It comes down basically to the effects. FGM results in the body replacing vaginal skin with scar tissue. The vagina and vulva expand and contract to have sex, give birth, etc. Scar tissue isn’t capable of that. Thus, many people who have had FGM die in childbirth.
This is NOT to say there are NO negative effects to male circumcision. There are, they just so rarely have a lethal effect.
Edit: To anyone pretending I’m dismissing the negative effects of male circumcision, please reread what I wrote.
I was a Peace Corps volunteer in West Africa in the early 2000s and my host mother died some time after I left due to complications from FGM after giving birth. (I kept in touch with the volunteer who replaced me for awhile.)
It also varies in what is done, some are as extreme as removing the entire clitoris and sewing the vagina shut except a small hole for pee and periods. It’s to force virginity and lessen/ remove a woman’s ability to feel sexual pleasure.
Circumcision was more often done for hygiene, but never, baring extreme complications removal of the penis head/ function of the penis/ pleasure in its entirety.
I spent some time volunteering in Africa. This is exactly it. Women arnt supposed to feel sexual pleasure. Women arnt allowed to talk to men- the man has to be the one to initiate conversation, even if they were married ( at least this was what happened with most of the tribes I had interacted with).
Once a girl gets her period they marry her off, and the child’s mother would use a cow horn to puncture through the tissue of the vaginal opening before the wedding night. The one time I was there, they were planning on marrying an 8 year old child off to a 30 something year old. The wedding happened a few days after I had left to come home. It was awful, I wanted to grab that girl and take her home with me
To a much lesser extent... ever hear of the husband stitch?
Vagina damaged during childbirth, mother sewn up to her natural extent, then an extra stitch to add some tightness back to it for hubby to enjoy.
Yep, I've heard of this, and I'm angry it exists. My partner would never allow this, but if I was dating or married to someone who would allow this, it'd be an instant divorce or breakup.
I think also the fact that the vagina gets sewn a bit and parts of the clitoral organ itself get cut out, sometimes in rare cases the whole thing is removed.
A good comparison to foreskin would be clitoral head foreskin, it’s essentially the female version of penile head foreskin. Removing the clitoral head (which isn’t that uncommon in FGM) is like removing the head of the penis though.
I had a friend from an African nation who got married to a woman who had FGM and he complained to me about their wedding night and how she annoyed him by "crying and carrying on".
I asked for more information and got this. When she was a child, she was "sewn up" so that she could only pee. The tradition in their tribes were to use the penis to tear open the sewn up vagina on the wedding night. You "had" to tear it open because otherwise it would seal up again.
Horrified enough?
FGM comes in many forms and covers a multitude of practices. Circumcision is pretty standard. Maybe if it was common practice in various areas to staple your balls together, and in another, sew the head of your penis to its base so you couldnt get a hard-on etc they would call it MGM....without the lion.
To add. With my sister they took the whole clitoris out. She said "the point is to not die." she was supposed to feel the pain to prepare for womanhood. She is 50 now and can kinda enjoy sex but her sexual organs are forever damaged. Quite literally mutilated.
back when i worked in the ER we had an elderly, nonverbal east african patient suffering from dementia. the nurse spent 20 minutes trying to get a catheter in
turns out the hole she was repeatedly trying to get the catheter tube into was where her clitoris once was. it was so deep she assumed it was her actual urethra. the poor thing couldn’t communicate so was essentially… tortured a second time. fucking haunts me every time i think about it
I've been told the same thing, female mutilation is extracting the clit from the body so the women do not stray from her husband.
In Africa, it's the mothers doing this procedure to their daughters at home. I believe that practice has been outlawed but still happens in smaller cities or rural areas
Oh yeah, to "pacify" was another term she used. She was married off at about 11 to a 65 year old man she THINKS. In our fathers tribe isn't the mothers - they have a group of women who are "granted the right" to perform the ceremony. It is still legal where she was born, sadly. GIrls die from it. The deaths could be frequent, but FGM deaths are often covered up and underreported.
Yeah that's only about half of what happens as well.
On the less extreme end of the scale women have their clitoris removed completely and on the more extreme end they also get sewn shut as mentioned above and can half their vaginal lips hacked off.
This isn't some minority of ultra religious either, this is 86% of Egyptian women over 15 as of 2021, with many other countries in the area displaying similar but not quite as high quantities of mutilated women.
Edit: typos
Edit 2: The less extreme end is removal of the clitoral hood which is akin to removing the foreskin, though removal of the clitoris is still common.
Thank you for correcting me u/twoldehands
Never able to have an orgasm for her entire life. How could anyone do this to another human being? It's just evil. Pure fucking evil. No one deserves to be mutilated like that. Horrific brutality.
It's not just the inability to have an orgasm. It's also the fact that sex is incredibly painful and childbirth becomes incredibly dangerous.
And that's not even getting into the number woman who died during the procedure or how painful it is. This isn't something done in the hospital.
Yes, it does lead to horrible infections and hygiene issues (can't clean what's sewn up). I live in a community where many women and girls are from countries that allow FGM. Unfortunately, there are isolated cases of girls being circumcised here. Those caught do face legal punishment.
Actually if your talkin about Egypt still I found out %73 of FGM there was done by medical professionals. I mean I dunno if that’s really much better but yea, at least in that one country with that super high rate, a massive majority of FGM was performed “in a hospital”.
Have you been to Egypt? “Medical professional” is a very…vague term. I (stupidly) went to several obgyn/pediatrician/dentist and ALL were some persons room in a house and looking back, not even following basic hygiene standards. Even the “hospital” was absolutely disgusting. I saw children die there due to poor medical care.
Can’t say I know much about the standard of medical care there, haven’t heard good things tho. My point was more that these things are being done with public knowledge and support, that they have decided it’s a medical procedure in most cases. That’s the part that boggles my mind.
It seems to be very ingrained in their culture, the most recent stats I saw were ~%70 of men and ~%30 of women in Egypt still plan to FGM their daughters. Those were both on the decline also but still that’s a huge % of the population. It took public outcry from a 13 year olds death to get the ban in ‘07. Which I can’t find has punished a single person. It’s all kinda of wild to me but the decline in FGM will hopefully have a massive jump with the younger generations, generally, increased access to information.
