so. This is analogous to removing a female's clitoris.

That way he'll still have sexual desire, but no way to truly satisfy it. And that's exactly what they're doing to these poor women.

[gorbal]

10. circumcision of boys seems pretty horrid too

If you look at it like that, the man seems less of a monster, and more like someone doing what he thinks is right. I'm not condoning it or anything, I am just against demonizing people as monsters for doing what in their culture is deemed "normal".

[Marrah_G]

13. The two are not even close to being the same

The SOLE purpose is to perpetuate female virginity until married. Many times they also stitch the vagina shut. These women are not people, they are property to be traded like goats.

[Vorta]

14. I like mine the way it is.

Now do I know if I have suffered life impact from the infant trauma? No, perhaps I have though I don't find my uncircumcised friends to be any less messed up than myself. Water seeks its own level, so personal observation probably isn't valid. I personally prefer the look and other aspects of the circumcised penis.

I would see a huge difference between removing what is arguably "extra" skin from the penis and removing the clitoris. I would think the clitorectomy would most closely correspond to a removal of the head of the penis. I suspect this is why the terminology was changed to "female genital mutilation" rather than the older 'female circumcision' which suggests that it's as harmless as male circumcision.

[ldf]

16. and who the hell deems it normal in ANY culture?

men.

for control.

they get to have their pleasure at will, while the woman, as a result of the men's decision to mutilate them, may never experience pleasure, and avoids sex (read "remains chaste") due to sex being painful.

crap like this should never be allowed, period. no "culture" has the right to sanitize this kind of practice. every nation on earth should say NO, and mean it.

are honor killings of women due to low dowry offer ok, too? is execution of women due to the fact that they were raped and have dishonored their family, ok, too?

legitimization of this type of logic is beyond me.

[melnjones]

24. Are you kidding?

Do some research...you must not know what's involved in the procedures. Serious ignorance is not attractive.

[Coventina]

27. Ah, the fabulous excuse of "cultural heritage"

According MY cultural heritage, it is perfectly acceptable to make a living by sailing up and down a coastline killing, raping, and pillaging.

But, gee, my ethnic group doesn't do that anymore. Have we "lost" our cultural "heritage"? That part of it, thankfully we have.

It was never acceptable behavior, and eventually, civilization caught up to us and pressured us to stop. No one seems to miss it, that I can tell.

Plus, your comparison that male genital mutilation is horrible (which I tend to agree with you) doensn't make female genital mutilation any LESS horrible. What an odd justification that is! It's like saying death by firing squad isn't so bad, because some people die from poisoning.

[pnwmom]

31. He is in the United States now and he knew it was illegal.

A pair of doctors from the Phillipines were convicted of holding a woman here in slavery for 19 years. They also claimed the cultural defense.

It's bogus. When you move to another country, you choose to be subject to the country's laws. Neither ignorance nor culture is a defense.

[LeftyMom]

41. It is horrid.

But two wrongs don't make a right. After all, the fact that it's legal to hit your kids in this country isn't a good argument for legalized wife beating.

[KitSileya]

58. Do not make the mistake of thinking FGM comparable to male circumcision

A better analogy would cutting off the right hand versus cutting off a finger. In the latter case, you retain use of your hand. Equally, female genital mutilation (FGM) can be compared, as is done in this thread, to the cutting off of the entire penis. FGM is done, most often, by untrained 'wise' women, in unsanitary conditions, with improper implements, and it causes immense pain. The results are painful also, often for the rest of the girl's life, makes it painful to pee, makes menstruation dangerous by trapping blood inside the vagina, and sex and childbirth? You try having a penis forced into your urethra, which is the dimension the vagina is usually left - it tears, and bleeds, and the clitoris is gone, as is much of the nerve endings, so any pleasure may not be had to distract from the pain of the forced entry. Childbirth is downright dangerous as well, and more painful than it needs to be, as the women need to be cut open to let the child out, and then be sewn together again afterwards, in primitive conditions.

I hope that this description of what FGM is has made you think a little. Once upon a time, slavery was deemed normal by the US - that doesn't mean the tradition wasn't monstrous. We condemn cultures that stone women that have been raped, and we condemn Iran for hanging homosexuals. We don't let them get away with the excuse that 'in their culture it is deemed normal.' As a resident in the US, the man broke American law - he will be punished accordingly. He is a criminal. He took a pair of scissors and cut off his daughter's genitalia. I'd say that also qualifies him as a monster and a demon.

