Female genital mutilation victim was 'aged just seven'

[dirtychinchilla]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-23001119

The poor girl, I can't believe circumcision still goes on in this country, legal or not.

Having said that, I'm still shocked that, when done to a woman, this is called genital mutilation; when done to a man, it's called circumcision, just part of religion. ********

 

[R.P.L]

Having said that, I'm still shocked that, when done to a woman, this is called genital mutilation; when done to a man, it's called circumcision, just part of religion. ********

Unless I'm mistaken, the female version is a far more unpleasant procedure..

 

[sports_brah]

Circumcision is still mutilation, usually performed on baby boys who obviously have not given consent. Should be banned, and allowed only after the age of 18. We have laws about tattoo's, drinks, drugs, and yet we allow routine mutilation?

 

[The Running Man]

Sounds bad but we have people in here everyday banging on about how banning the burka or whatever is somehow racist and that we should change our laws to allow minorities to act like they were still in Asia.

Where are these people now?

 

[wnb]

I read the OP bbc link and it sounds dreadful, I had no idea what was the distorted reasoning behind such a dreadful mutilation.

 

[Vulcan]

Sounds bad but we have people in here everyday banging on about how banning the burka or whatever is somehow racist and that we should change our laws to allow minorities to act like they were still in Asia.

Where are these people now?

There is clearly a difference between someone's clothing, and having a piece of their body permanently removed.

The laws should be based on equality, not about preference to one group or another.

 

[Hicks]

Jesus! (No pun intended)

Hasn't this subject been done to death and more already?

And by the OP himself http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18418857&highlight=genital+mutilation

 

[arknor]

Circumcision is still mutilation, usually performed on baby boys who obviously have not given consent. Should be banned, and allowed only after the age of 18. We have laws about tattoo's, drinks, drugs, and yet we allow routine mutilation?

atleast there can be health benefits though to that and some people need it done anyway because they are to tight.
although I'm glad my member is fully intact.

for women it's only to remove the pleasure from sex?

 

[The Running Man]

There is clearly a difference between someone's clothing, and having a piece of their body permanently removed.

The laws should be based on equality, not about preference to one group or another.

The only difference is the scope of activity not in the logic behind why such activity should be able to take place.

For example is should male circumcision be allowed? What about neck rings or ear rings on an underage non consenting child. The situation is you either allow these cultures to what they want or you get them to match our standards. Grey areas in between are a slippery slope.

 

[MooMoo444]

Religion or not, it shouldn't happen. The child didn't choose the religion, let alone the practices. Why should they have it done to them?

 

[Craig1981]

Its a vile and disturbing practise and should be made illegal. Circumsition is barely any better, and should only be performed for medical reasons.

 

[neil_g]

theres a lot of assumption that all male circumcisions are done because of religion..

 

[The Running Man]

theres a lot of assumption that all male circumcisions are done because of religion..

I'm making an assumption that 100% of unnecessary circumcisions are for religious reasons.

 

[Craig1981]

theres a lot of assumption that all male circumcisions are done because of religion..

Not all are. I have a friend who had it done as an adult due to medical reasons. But I think its fair to say that the overwhelming majority of them are done as a religious practise and without neccessity.

 

[neil_g]

I'm making an assumption that 100% of unnecessary circumcisions are for religious reasons.

Not all are. I have a friend who had it done as an adult due to medical reasons. But I think its fair to say that the overwhelming majority of them are done as a religious practise and without neccessity.

maybe.. if like to see some figures on that though. for example from what ive heard from parents etc, doctors actually used to recommend it for hygiene reasons. no idea if this is still the case however.

 

[realBabelfish]

atleast there can be health benefits though to that and some people need it done anyway because they are to tight.
although I'm glad my member is fully intact.

for women it's only to remove the pleasure from sex?

male circumcision should only be allowed for health reasons. just because you believe in sky fairies is no reason to chop some of your son's foreskin off. its child abuse IMO.

female circumcision should be classed as child torture and all parties (including parents) should see a lengthy jail sentence (10+ years)

 

[realBabelfish]

The only difference is the scope of activity not in the logic behind why such activity should be able to take place.

For example is should male circumcision be allowed? What about neck rings or ear rings on an underage non consenting child. The situation is you either allow these cultures to what they want or you get them to match our standards. Grey areas in between are a slippery slope.

earrings are quite different. the hole seals up and there is virtually no pain (ive had a few piercings in my time but they are all healed up now).

not quite as easy to grow the C or foreskin back!

 

[The Running Man]

maybe.. if like to see some figures on that though. for example from what ive heard from parents etc, doctors actually used to recommend it for hygiene reasons. no idea if this is still the case however.

Were those doctors foreign? He wasnt called scaramanga was he?

 

[Craig1981]

Were those doctors foreign? He wasnt called scaramanga was he?

He did have a third nipple....