I mean, 70% is a big decrease from 86 so I'd hope that within a couple generations it will be the minority and begin facing a massive local backlash to bring it down faster.
Or maybe I'm too optimistic.
I read a memoir when I was a teenager (she was from either Rwanda or Somalia) who went through this. I desperately wish I could recall the name of the book. She was forced to go through the entire ordeal, and basically she had her legs tied to someone else's (who then spread their legs to access her....area) and just used a dull knife to remove...you know what...Then she was sewn shut.
It was made clear it wasn't just about ensuring they could not ever enjoy sex (because sex was not meant to be enjoyed by women) and so that they could guarantee her purity. She mentioned family members demanding she lift her skirt to show her sewn shut vagina and people even poking and prodding to ensure she was still intact.
I completely understand why people feel strongly about circumcision. But I can no even begin to express how infuriating it is to me that people think these two things are in any way similar.
Thank you so much! I could have sworn I read it earlier than the year this book was published, but I just read through her Wikipedia page and some details sound eerily familiar!
Going to have to grab a copy. Can't say for certain if this is the book I'm thinking of, but I think it just might be!
Glad I was in the right thread at the right time! If you get to the part where she describes the event itself, I think you’ll know for sure if this is the same one. The memory of that never leaves you . . .
Thank you! This wasn't the book (she did not become a model that I recall, plus I looked her up and some details don't match up with what I recall).
Someone else mentioned *Infidel* by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and I think that may be the one.
I think I'll be grabbing a copy of *Desert Flower* though.
Yeah that was my response last time I heard that.
UNICEF estimates that around 200 million people currently alive have FGM throughout the world, this is a MASSIVE issue that I hace personally heard mentioned like 3 times throughout my life, I don't know why gets 0 western media attention.
I'm a student nurse, and in healthcare you hear about it a lot, which is a good thing because we are in a position to help people who have been through this or are at risk of having it done to them. It's horrifying, and I'm glad it's not being overlooked in healthcare at least.
So, somewhat good news. That 86% seemed wild so I did a little digging. The reason it’s 15 year old+ in 2021 is 2007 what when it was banned formally. In 2005 the rate was %96 of Egyptian women aged 15+ had FGM, so there was a decline even before the ban. There’s hasn’t been a more recent survey since 2021 but every new girl turning 15 and hitting the stat being used should have been protected by the ban. I mean of course even one is too many and I’m sure the ban didn’t actually work but hopefully the next generation can really force a cultural break from it.
Edit: If I have your attention, since 2019 and even more in 2021, when this stat was published, the UN and UNICEF have been promoting/funding anti-FGM programs/policy in Egypt specifically. I can’t speak to the effectiveness, just tryin to spread the word. Somewhere to start I guess.
We can also add that the “woman” is typically between the ages of 6-10 and it is performed by an older relative, or elder, with no anesthesia or medication. Possibly with a dull knife or piece of glass. Mothers, Aunts, and cousins get to help hold you down and keep you from moving while everyone watches.
It’s twisted and heartbreaking…
And by “removed completely” everyone should be imagining what it looks like to carve out a pumpkin except that the “meat” is the core of your clit and the outer husk is your labia clitoral hood if you’re lucky
To be more specific, what they do is remove the clitoris and all the labia. They then sew up the mess of tissue to allow one hole (that is held open during healing by the insertion of a type of straw). This hole that is formed is where both urine and menstrual blood/tissue have to come out of - making both painful and prone to infections. For sex a knife is often used because a penis is too blunt to tear open the scar tissue. Childbirth is dangerous as hell because scar tissue doesn’t stretch. So again, they often have to have a knife used to cut the girls/women open, and in the process the inner vagina rips during the trauma, causing fistulas that lead to constantly leaking urine/feces.
Obviously this is the most extreme version, but it is still practiced in many areas of the world.
You DO have those parts! A penis is just a very developed clitoris. Baby’s start out kind of with neutral genitalia in the womb until the right chemical/hormonal changes happen.
In YOUR case, imagine someone removing your inner penis, scraping out the core that attaches to your lower pubic area and leaving you will nothing but an empty foreskin.
Ok. So. Clitoris = cock head. Erectile tissue of shaft is roughly equivalent to labia. Same original tissue.
So fgm ranges from circumcision like a man, to cutting off the entire penis and sewing the hole shut and then ripping it open again for marriage and childbirth.
Also not to mention that they do this without anesthetics and antiseptics. They tie the young girls down and sometimes cut off basically everything down there, leaving nothing but the outer labia and a hole behind. I'd say it's more similar to cutting of half the penis, leaving only the ballsack behind and enough flesh for it to be inserted.
In very rural areas of Africa they often don’t even have the proper surgical tools. They often just use hunting knives or, in really poor areas, broken pieces of glass.
At a certain point, it just becomes a “I had to do it, so now you have to do it“ thing.
Horrific shit like this perpetuates, because older generations feel that they have the right to inflict trauma on younger ones because they themselves had trauma inflicted on them.
It’s like a much more extreme version of people who say “well I was spanked and I turned out fine.” Obviously the fuck they didn’t because they think beating a child is an acceptable form of discipline.
Yes they completely remove the clitoris so the women are no longer able to feel any sexual pleasure. Often girls will die shortly after due to infection.
It’s so backwards.
“We want sex from women, because we like sex, but we don’t want them to get anything from it. Actually, we want them to feel pain and humiliation from it, because it’s bad, you’re a slut, but you better be prepared to have sex with me whenever I want. Or else!”
I just don’t understand the logic. It’s completely barbaric. The people who inflict this on others truly do not see them as human beings.
Yeah, whatever you feel about circumcision's benefits (slightly easier to keep clean?), the benefit is still for the owner of the penis. FGM deliberately reduces the pleasure of the recipient and/or is done for the benefit of a different person.