[Sirveri]

70. Why do you only focus on infibulation?

There are 3 distinct types of FGM, ranging from a mild nick of the clitoral hood (as practiced in Indonesia) all the way to infibulation (removal of the clitoris, labia minora, scrapping, and sewing up the labia majora). You of course decided to pick the most horrific example you could find (infibulation), and then make it appear as though that was all that was done. Removal of the clitoral hood would be analogous to removal of the male foreskin. That isn't what occurred in this case, however to claim that comparisons can not be made is incorrect. The female procedure is performed IN hospitals, on baby girls, in Egypt under sanitary conditions. Male circumcision is also performed in unsanitary conditions using unsterile equipment by inexperienced people. It has spread HIV. It has sent people to the emergency room. Initiate boys in primitive cultures have died from infection because of it.

Every 26 seconds somebody takes a pair of scissors and cuts off a part of someone else's genitalia, yet because that person is male, and it's part of your culture, you accept it. I would only change one word from your final two sentences.

"He is a criminal. He took a pair of scissors and cut off his CHILD's genitalia. I'd say that also qualifies him as a monster and a demon."

[KitSileya]

72. Did I or did I not compare male circumcision to cutting off a finger?

I do believe I did - it may not be incapacitating, but it is mutilation all the same.

According to the WHO, in 80% of all cases of FGM they cut off the clitoris and the labia minora, while 15% of the cases are infibulation. That leaves only 5% of cases being your supposedly bening procedure. They also say "FGM is usually performed by a traditional practitioner with crude instruments and without anaesthetic. Among the more affluent in society it may be performed in a health care facility by qualified health personnel." which I take to mean that the majority of the cases fall under the former type, considering the wealth distribution in Africa, where FGM is most prevalent. You can see the numbers of how many girls in each region of Africa suffers thru this mutilation in post #22.

While I do not condone male circumcision, my post was a direct rebuttal of the claim that the poster was uncomfortable with demonizing the perpetrator of this crime as a monster for doing what in their culture is deemed "normal." I tried to illustrate how monstrous a crime it really is to enlighten gorbal to the fact that regardless of whether some things are deemed normal in a culture, we still condemn these things on the basis of the worth of each individual human being. We condemn slavery, we condemn honor killings, we condemn all manners of tyical cultural practices. And we condemn FGM, and many Western nations have made it a crime, even if it happens abroad, e.g., if parents send their daughters back to Ethiopia to be mutilated, they can be prosecuted here in Norway.

In addition, in at least 95% of the cases of FGM they severly or completely reduce a woman's possibility of enjoying sex. Are you saying that male circumcision is just as bad as FGM? Do 95% of the men who are circumcised have a severe or complete loss of sexual pleasure? Does it make intercourse painful and/or dangerous? I am not saying that male circumcision is necessarily good, mind you, but there is a difference in degrees here.

And as for your claims downthread that any nation that condones any "genital cutting" cannot criticize FGM - I live in Norway, where we do not circumcize our boys, unless the parents happen to be religiously convinced it must happen, in which case they must pay for it themselves, yet the procedure must happen in a hospital.

[Sirveri]

75. Fair enough.

My claims downthread were more on the hypocrisy of ignoring something going on in ones own backyard all in the name of culture and then proceeding to bash a differant culture they know nothing about and getting vitriolic about it when the procedures are comprable. And yes, male circumcision is just as bad as female circumcision, FGM being reserved for things worse than clitoral hood removal i.e. Sunna (which I refer to as female circumcision), which I consider to be analagous.

On edit: The reason I mentioned infibulation was this segment that I first replied to. "The results are painful also, often for the rest of the girl's life, makes it painful to pee, makes menstruation dangerous by trapping blood inside the vagina, and sex and childbirth?"

All of these are a result of infibulation, which according to your own provided stats isn't even widely prevalent. Infibulation actually stiches the labia majora together leaving a small hole for urine and menstruation thus leading to all of the above. End edit.

In addition FGM isn't perpetrated soley by males upon their daughters, it's primarily driven by the females upon their females, for fear that their daughters will become prostitutes or not be able to find husbands, which in their culture are very important things, more important than the females enjoyment of sex in some cases. While I don't agree with the procedure, I can at least understand why it continues, cultural inertia is a very powerful thing.

In addition, in at least 95% of the cases of FGM they severly or completely reduce a woman's possibility of enjoying sex. Are you saying that male circumcision is just as bad as FGM? Do 95% of the men who are circumcised have a severe or complete loss of sexual pleasure? Does it make intercourse painful and/or dangerous? I am not saying that male circumcision is necessarily good, mind you, but there is a difference in degrees here.

