August 27, 2010 on Russia Today
Medical officials in the UK say the number of women who've been subjected to genital mutilation is on the rise. Although the practice is illegal in the country, thousands are considered to be at risk annually -- and no one has ever been convicted of the crime.
these disgusting wackaloons need to be terminated from the human race for doing this.
ReplyDeleteMale circumcision is also mutilation. I hate the double standard
ReplyDeleteYes, it's mutilation also. But they really can't be compared. One causes you to completely be unable to enjoy sex, the other doesn't make a big difference.
ReplyDeleteIf both are mutilation, they can be compered. Like this:
ReplyDeleteCne causes you to be completely unable to enjoy sex, and the other only makes it less so for both participants, and possibly painful for the partner.
Shep, ask someone who has sexual experience from before his circumcision.
Ask women with experience of both mutilated and unmutilated men, too.
About time someone - preferably lots- get prosecuted for performing it and procuring it.
ReplyDeleteIf necessary interview and prosecute the parents.
What about the guys perspective. Would a guy ever want to marry a woman that has been made to become uninterested in sex?
ReplyDeleteMake it a capital crime, with no appeal, and withhold financial aid from all countries that refuse to get on board.
ReplyDeleteIt would be more comparable if they actually chopped the whole penis off also. Not really the same thing at all.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IAlEcB4KNDo
The question is not "how they compare" but "do they compare", and being two forms of the same practice, they are comparable.
ReplyDeleteResults of such comparison would show that one is less severe for the individual, but the point in the discussion here is the double standard arising from the euphemism of 'circumcision'. Said point being that we should drop the euphemism and call things what they are: genital mutilation, both male and female.