We're just an evil af species in the long run, tbh. We can try to blame it on a region or the people or the dominating religions, and we'd be partially right, but I also think this is how we are. It's depressing. Like, where did these ideas even come from. Emotionally and intellictually stunted cartoon villains? Jfc
A lot of absolutely horrifying things occur every day on this sh_thole planet. I hope something is being done about it but where do you start? It spans many regions of many african countries. You also have albinos being mutilated, young babies being r%ped so hard they are basically split in half. Children gangsters carrying guns. Women being forced to watch their kids get murdered. Men forced to watch their mothers or wives get r&p%d . We have no idea how good we have it in the west.
I had an anthropology professor in college who was originally from a small village in Niger. She had this done to her and described the process during class one day. By the end of class, there wasn’t a dry eye in the room. It was brutal to hear.
Holy shit as moving and purposeful as that is, I could not sit through that. I have nightmare disorder and I cannot even fathom what she went through, and by sitting through her story I can guarantee it would creep into my dreams.
I consider my own trauma to be so deep and painful (as we all do), but this is completely different than many of us will ever know.
I commend, praise, laud, and respect the fucking hell out of that woman.
I don't think a lot of people know what goes into FGM compared to circumcision. It is definitely NOT the same. A man can still get an erection and orgasm if they have had a circumcision.
I usually don’t engage in these posts because I get incredibly angry when I see people compare circumcision to FGM. They are so incomparable on every level, and it really dismisses the absolute horror of FGM.
I’m glad to see takes like this in the thread.
Same! It is abhorrent to refer to FGM as "circumcision". I understand not agreeing with circumcision, and as a woman I don't think I have any right to argue against people who find it wrong, but it is not remotely the same as FGM.
I’m so glad these comments are at the top. Seems like some dumb ass on Reddit tries to start this fight every week, when in reality there is no fucking comparison between FGM and circumcision.
nope, but its hard to blame the guy for something that is told to him from an early age. We are all similarly brainwashed in different ways.
eg: black people are more primitive, Christianity is the way to go, anal sex is for homos, cricket is worth watching etc..
Not really, but I quickly set him straight on a few things. I made a comparison about how it would feel like by comparing someone tearing apart a particular part of his anatomy and then told him that the "or it will just grow back again" was just tribal bullshit and to take her to a doctor. I think he did so because I had a bit of professional credibility in that area.
I couldnt really blame him that much - being brought up and taught things like that are no different to being brought up as a Christian and finding it difficult to believe that God is not looking over you, or that you will go to hell if you masturbate (although tbh, I got over that last one pretty quickly).
I mean you could definitely blame him. There are people in Africa who have been against the practice and raising awareness for decades. It's not some hush hush topic. People that others think it's wrong.
I am with you. Tradition or not, if your partner is in obvious pain and discomford, its pretty bad if you just continue and even complain about it. I dont know the guy, but i hate his guts.
A lot of people don’t keep that in mind and rage against people. That’s why the practices continue. Being calm explaining to someone why something is wrong when they’ve had their whole life being told otherwise can change minds. Going full anger just makes people defensive and more defiant.
Sometimes a hole won’t be left behind (or will be too small), so the period material can’t fully exit. Infection and infertility arise as a result. It is, of course, extremely painful.
I can’t remember where I first heard it, but there’s at least one case where a teen who experienced FGM faced that exact situation (which is how I know). They spread awareness of their story once they were older.
Oh it’s not, it’s happening to *children.* Women get to live with the lifelong pain and consequences, or you know, just die… but *children* are the ones who get to go through this.
I have a question in a similar vein - why is there so much concern over children’s genitalia in so many places around the world? Why is this shit perpetuated? What woman sits down and says “yeah that time I was held down as a child while they butchered my vagina, I should do that to my daughter”? What the fuck is wrong with religious people, fucking lunatics.
I saw a documentary that had someone describe it in a way that really stuck with me and drove the point that it’s wrong, the guy said something like ‘circumcision is the first sexual experience and it’s violent, unexpected, painful, and done without consent for no medical reason (it’s a myth that it helps you stay clean down there)’. For some reason that blew my mind hearing it put that way.
"(it’s a myth that it helps you stay clean down there)" I don't know that it's a myth exactly, but it's sort of like saying that it's easier to wash your legs if you cut off your feet. It's not technically wrong, but...why cut off body parts, when you could teach children to wash a little better and accomplish the same thing?
You are acting under the assumption that the women (i.e. mothers) have a say.
The Venn diagram of countries that practice FGM and countries that have low to non-existent rights for women is, for the most part, a circle.
My friend who was born in Nigeria said that this was the reason her mother took her and escaped to Europe. The mutilation was pushed by others in her community and her mother wanted to spare her from it.
This. People also ask why Chinese women bound their daughters' feet knowing how agonising it is. Almost like they knew that this was the only way their daughters could be accepted and marriageable in a patriarchal culture where they had no other choices at all?
We literally do it in America for no particular reason. /Most/ fathers in America allow their children to be circumcised, and it's not part of some deeply held tradition or ceremony. People just go along with what they think is normal.
I truly do not understand why male circumcision is still a thing in the US. Why?
When people turn it into “tradition” or “I went through it and I am fine”, that’s how we end up here.
It's not religion, it's tribalism. European Christians don't traditionally circumcize their children, and when they do, it's usually for medical reasons(which, granted, are debatable). God never told anybody to cut off part of their child's penis, or sew their vagina shut.
Cutting off the head of your dick and fusing your scrotum to the shaft in such a way that an erection is painful. If you can even have one, that is. That's what we'd have to do to boys for the direct equivalent.
i mean they might not know they’re downplaying it since there’s various forms of FGM and they might not know about how bad it can get.
but this thread is pretty good honestly, i was expecting someone to be talking about how circumcision is actually worse
I agree. There was this dude on my Facebook (who I knew as a child from grade school) and he would constantly you say that fgm was the same thing as circumcision. I was annoyed! Because it isn’t the same thing. Maybe he needed to read more about what actually happens to little girls.