Does it matter, they both change sensation, they are both done without the owners consent. Both stem from a desire to control and destroy human sexuality. Rationalizing that it is acceptable to lose 10-20% of ones feeling but 50-90% is unacceptable is not something I will agree to. It is ALL unacceptable, unless the owner consents and agrees to it. And even then that consent shouldn't be culturally induced consent.

The problem I have is that our current FGM prohibition prohibits everything, including things that are both analagous to the male counterpart in addition to things that are even less damaging than that. Which is pure cultural bias and hypocrisy, especially given that we have a 14th amendment of the constitution which is suppossed to guarentee equality.

So to finally answer your question, no they aren't the same some of the time, but I don't care. You butcher your baby, you have no right to act shocked and offended when someone else does theirs in a way that happens to conflict with your culture. It's like voting for Bush and the Iraq war, and then getting shocked and offended about Darfur in Sudan and/or the Congo. Genital cutting of unconsenting people is wrong.

[KitSileya]

76. Ok, I didn't see where you differed between FGM and

female circumcision. Then I understand where you're coming from.

As for the laws banning every sort of female genital cutting - isn't that good? YOu wouldn't want to legalize female circumcizion just because people insist on keeping male circumcision legal? At least this way, it gives one a springboard to argue against MC, and it saves some of the children from the experience.

[Sirveri]

78. Yes, I suppose they are good laws.

At the same time there are numerous people in the American anti-circ community who want to challenge them based on gender equality issues using the 14th in an attempt to eliminate RIC, but that's another thread for another time.

[KitSileya]

79. Yeah, I'm just glad that they prosecuted the father in this case.

It means they're starting to recognize it as a crime. This girl was mutilated, and prosecuting gives a signal to all the others that it's not allright. The protests show that they've managed to show where the US stands on this matter.

[Sirveri]

81. Well, most will likely just return to their country of origin.

Have the procedure performed traditionally, then return. It's a giant problem in France where a lot of people from former French colonial possessions come out to France, then have kids, go back to their homeland on vacation, cut their children up, then they come back. It is one of the gray areas of globalisation. While I'm not too familiar with French law and immigration and citizenship rules, I've heard the story happening numerous times in numerous countries. But, the west has always felt that this has needed criminalizing, but it's really not something you see much of in this country, so nothing happened until 1996. And then no cases for a decade, because it is so underground, it's not offered by any form of establishment.

[KitSileya]

85. Yes, that is what they do, which is why Norway criminalized that too.

I don't know if anyone's been put on trial for sending their daughters back to get FGM, but in Norway, that is a crime. Unfortunately, in practice, the only way to get a conviction, I believe, is if the girls presses charges against her own parents. Danish research concludes that ca 50% of girls ith Somalian parents living in Denmark have been mutilated - there's no reason why the numbers aren't the same in Norway and the US. In Norway, we've been so lucky that some girls and young women have dared to go public with the fact that they've been mutilated, and thereby created debate and encouraged openess about it. In Scandinavia, there's a broad cooperation between the different health departments to inform and debate this practice, with the goal to end it, of course.

However, in Africa, this is not something that can be ended by individuals, or even a few families. There must be a sea change in opinion in the population, for, as you've pointed out it's the women who do it to the girls. Of course, this would not have happened without pressure from the men, but the women have internalized the misogyny. With the health hazards inherent in the procedure, it is imperative to work to end the practice, but what's more, we need to work to end the view of women of which it is a symptom.

[NotGivingUp]

62. hello? they are not removing the source of sexual pleasure!!!!!!!

[iverglas]

86. the criminal justice system does not demonize anyone

The criminal justice system determines whether someone has broken a law, and then determines what the appropriate punishment for the violation is, within the limits established by law and in accordance with the applicable principles, having regard to the circumstances of the offence.

The only culture in issue in the process is the culture in which the act took place. In this instance, the relevant culture has decided that hacking pieces off other people's bodies is unacceptable.

If the culture in question had decided to outlaw an act that did not violate the fundamental norms of the society in a way that had a public effect -- say, to outlaw prayer in one's own home or the wearing of pink on Fridays -- the culture of the individual committing the act, and that individual's right as a human being to practise his/her culture, would be in issue.

This was not a purely private act, it was an act committed on the body of another person. Individuals do not get to make and follow their own rules in that respect, in the US or any country that recognizes and respects human rights.