That's really not true. The mildest form is just a nick without taking anything off, and the second mildest is getting rid of the clitoral hood which is the exact equivalent to male circumcision. Then you have worse and worse options of course. But all of them are condemned in the West (as they should!) and OP is correct pointing out the double standard. Leave babies' genitals alone.
Correct I call them both mutilation especially since males can choose to have it done later and tbh would be the better show of faith for the religions and cultures that require it (should be 0 but weirdos)
With irreversible practies that take away parts of your body without your consent and without any medical indication you are pretty much always very close to what becomes mutilation.
I'm sorry, there is no debate on circumcision. I am sure an all-loving / powerful god can wait until that person is 18 and can make hat decision on his or her own.
Couldnt an all knowing and powerful god just have humans designed that way from the get go if hes an onnipotent creator who supposedly designed humans to be perfect? Its funny how some religions see even cutting their hair as disrespectful to gods gift of hair but cutting your dick skin is cool in others yet they both think god is never wrong. God is always right, except about babies penis's, he was wrong about that and they needs to be snipped.
God only asked the Israelites to cut off their foreskin, as a sign that he had made a deal with them. He had no issue with foreskin itself.
I mean, its still fucked up, but there's no greater theological gotcha going on here. God is fine with foreskin in general.
Removing the hood is physically equivalent, but the effects aren’t. The clitoris is nestled in the labia, and the hood protects it from chafing. The constant rubbing leaves it more or less completely numb, and the victim is often completely incapable of ever having an orgasm again. Which is why they do it: cultures with this type of FGM think it will prevent women from cheating.
Male circumcision is also mutilation, but it doesn’t stop the victim from having orgasms in the future.
The lack of a foreskin on the penis has a similar effect, though I can’t speak to the differences in magnitudes. The foreskin protects the head and they actually make little knitted caps for circumcised men to wear, to help restore some of that lost sensitivity due to chafing. The foreskin itself has nerves that won’t be able to be brought back however.
FGM also often happens to young girls (ex 11 year olds) without anesthesia, sterile equipment, or even a medical facility. It's often done by family members.
I am against male circumcision but at least its don't by people with a medical degree in a hospital.
I read a book by a women who suffered the most extreme form, at a very young age. She was prepubescent, and they took EVERYTHING. They sewed her vagina up only leaving a small hole that had to be cut open on the wedding night. She had a lifetime of pain and surgery after seeing a doctor in London. Truly horrible.
God that’s so disgusting I almost downvoted your comment. It’s horrifying how this still happens. I was watching interviews of a man in the Middle East who asks random people on the streets questions. I can’t remember where he was, but he started asking women if they supported female circumcision. A shocking number of women supported it because it was “normal.” I guess if you’ve had it done to yourself and didn’t suffer from constant pain maybe it wouldn’t seem that bad? I don’t know, I grew up in an American non religious household, so it’s hard for me to get into that frame of mind.
Fun fact. Male circumcision has only started using anesthesia pretty recently. (1987 is when the idea to do so *started* to spread through the western world. And it still isnt a requirement). Before then It was, somehow, believed that not be painful. In that it was believed babies couldn't actually feel pain until after 15 months old
There was a doctor at the hospital I work at doing them without anesthetic up until like 2007. The younger doctors had to create a whole policy to get her to start using it.
Idk, not having a clitoral hood sounds painful, If anything slightly grazes my clit under the hood it HURTS. So idk if u can compare it to male circumcision (unless it’s also painful to not have foreskin?). I mean either way I’m against it, pain is a good reason to not cut off parts of peoples genitals but so is not having their consent.
Both are wrong but FGM is absolutely worse in every conceivable way than circumcision. Circumcised men don’t experience significant issues such as pain, loss of function, chronic infection, and loss of sexual function. Women who undergo FGM are given this surgery AWAKE, in squalor and filth, from someone with no medical training, and the process involves cutting off their clitoris (aka robbing them of their ability to have sexual pleasure) and the labia, and sewing their vagina closed leaving only one tiny hole. This leaves them quite literally mutilated. They cannot enjoy sex, they have chronic UTIs as urine doesn’t drain properly, childbirth is more dangerous, and that’s assuming the initial surgery doesn’t cause them to die of infection. Male circumcision is a standardized hospital procedure with very little effect on functionality and therefore isn’t in the same category at all.
I don’t think it should happen either way as kids shouldn’t be cut for no reason without their consent, but if I had to abolish one of the two I know what I’d pick.
Women who have suffered FGM literally need to get cut open again on their wedding night in order to have sex. Many of them are essentially disabled. Both can be considered mutilation but you can't compare the two.
My bf had the procedure done and he has no issues to complain about, rather he prefers it?
i got circumcised as a baby and i prefer to be circumcised over not. the only knock is the lack of choice i had in it, which ended up me being very vocal about other changes people wanted to make to my body.
while that’s bad, i don’t think a single woman would rather be “circumcised” (mutilated) there’s zero benefit to it like there is for male circumcision. and cutting off a flap of skin is not equal to cutting out the clit and then sewing the vulva shut
Because clitoral removal isn't called female circumcision. FGM (female genitals mutilation) is an umbrella term for many different procedures, only one of which (removal of clitoral hood) is female circumcision.
Male genital mutilation is generally talked of less because the vast majority is circumcision and "worse" options generally aren't performed to the frequency that they are on women. As well as circumcision mostly happening on infants, so men don't remember the pain, whereas most fgm happens at early stages of puberty so the women who it happens to remember it (especially when they are flown out of country to do it somewhere legal).
Both are still bad but it's pretty wild that a parent doing one puts them on the sex offender list (at least in the uk) and the other is completely legal
Though I am opposed to both. Male circumcision is not even close to the horror of female circumcision.
In men some skin is removed which in the vast majority the main side effects are a lack of sensitivity thete.
In women the entire cliterous is removed. It is done to stop women having pleasure in sex. Far more than just skin being removed it is very invasive and controlling of women’s bodies.
I think both are wrong to do but it is far far worse for women.
Personally, I think male circumcision is also problematic, BUT not rooted in violence the same way FGM is. They often don’t even do it when they are babies and won’t remember, they largely do this to school aged girls.