Individuals may well have harsh things to say about men who mutilate the bodies of their infant daughters. Sometimes, the harsh things that individuals say about other people may amount to bigotry against others and their cultural practices.

In this instance, however, the plain fact is that the man in question committed a serious criminal offence under the laws of the jurisdiction where he was living, and his act simply did not fall within the range of things that any society should be expected to tolerate in the name of cultural diversity and respect. His motives are completely irrelevant to the nature of the offence and the public need for such offences to be denounced, deterred and punished, for the protection of individuals vulnerable to this kind of assault.

I can't ignore the appalling trivialization of the offence committed against this child by you and the usual opportunistic anti-circumcision brigade. I am not a supporter of infant circumcision (i.e. of boys), but that is a separate issue and simply has nothing to do (at least in the case of non-ritual circumcision, which might be similar in theory but not in practice in any event) with either the practice of female genital mutilation or the usual effects of the practice.

[bullimiami]

11. removing a clitoris with scissors is hardly equivalent to circumcision.

why do they insist on calling it that? its more like chopping off half a kids penis.

this is purely mutilation to destroy any possible future of her getting pleasure from sex. it is very sick.

[Warren Stupidity]

15. You should research male ritual circumcision.

It is a brutal, barbaric and unhygenic procedure. Surgical, mediclly neccesary male circumcision is one thing, cosmetic or ritual circumcision are quite another. And yes, removing the foreskin desensitises the glans, part of the point of ritual male circumcision is to reduce sexual pleasure. The other part is obedience to authority.

[customerserviceguy]

17. Having had mine done at 19

(it was medically necessary) I can speak from "before" and "after". I have to say, no reduction of sexual pleasure, although I was a virgin before the circumcision. Desensitizing the glans helps a man last longer, and that usually is pleasant to his partner.

[pnwmom]

33. I did research it thoroughly. Twice.

When each of my sons were born, several years apart. A local anesthesia was used, we watched, and our sons' main objection was to the needle pricks. There was little crying and it healed very quickly. At the time, we decided on the procedure because an older sibling had had an undiagnosed UTI that led to kidney damage. Circumcisions reduce the likelihood of UTI's in infancy.

By the way, the World Health Organization is wrapping up two very large-scale studies in Africa that are showing that -- everything else being equal -- circumcision also lowers the risk of AIDS about 60%.

[Vorta]

12. It's hard to believe that there is another side to this story

Adem denied he had excised his daughter's clitoris or asked anyone else to do it. His defense lawyer conceded that the girl had in fact had her clitoris removed, but implied that Fortunate Adem's family--immigrants from South Africa--might have been responsible.<4>
Adem's lawyer argued that Fortunate's accusations were the result of the acrimonious divorce and custody battle the couple went through in 2003, during which Fortunate received sole custody of the girl.<3> The fact that the crime had occurred in 2001 and yet was not reported by Fortunate until 2003 was used to suggest the accusation was spurious and vindictive.
Fortunate claimed she did not discover her daughter's amateur clitoridectomy until an argument with her husband in 2003 about the practice of female genital cutting, during which, according to Fortunate, Khalid Adem implied it had already occurred to their daughter. The two were divorced several months afterwards, and Fortunate was awarded sole custody of the girl.<3>
Khalid claimed the reverse, that it was Fortunate who had revealed to him that their daughter had had her clitoris removed, and that she was falsely accusing him to obtain leverage for the custody battle.<6>
The defense also tried to cast doubt on the veracity of the testimony of Adem's daughter, who was two years old at the time of the incident, but was seven by the time she testified before the court. Defense attorney W. Mark Hill brought in psychologist Jack Farrar to raise the question of false memory.<7> Again, the fact of the mutilation was not disputed by the defense. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_Adem

Obviously the jury believed the prosecution, despite the practice most often being a maternal ritual.

[ronnie624]

49. Thank you for the background.

Very interesting.

But beware! Many seem to prefer to draw their verbal knives and leap to attack anyone who attempts to understand instead of vilify.

Incidentally, I consider female "circumcision" brutal and barbaric, and the equivalent of cutting off the head of ones penis. I also believe it should be illegal, but obviously, education is the key to ending such a ritual.

Imagine what could be accomplished if 1/3 of the U.S. military budget was devoted to programs devoted to helping and educating the people of Africa, instead of mass murder and plunder in other parts of the world.

[struggle4progress]

51. How could the wife not know for two years this had been done? They lived together

until after the wife said she discovered this fact. But the child's behavior, including trust of adults, must have changed immediately, and the injury must have been obvious to anyone who helped the child dress or bathe. The story is strange.

[zreosumgame]

73. ok, trying to understand here...

the WIFE seems to not have ,ahem, 'inspected' the daughter close enough to see if her clitoris was intact..but the HUSBAND had? Uh, why do I think there may be waaaaaaaaaaay more to this story...

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

18. I hereby declare that, should George W. Bush tell these psychos to go fuck themselves

in public, he'll get a thumbs up from me -- maybe even a letter of appeciation.

Only condition is: he has to use real profanity and do it on national TV.

[Katzenjammer]

25. I feel the same way. Talk about a vile, misogynistic ritual. ukkk. (nt)

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

87. I now see there's doubt that the father did it. But SOMEbody did. The question is:

Are the people in Ethiopia protesting that someone was railroaded or that one "aspect of their culture" is being considered a crime? (goes read article) Hm, seems like the former. I take the W comment back then.

[nashville_brook]

20. "circumcision" ?? no f'n way -- it's female genital mutilation. period.

that's quite a euphemism.

[WindRavenX]

28. yup

Sigh.

[williesgirl]

21. In THIS country, that's a crime. Should be there too. Lock him up and throw away the key.

[muriel_volestrangler]

23. As pointed out in reply #12, it's not the illegality in question

He claims he didn't do it at all - he says it was his wife.

[pnwmom]

30. He did it.

There was lots of evidence that it was he.

Including a videotaped session of his daughter with a therapist when she was 3, describing how her father had hurt her.

[nashville_brook]

22. female genital mutilation wiki link... in case anyone's interested

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_mutilation

[rpannier]

37. Thanks

I appreciate the information.

[daninthemoon]

63. Exactly on target. I think this should be one of the top humanitarian

issues for the UN and whatever other organization might help. Also, keep in mind that this map follows the population distribution of Africa, so even though it looks like only a relatively small geographic area, per capita we're talking about most African girls having this done to them.. This is nothing like a male circumcission, it is the removal of the source of the female orgasm. African women are about the most oppressed group of people in the world today.

[Pavulon]

26. When in rome...

if you dont like the laws that say you cant chop on your kids privates, well you know the rest.

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NickB79]

34. Any man protesting FGM should sign up for his own, similar surgery

Which would be the equivalent of chopping off the penis mid-shaft. Let's see how many men protest then.

[depakid]

35. I reckon that international aid

might be tied to barbaric practices.

Money & food talk- and pathological practices walk.

[Selatius]

36. I have a new tradition for them that they should try

If they mutilate women so that they will stay faithful, then men should have their balls cut off after they have married and had children.

[burrowowl]

38. Circumcision is the

removal of the foreskin, so-called female circumcision is the removal of the clitoris, i.e., male equivalent of removal of the glans ergo no possibility of pleasure and much pain. Also includes sewing up the labia until married, where upon labia are cut open with a knife.
Sicking!

[nashville_brook]

40. also called "infibulation"

this is the "procedure" that is most disturbing and really exposes the ritual for what it is -- misogyny.

from wiki

Infibulation

The form of female circumcision regarded as the most severe is Type III, which is also referred to as infibulation or pharaonic circumcision. This is often carried out by a "gedda," or matron of the village, without anaesthetic, on girls between the ages of two and six.

Infibulation replaces the vulva with a wall of flesh from the pubis to the anus, except for a pencil-size opening at the inferior portion of the vulva to allow urine and menstrual blood to pass through. A reverse infibulation is where the opening is left in the anterior part of the vulva in front of the urethra. After excision, the labia are sewn together, and since the skin is abraded and raw after being cut, the two surfaces will join via the natural healing and scar-formation process to form a smooth surface. The girl's legs are tied together for around two weeks to prevent her from moving the wound. <14>
The sewn-together labia majora are slightly opened before sexual intercourse by the girl's husband — girls will often be married at 12–16 years old — or by his female relatives, whose responsibility it is to inspect the wound every few weeks and open it some more if necessary.

During childbirth, the enlargement is too small to allow vaginal delivery, and so the infibulation must be opened completely and restored after delivery. Once again, the legs are tied together to allow the wound to heal, and the procedure is repeated for each subsequent act of intercourse or childbirth. When childbirth takes place in a hospital, the surgeons may preserve the infibulation by enlarging the vagina with deep episiotomies. Afterwards, the patient may insist that her vagina be closed again so that her husband does not reject her.<14>

This practice is reported to cause the disappearance of sexual pleasure for the women affected, as well as major medical complications, although advocates of the practice deny this, and continue to carry it out.