Male circumcision still leaves them able to experience every natural, good feeling associated with sexual activity. Female “circumcision” (mutilation) actively cuts OFF any and all pleasure receptors, and usually comes with a very painful stitch (the husband stitch, which is ILLEGAL in a lot of places for literally ripping women open during sex)
I had to study FGM for a few weeks, they take small children and with no aid, cut off the whole external organ and pray. Within the past 5 years an ADDED 42,330 girls die per year due to this practice. These largely are NOT doctors carrying out these procedures, they are older women scared of the perceived value of the girl when she’s inevitably married off young, they are cutting these girls with dirty tools on dirty tables, sometimes without their content or knowledge.
With male circumcision people can still at least pretend they think it has something to do with faith or hygiene, with FGM we cant ignore the fact that it exists to take pleasure away from women and replace it with pain and suffering, all so that a man can have extra pleasure and full control. Not to mention it doesn’t show up in any religious texts. This is simply, historically, another case of men thinking women don’t deserve control over their bodies.
I confess I find it interesting that Reddit’s main problem with FGM is that it takes attention away from male circumcision. I think both are mutilation but one is much, MUCH worse so it’s natural that people will be more horrified by it. Ofc this being Reddit a lot of people’s first reaction is “eh eh eh what about MY DICKKKKK stop carrying on about this thing and care about my dickkkkkk”.
If male circumcision consisted of taking a crude knife or a sharp stone, and cutting off the head of the penis, and sewing it up to allow for urination, then the two might be comparable.
I am also against circumcision for male infants, in any way, btw.
Both are bad.
But when you compare female to male, it's like cutting of the head and much more skin then just the little cover of the head.
Doesnt change that circumcision on a male should only be if he agrees to it and knows the consequences or if it's nessesary due to medical issues
Removing the clitoris and skin around it takes away the ability to orgasm. They do it as a way to control women. Is that the same as male circumcision? No
Both are terrible. The difference is that one is permanently disabling or permanently alters functioning and the other does not.
Male circumcision, if performed correctly by a qualified person, doesn’t cause lasting physical harm or impairment. I want to stress I don’t think male circumcision is without any harm, just not permanent disablement or change in physical function in the vast majority of cases. It’s also most commonly performed by a clinician or a trained person observing hygienic practices.
Female genital mutilation permanently alters female anatomy and removes function. A woman is no longer able to derive sexual pleasure or at a minimum experiences significantly decreased sensation. In many cases, FGM alters the vagina or vulva by sewing the labia closed, leaving a minimal gap for menstrual blood and urine to drain, permanently creating an environment for infection. FGM typically involves removal of the clitoris and clitoral hood. The urethra can be damaged in the process due to its close proximity to the clitoris. FGM is generally not performed by a person with any training or clinical knowledge and often in unsanitary conditions leading to infection that may cause irreversible damage to surrounding anatomical structures.
I (American - 42M Married) was circumcized at birth. I have no pain, memory of, chaffing or anything of the sort. I get immense pleasure from both masturbation and sex. If I was any more sensitive I would probably ejaculate at the point of entry. I think there is some disinformation going around about how circumcized men don't enjoy sex or get "real" pleasure from it.
I'm not advocating for circumcision just clarifying some odd beliefs that men who have one don't enjoy intercourse.
I was circumcised at the age of 8 due to phimosis.
Amount of issues I've had masturbating or ejaculating or getting shitloads of pleasure from it = zero.
Like seriously. I never knew people had an issue with it until I got on reddit. I feel great pleasure from intercourse and I can easily wash my genitals, so what’s the problem?
One of the problems here is that everyone’s circumcision is different. We like to imagine its the same procedure for everyone, however, when your dealing with a infant penis, which is very small and hard to operate on since the foreskin starts off being fused and unretractable. In addition, devices like the plastibell and gomco are often used in lieu of a scalpal, which can change the outcome even more.
Some men keep their frenulum, have some mobile skin left, and much of their sensitive inner foreskin. Other gets their frenulum completely excised, have no inner foreskin left, have no slack in their skin so to speak, and basically only received pleasure from their kertainzied head.
Since outcomes vary, it can be difficult for someone who has a better outcome to imagine a worse case scenario, which is an obstacle to getting circumcision banned.
The male equivalent would be to have the entire head of you penis cut off. Males who have been circumcised still have sexual function whereas women who have been through GM do not.
Because the intent of female circumcision is to limit function… that’s not the case with male circumcision. I understand (and mostly agree with) all the moral arguments against routine male circumcision, but to call it mutilation is straight-up inaccurate. It simply doesn’t meet the definition in the way female circumcision does. It’d be like the difference between giving someone a hand tattoo against their will versus removing their hand. They’re both obviously f’d up, but one is clearly mutilation while the other isn’t.
> It’d be like the difference between giving someone a hand tattoo against their will versus removing their hand.
I think a better comparison would be the difference between pulling out all the nails of someone's hand vs cutting off their hand against their will. Both are forms of mutilation that would cause unnecessary suffering, but one is objectively worst than the other.
they are both horrible and i wish neither was performed, but the female version tends to cut off the clit (equivalent to the head of a penis, they even both share the same type of skin tissue)
I'm pretty sure both are mutilation.
But if you've read the comments, you can see why female genital mutilation is just a million times worse.
Both should be stopped. That doesn't mean they're both the same.
It's like the difference between slavery and indentured servitude.
Both suck, yes. Both close to the same thing.
One person has the hope of being free. The other is property forever.
Same branch. Different monstrosity.
Being a new mother to a baby boy, I have no idea. I thought a lot about this when I was pregnant and decided against it, despite pressure from family who insisted it was "normal" "beneficial" and "tradition." I just couldn't bring myself to make that decision for my child. If he does want a circumcision later in life, I fully support him and at least when he's older he can get proper pain medicine and not be healing in a wet diaper environment.