[Sirveri]

39. The responses are quite amusing.

All this outrage over such a simple social custom that I've heard argued numerous times should remain a parental choice.

When I expressed the same outrage back in the early 90's I was met by the following:
"It's none of your business how I raise my children."
"How dare you try to infringe upon MY right to raise my children according to MY values."
"It's harmless, and it's so much cleaner, we're doing it"
"My entire family does it, and it's what I'm used to."
"It's part of my culture..."
"It's part of my religion, you bigot..."
"It's just a little flap of skin, they won't miss it."

Genital cutting is genital cutting. Even the slightest pin prick to a females genitalia is illegal in this country as of 1998. Before you all go about expressing horrified outrage try taking a long hard look at your own cultural practices before commenting about how this is 'barbaric' and 'mutilation'. And food for thought from 1959.
http://www.noharmm.org/femcirctech.htm

[piedmont]

42. Is there a point in there somewhere?

[Sirveri]

43. yes

The point is that in everyones race to condemn someone else for a pointless cultural practice that damages another human being for no apparent reason they ignore their own, or attempt to rationalise it away. Call a spade a spade. Male or female, Ethiopia or United States, we have more in common with each other than not. How can people be so quick to condemn a cultural act of another land when they practice something that is almost the same in their own, and then not even see the correlation. Or worse attempt to rationalize it away to assuage their own guilt.

[piedmont]

44. Would you care to name the practice you are talking about?

Or will you continue to dance around it?

[Sirveri]

46. The practice of genital cutting.

What, was it not quite obvious enough for you?

[piedmont]

50. Stop dancing

You seem to be implying that male circumcision is equivalent to female genital mutilation. Which (if that's what you believe) is FUCKING ABSURD.


What, was it not quite obvious enough for you?

No, it wasn't. Why not just say what you mean? Afraid someone will call it stupid?

[Sirveri]

65. Genital cutting is absurd.

I'm glad we agree. It is simply too bad that you are unable to see that both male and female are done to unconsenting minors. Both in the name of culture. Both in the name of hygiene. Both in the name of cleanliness. Both in the name of them being more accepted by future mates. Both to lessen their risk of catching disease. Both are highly entrenched in the cultural fabric of their society.

But somehow it is OK for us to perform genital cutting on our children. Yet they can not. Oh, I forgot, one happens to be done on males, the other females AND males.

I'm sure you're sitting there, rationalizing it, thinking of all the 'medical' excuses you think you know. Spare me, I've been fighting the fight to end male circ in this country since 1995. I saw and championed the FGM bill when it came out and was made popular by Oprah. I saw the HIV studies begin to evolve from their earliest beginnings. I saw cervical cancer slowly get eliminated as a health benefit to male circumcision.

That's why I find the responses amusing, because about seven years ago I was the one filled with the outrage. I know none of you will ever go to sub Saharan Africa and fight their populations to stop what you are so outraged about. You won't look into a mirror and see someone who is tired and haggard from mentally screaming for 4-6 hours a day every day, 8-10 on weekends. You will never know the disappointment when you try and convince another person to not butcher their child for the sake of cultural conformity and they spit it back in your face.

I don't really give a damn anymore, as far as I am concerned you are all a bunch of blind hypocrites. You can yell and shout all you want, but none of you care enough to do anything about it, you won't even donate a dime to stop it in those countries. So all of you can spare me your pretentious rage, since I've actually had to fight the battle against culture. I'm done fighting that fight, let those who are younger and have a greater desire to smash their head against the wall wear themselves out for a while.

[Trajan]

48. IF you are referring to Male Circumcision ...

Then you obviously do not recognize, purposely or ignorantly, the difference ....

Cutting a clitorus DENIES sexual pleasure ... cutting a foreskin does not ....

Cutting a clitorus more closely resembles removing a penis .... NOT a foreskin ....

While I am ambivelant about circumcision, I am QUITE clear about this practice: it is horrible ... and criminal ....

[Sirveri]

64. Sunna is the more widely practiced and accepted form

of female cutting, it only involves the clitoral hood, which is analgous to the male foreskin, and is illegal in this country. It is a widely performed procedure in numerous Egyptian hospitals on young girls.

Whereas our own doctors back in the 50's used to burn the entire clitoris off using carbonic acid. I know a person who has had the procedure done, in this country, during that time frame, and was it confirmed by UCSF medical staff.