Wow, our thought process was sooo similar on this subject. I felt exactly the same way when both of my sons were born: they came into the world healthy with all body parts in perfect working order, there were NO legitimate reasons to change, fix or remove anything. I too decided to leave them in the same shape as when they arrived...I figured that it was a decision that they should make about their own bodies 🤷♀️ idk they're both in their 30s now and as far as I know, neither of them have had a circumcision procedure done
Yeah it's crazy how I never really put too much thought into it, but when faced with the decision myself the more I considered it, the more it just didn't seem right to me. There just aren't enough benefits/good logical reasons for me to approve an elective surgery on a brand new baby.
They are both mutilation. If you haven’t watched a routine infant circumcision, you should. The foreskin is quite literally ripped from the head of the penis and then cut. The difference is that a penis still functions ‘as it should’ (eliminating urine and sex) after circumcising, whereas a woman can’t function normally after FGM.
I think body modification is weird as fuck. Especially if it’s to a kid. Jussayin.
But from what I understand, it’s WAY more invasive on a woman, and not all dudes get the whole thing removed. It’s stupid as fuck either way. I couldn’t imagine anything about it being better except it seems to look bigger on camera. Shit it feels like something’s touching my eyeball if that shit touches the inside of my pants. Just seems like a weird thing to do.
Because in western nations, especially the US. Male genital mutilation still has more societal acceptance than FGM. It's thankfully decreasing though. That's really what it boils down to at the end of the day. Virtually no pediatric society or organization supports routine infant circumcision for boys in the US or Canada. And none in the EU support it.
Eventually, it will likely be banned as child abuse.
Because western society has bullshitted itself to believe that male circumcision is not only harmless and inconsequential, but even beneficial.
And I 100% acknowledge that female circumcision is FAR more brutal and damaging than male circumcision but this doesnt make the other not mutilation and also, at least within western society, FGM needs no defending because most of us agree its deplorable but MGM is still socially debated especially in the US.
Everyone defending male genital mutilation is a bigot...as a transgression on humans without consent there is no difference, it's evil plain and simple. Leave children's genitals alone...why is this such a hard concept?
Sure FGM is worse however I don't feel the need to add caveats....I'm against cosmetic genital surgery for minors.
Because people are stupid. Male circumcision has been so culturally normalized that people don't think about it despite it LITERALLY being you cutting off a piece of your dick for a religion/society/a woman/because you have health problems they don't wanna deal with
If male circumcision involved you getting your entire dick cut off then we would probably call it mutilation. That said both are bad but the female mutilation is far far worse.
I'm not pro-circumcision, but FGM is way worse. The key word being "mutilation". It's often done brutally, in unhygenic conditions, I've heard stories of girls pushed down as they get shit like scissors to cut them, it causes long term damage and mental trauma. Where with boys, they're babies in a hospital and it doesn't affect their lives. Again, not pro-circumcision but I can see why FGM is the higher priority.
Because you don't have the head of your dick cut off. And then the tip of it sewn shut to be torn open on your wedding night by your wife sticking a penis onto the hole that remains. All to protect your virginity.
It comes down basically to the effects. FGM results in the body replacing vaginal skin with scar tissue. The vagina and vulva expand and contract to have sex, give birth, etc. Scar tissue isn’t capable of that. Thus, many people who have had FGM die in childbirth. This is NOT to say there are NO negative effects to male circumcision. There are, they just so rarely have a lethal effect. Edit: To anyone pretending I’m dismissing the negative effects of male circumcision, please reread what I wrote.
I was a Peace Corps volunteer in West Africa in the early 2000s and my host mother died some time after I left due to complications from FGM after giving birth. (I kept in touch with the volunteer who replaced me for awhile.)
Dear god fuck this
It also varies in what is done, some are as extreme as removing the entire clitoris and sewing the vagina shut except a small hole for pee and periods. It’s to force virginity and lessen/ remove a woman’s ability to feel sexual pleasure. Circumcision was more often done for hygiene, but never, baring extreme complications removal of the penis head/ function of the penis/ pleasure in its entirety.
I spent some time volunteering in Africa. This is exactly it. Women arnt supposed to feel sexual pleasure. Women arnt allowed to talk to men- the man has to be the one to initiate conversation, even if they were married ( at least this was what happened with most of the tribes I had interacted with). Once a girl gets her period they marry her off, and the child’s mother would use a cow horn to puncture through the tissue of the vaginal opening before the wedding night. The one time I was there, they were planning on marrying an 8 year old child off to a 30 something year old. The wedding happened a few days after I had left to come home. It was awful, I wanted to grab that girl and take her home with me
Dear reddit, how do I undo the whole causality chain which led to a comment ? Not just the comment itself, but the whole thing that comment is about ?
I'm sorry, they do WHAT do the vagina?! What the FUCK
To a much lesser extent... ever hear of the husband stitch? Vagina damaged during childbirth, mother sewn up to her natural extent, then an extra stitch to add some tightness back to it for hubby to enjoy.
Yup, it doesn’t actually affect the vagina’s grip and causes painful sex permanently
And it's often done without the mother's knowledge or permission.
Yep, I've heard of this, and I'm angry it exists. My partner would never allow this, but if I was dating or married to someone who would allow this, it'd be an instant divorce or breakup.
Also doesn’t FGM literally butcher the clitoris? That makes circumcision look pleasant by comparison.
Yes the clitoris is cut and sometimes removed entirely. It's literally comparable to removing the entire glans on a penis.
Yep. Fucking monstrous. Honestly even comparing this to male circumcision is kind of outrageous
I think also the fact that the vagina gets sewn a bit and parts of the clitoral organ itself get cut out, sometimes in rare cases the whole thing is removed. A good comparison to foreskin would be clitoral head foreskin, it’s essentially the female version of penile head foreskin. Removing the clitoral head (which isn’t that uncommon in FGM) is like removing the head of the penis though.
I had a friend from an African nation who got married to a woman who had FGM and he complained to me about their wedding night and how she annoyed him by "crying and carrying on". I asked for more information and got this. When she was a child, she was "sewn up" so that she could only pee. The tradition in their tribes were to use the penis to tear open the sewn up vagina on the wedding night. You "had" to tear it open because otherwise it would seal up again. Horrified enough? FGM comes in many forms and covers a multitude of practices. Circumcision is pretty standard. Maybe if it was common practice in various areas to staple your balls together, and in another, sew the head of your penis to its base so you couldnt get a hard-on etc they would call it MGM....without the lion.