Why is it so hard to accept that genital cutting of unconsenting people is wrong. Removing healthy functioning tissue from anyone, regardless of age is wrong. People have the right to decide what body parts they get to keep.

[Trajan]

83. The case in question ...

Involved the complete removal of the clitorus .... hence you comment comparing the two are what is absurd ....

I have NO problem with customs which follow cultural traditions IF they do not weaken the human ability to live a full, sexually enjoyable life ..... Even tissue removal of the skin surrounding the clitorus does NOT impede sexual fulfillment ....

I am not sure what the message of your argument is intended to convey ... it is as if you wish to claim that ANYONE complaining about this vicious and brutal act should just STFU unless they are willing to also condemn circumcision ..... This is a non sequitur fallacy in my book ....

[AngryAmish]

60. This is absurd

[GoddessOfGuinness]

56. News for you...

1959 was almost 50 years ago.

Slavery was a "cultural practice" in this country at one time, too...one that many of us continue to fight, while others are loathe to apply that label to those who work for less than a living wage.

When a social custom inflicts physical or emotional injury on a person, it's time to re-think that custom.

[Sirveri]

66. I agree

male circumcision is a surgery. Surgery by definition inflicts physical harm. The most commonly given reasons for its propogation are 'to look like daddy' and 'because it's cleaner'. It has not been shown to have enough medical benefits to warrant the AAP to reccomend it as a routine procedure, instead defferring to 'social and cultural factors' to sway parental opinion.

And you say 50 years is a long time.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

67. 50 years ago, this would not have even been a topic of discussion.

Yes, 50 years can be a long time.

Discourse on the subject is important, as evidence that male circumcision as preventive medicine has come under scrutiny. If it isn't necessary to cut, it shouldn't be done, in my opinion. But then, it would be best to present the evidence that the operation is pointless, and create a new topic, rather than hijack a thread that is specifically devoted to a particular case of female circumcision.

[Sirveri]

69. This isn't a topic in many places on earth.

As for threadjacking, I'm commenting more on the outraged people posting who can't even look objectivly at what they are themselves doing. Not even you can do it with the statement of "But then, it would be best to present the evidence that the operation is pointless". The burden of proof isn't upon us to prove a negative (which is impossible to do), but upon the procedure to prove it needs to be performed to change the natural state. The mere fact that it is entrenched automatically biased you to think that it is 'how things should be' simply because it's what you are most familiar with.

But either way, the medical benefits which are mentioned in the link above are still relevant, it does prevent phimosis of the clitoral hood and remove clitoral adhesions as well as improving local hygiene. The differance is that nobody is recommending it as a routine procedure for all baby girls, whereas the entrenched male counterpart does give those as viable medical reasons. In addition the link sought to IMPROVE female sexual response and enjoyment.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

77. I'll be happy to comment

when you start your own thread in GD on the subject.

[Sirveri]

80. I'd argue that I was on topic...

Since the original post was about people in Ethiopia protesting our trial outcome. Then I posted that it was basically due to cultural differances (which it is), and then it spiraled out from there. But I'm burning out on this subject again, rehashing the same tired arguements and pulling up the same articles on cirp.org as referance material, culling through medical studies I've already seen twenty times. All to be told screw you I don't care I'm doing it anyways because it's part of my culture. Sorry, I'm done playing that game. I just hope someone somewhere read my posts, didn't think I was a complete nut job, and actually thought a little bit more about the complexity of the issue instead of the simple knee jerk reaction I normally see.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

82. I read nothing in the OP article that indicated this was a protest of cultural differences...

The article left me with the impression that this trial was the result of a nasty divorce case in which both parties accused the other of mutilating their daughter's genitals.

I also read nothing that proved either party to be the guilty one...so maybe the protesters have a point.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

89. You are correct. (Although I'll bet there's much "code protesting" in there) -nt

[Crim_n al]

57. You are not the least bit amusing.

Anybody who calls the removal of any chance of sexual pleasure for women "a simple social custom," is as unspeakably deviant as they come. And the numbers doing it and supporting is are irrelevant. Even if everybody in the world advocated such torture, that would never make it right.

As for your comparison with male circumcision, firstly, they are of such a different order of severity that they are barely comparable, and secondly, there was no way I was letting anyone circumcise my sons, even though my husband wanted it done to them.

Anyone wanting to take a knife (or scissors or sharp stone) to the genitals of an innocent baby or child for no good medical reason is a perverted primitive, in my opinion.

[Sirveri]

68. I'm glad we agree.

We agree totally on all counts, which I find refreshing.