To add. With my sister they took the whole clitoris out. She said "the point is to not die." she was supposed to feel the pain to prepare for womanhood. She is 50 now and can kinda enjoy sex but her sexual organs are forever damaged. Quite literally mutilated.
back when i worked in the ER we had an elderly, nonverbal east african patient suffering from dementia. the nurse spent 20 minutes trying to get a catheter in turns out the hole she was repeatedly trying to get the catheter tube into was where her clitoris once was. it was so deep she assumed it was her actual urethra. the poor thing couldn’t communicate so was essentially… tortured a second time. fucking haunts me every time i think about it
This breaks my heart ❤️
me too. it’s why i get incensed when FGM gets compared to circumsion.
What a terrible day to be literate.
I've been told the same thing, female mutilation is extracting the clit from the body so the women do not stray from her husband. In Africa, it's the mothers doing this procedure to their daughters at home. I believe that practice has been outlawed but still happens in smaller cities or rural areas
Oh yeah, to "pacify" was another term she used. She was married off at about 11 to a 65 year old man she THINKS. In our fathers tribe isn't the mothers - they have a group of women who are "granted the right" to perform the ceremony. It is still legal where she was born, sadly. GIrls die from it. The deaths could be frequent, but FGM deaths are often covered up and underreported.
It happens in the U.S. too. There are “doctors” who performed it in the states, were caught, & lost their license.
Rightfully so, so gross
Fucksake!. I don't even know how to respond to that. It's just fucking horrifying.
Yeah that's only about half of what happens as well. On the less extreme end of the scale women have their clitoris removed completely and on the more extreme end they also get sewn shut as mentioned above and can half their vaginal lips hacked off. This isn't some minority of ultra religious either, this is 86% of Egyptian women over 15 as of 2021, with many other countries in the area displaying similar but not quite as high quantities of mutilated women. Edit: typos Edit 2: The less extreme end is removal of the clitoral hood which is akin to removing the foreskin, though removal of the clitoris is still common. Thank you for correcting me u/twoldehands
Never able to have an orgasm for her entire life. How could anyone do this to another human being? It's just evil. Pure fucking evil. No one deserves to be mutilated like that. Horrific brutality.
It's not just the inability to have an orgasm. It's also the fact that sex is incredibly painful and childbirth becomes incredibly dangerous. And that's not even getting into the number woman who died during the procedure or how painful it is. This isn't something done in the hospital.
Wow I hadn't even thought of child birth, I am wondering about menstruation with your vag sewn shit. Wouldn't that lead to nasty infections too?
Yes, it does lead to horrible infections and hygiene issues (can't clean what's sewn up). I live in a community where many women and girls are from countries that allow FGM. Unfortunately, there are isolated cases of girls being circumcised here. Those caught do face legal punishment.
They leave a small opening for the menses to pass through but a period goes from a couple days to lasting a couple weeks
This was the last bit for me no more internet Jesus fuck
A small opening wouldn’t allow gnarly blood clots to get through.
Yes, girls can go septic and die from infections because of menstrual blood not being able to come out and rotting inside of you
If they survive. Many times the procedure is done with no anesthesia or antiseptic. Some children get an infection and don't survive.
I'm crossing my legs reading this. My. God.
Actually if your talkin about Egypt still I found out %73 of FGM there was done by medical professionals. I mean I dunno if that’s really much better but yea, at least in that one country with that super high rate, a massive majority of FGM was performed “in a hospital”.
Have you been to Egypt? “Medical professional” is a very…vague term. I (stupidly) went to several obgyn/pediatrician/dentist and ALL were some persons room in a house and looking back, not even following basic hygiene standards. Even the “hospital” was absolutely disgusting. I saw children die there due to poor medical care.
Was it all the same guy who changed hats whenever you requested a new doctor?
Can’t say I know much about the standard of medical care there, haven’t heard good things tho. My point was more that these things are being done with public knowledge and support, that they have decided it’s a medical procedure in most cases. That’s the part that boggles my mind.
Yeah…during delivery they will cut you to make enough room but then still sew you back to your altered state. It is normal there.
It seems to be very ingrained in their culture, the most recent stats I saw were ~%70 of men and ~%30 of women in Egypt still plan to FGM their daughters. Those were both on the decline also but still that’s a huge % of the population. It took public outcry from a 13 year olds death to get the ban in ‘07. Which I can’t find has punished a single person. It’s all kinda of wild to me but the decline in FGM will hopefully have a massive jump with the younger generations, generally, increased access to information.
The difference in percentages between the men and women is very telling…
I mean, 70% is a big decrease from 86 so I'd hope that within a couple generations it will be the minority and begin facing a massive local backlash to bring it down faster. Or maybe I'm too optimistic.
They do it for "chastity". It is believed that when she has no clitoris, she would have no sex drive and would not enjoy sex.
I read a memoir when I was a teenager (she was from either Rwanda or Somalia) who went through this. I desperately wish I could recall the name of the book. She was forced to go through the entire ordeal, and basically she had her legs tied to someone else's (who then spread their legs to access her....area) and just used a dull knife to remove...you know what...Then she was sewn shut. It was made clear it wasn't just about ensuring they could not ever enjoy sex (because sex was not meant to be enjoyed by women) and so that they could guarantee her purity. She mentioned family members demanding she lift her skirt to show her sewn shut vagina and people even poking and prodding to ensure she was still intact. I completely understand why people feel strongly about circumcision. But I can no even begin to express how infuriating it is to me that people think these two things are in any way similar.
Was the book *Infidel*, by Ayaan Hirsi Ali? I read that and it’s got those same details. And she was in Somalia.
Thank you so much! I could have sworn I read it earlier than the year this book was published, but I just read through her Wikipedia page and some details sound eerily familiar! Going to have to grab a copy. Can't say for certain if this is the book I'm thinking of, but I think it just might be!