I have followed this subject and its male counterpart for 11 years now. I was heavily active for about 4 of those years. I have in fact become completly and totally jaded on the subject. I generally stay away, but when I saw the vitriol in the postings, which was a mirror image of my own, I had to come out and say something about it. Especially since it was female circ that first led me to examine male. But, lets get real here. No DU'er really cares about this subject, we're all going to froth at the mouth on this thread, and then abandon it once it cycles off the page. I know the Ethiopians don't care what we think, most people in this country certainly don't give a damn what I think.

I think what bothers me the most however, is that people are not even open to honest discussion of the subject. They won't do research, they won't listen to oppossing view points. In 11 years I've learned enough that I can successfully argue both sides, male and female, fight either field for either team using any bent of arguement. But when nobody on either side will listen, what's the point?

Here's an arguement worth considering. In traditional Islamic and African societies, female virginity (lack thereof) is a reason for stoning to death of the female in question. female circ (the worse the better in this case) makes the question of virginity a guarentee in the case of infibulation, or easily ascertainable and less like lost in the case of clitoridectomy (clitoral removal), or at least more easily recognised in the case of sunna (clitoral hood removal). In this case female circ actually prevents deaths.

The closest the male counterpart can come to a benefit like that is in the potential decrease in UTI rate leading to lowered cases of renal failure in neonates. Thus making female circ more medically worthwhile than female. And furthermore the more excessive the female circ the more helpfull it is to the female in question. AND it has to be done before they reach the age of sexual maturity to be effective.

One would argue that perhaps we should attempt to change that societies view on female virginity and the Koran's interpretation therein. I would agree. Shouldn't we focus on the murder of women by these societies before we focus on a procedure which will keep them safer from being murdered?

[Crim_n al]

71. My apologies for misunderstanding you.

I had thought you were saying that, because male circumcision was okay we couldn't argue against female circumcision. I'm glad to meet someone else who is against both. It's bad enough when a child has to be operated on for a good reason, but to do it for no reason ...
I have trouble even believing it's still done. Australian doctors no longer will offer the procedure, (of male circumcision) and many will refuse to do it.

Being a pragmatist I can see the value in finding a way to eliminate the perceived need for female circumcision. I'd expect the wish for daughters to be marriagable is behind a lot of it, and educating the men to realise that an uncircumcised wife might make a better marriage partner could make a difference there.

Changing the laws and expectations regarding virginity would be much harder.

[roguevalley]

45. self edited. This is so horrific I can't really reply. Why oh why do

men feel they have to chop women up?

RV, shuddering over all of it.

[depakid]

47. 10 years is not enough

Life in prison should have been the sentence.

People like that ought NEVER to walk the streets again. Period.

[Princess Turandot]

53. It does make me wonder whether a stranger doing something like this..

would have received a stronger sentence. All in all, it's about as disgusting as it gets.

[Hekate]

52. Come to the US -- obey our laws. We don't sacrifice babies to Moloch, either.

We don't buy and sell children into slavery to pay their fathers' debts. We don't bind little girls' feet until their bones break. We don't countenance "honor killings" because a teen has a boyfriend, or bride burnings due to unpaid doweries.

We don't do a lot of things that in other cultures were/are considered time-honored and immutable cultural practices. Most immigrants to the US are trying to get AWAY from shit like this.

You want to wear the national costume of your grandparents -- no problem. But if you want to cut off a baby girl's clitoris, you can think about your crime in a US prison.

This man's fate should be publicized everywhere in the immigrant communities of this country. And as for the demonstrations in Addis Ababa, if the US government can't stand tough in the face of people who want to abuse their children on US soil we should all be ashamed.

Hekate

[bleedingheart]

54. You said exactly what I was thinking!

[hatrack]

84. Succinctly put - you took the words right out of my mouth

Horrified and pissed off and still nothing short of AMAZED that people would protest for the "right" to practice this kind of barbarism.

[OregonBlue]

55. Who cares what they think. This barbaric custom cannot be allowed

to happen here. It's misogyny plain and simple.

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[geek tragedy]

74. I encourage all of those protestors to

stay the fuck out of the United States. Problem solved.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

88. In all fairness, they seem to be protesting that the father didn't do it

rather than defend the procedure. Read the article linked in the OP.

Edit: for those who DO defend it, the USA is hardly the only place in the world they should stay away from. What about "all of the Americas, all of Europe, most of Asia, of Oceania, basically everywhere but crazed theocracies?"