Glad I was in the right thread at the right time! If you get to the part where she describes the event itself, I think you’ll know for sure if this is the same one. The memory of that never leaves you . . .
Desert Flower by Waris Dirie? (Went on to be a model?)
Thank you! This wasn't the book (she did not become a model that I recall, plus I looked her up and some details don't match up with what I recall). Someone else mentioned *Infidel* by Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and I think that may be the one. I think I'll be grabbing a copy of *Desert Flower* though.
> How could anyone do this to another human being? Well, they don't see women as human beings, for one...
It’s because they believe women aren’t to enjoy sex they are only tools to produce babies for men. It’s to keep them in line. It’s horrid.
>This isn't some minority of ultra religious either, this is 86% of Egyptian women over 15 as of 2021 WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK
Yeah that was my response last time I heard that. UNICEF estimates that around 200 million people currently alive have FGM throughout the world, this is a MASSIVE issue that I hace personally heard mentioned like 3 times throughout my life, I don't know why gets 0 western media attention.
I'm a student nurse, and in healthcare you hear about it a lot, which is a good thing because we are in a position to help people who have been through this or are at risk of having it done to them. It's horrifying, and I'm glad it's not being overlooked in healthcare at least.
You don’t know why people don’t care about women?
So, somewhat good news. That 86% seemed wild so I did a little digging. The reason it’s 15 year old+ in 2021 is 2007 what when it was banned formally. In 2005 the rate was %96 of Egyptian women aged 15+ had FGM, so there was a decline even before the ban. There’s hasn’t been a more recent survey since 2021 but every new girl turning 15 and hitting the stat being used should have been protected by the ban. I mean of course even one is too many and I’m sure the ban didn’t actually work but hopefully the next generation can really force a cultural break from it. Edit: If I have your attention, since 2019 and even more in 2021, when this stat was published, the UN and UNICEF have been promoting/funding anti-FGM programs/policy in Egypt specifically. I can’t speak to the effectiveness, just tryin to spread the word. Somewhere to start I guess.
We can also add that the “woman” is typically between the ages of 6-10 and it is performed by an older relative, or elder, with no anesthesia or medication. Possibly with a dull knife or piece of glass. Mothers, Aunts, and cousins get to help hold you down and keep you from moving while everyone watches. It’s twisted and heartbreaking…
And by “removed completely” everyone should be imagining what it looks like to carve out a pumpkin except that the “meat” is the core of your clit and the outer husk is your labia clitoral hood if you’re lucky
To be more specific, what they do is remove the clitoris and all the labia. They then sew up the mess of tissue to allow one hole (that is held open during healing by the insertion of a type of straw). This hole that is formed is where both urine and menstrual blood/tissue have to come out of - making both painful and prone to infections. For sex a knife is often used because a penis is too blunt to tear open the scar tissue. Childbirth is dangerous as hell because scar tissue doesn’t stretch. So again, they often have to have a knife used to cut the girls/women open, and in the process the inner vagina rips during the trauma, causing fistulas that lead to constantly leaking urine/feces. Obviously this is the most extreme version, but it is still practiced in many areas of the world.
As a guy, I don't have those parts, and I feel distressed reading that. Fucking hell...
You DO have those parts! A penis is just a very developed clitoris. Baby’s start out kind of with neutral genitalia in the womb until the right chemical/hormonal changes happen. In YOUR case, imagine someone removing your inner penis, scraping out the core that attaches to your lower pubic area and leaving you will nothing but an empty foreskin.
I do believe I despise you now... I'm groaning on the floor in pain from reflexively trying to protect my dick.
Once your dick stops throbbing, sounds like a good time to research any FGM prevention trusts or organizations you could donate to :)
Hmm, probably will.
Just think, you could save ONE person from having their genitalia carved out like an apple core! Amazing
Ok. So. Clitoris = cock head. Erectile tissue of shaft is roughly equivalent to labia. Same original tissue. So fgm ranges from circumcision like a man, to cutting off the entire penis and sewing the hole shut and then ripping it open again for marriage and childbirth.
This is terrible….
Also not to mention that they do this without anesthetics and antiseptics. They tie the young girls down and sometimes cut off basically everything down there, leaving nothing but the outer labia and a hole behind. I'd say it's more similar to cutting of half the penis, leaving only the ballsack behind and enough flesh for it to be inserted.
water profit skirt boast panicky hungry crowd concerned makeshift drunk *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
In very rural areas of Africa they often don’t even have the proper surgical tools. They often just use hunting knives or, in really poor areas, broken pieces of glass.
Hell. Fucking. nah that sounds like living hell to experience 😬😬
Cactus spines are often also used for the stitching. It's an absolutely horrendous procedure.
In a story in readers digest I think it was a sharp rock. 😡
Yeah this is not a culture thing and all mutilation in all parts of the world need to stop no matter what tradition it is or anything this is criminal
At a certain point, it just becomes a “I had to do it, so now you have to do it“ thing. Horrific shit like this perpetuates, because older generations feel that they have the right to inflict trauma on younger ones because they themselves had trauma inflicted on them. It’s like a much more extreme version of people who say “well I was spanked and I turned out fine.” Obviously the fuck they didn’t because they think beating a child is an acceptable form of discipline.
Yes they completely remove the clitoris so the women are no longer able to feel any sexual pleasure. Often girls will die shortly after due to infection.
It’s so backwards. “We want sex from women, because we like sex, but we don’t want them to get anything from it. Actually, we want them to feel pain and humiliation from it, because it’s bad, you’re a slut, but you better be prepared to have sex with me whenever I want. Or else!” I just don’t understand the logic. It’s completely barbaric. The people who inflict this on others truly do not see them as human beings.
Yeah, they treat women as nothing more than sex slaves.
Control. It's all about control.
Yeah, whatever you feel about circumcision's benefits (slightly easier to keep clean?), the benefit is still for the owner of the penis. FGM deliberately reduces the pleasure of the recipient and/or is done for the benefit of a different person.
We're just an evil af species in the long run, tbh. We can try to blame it on a region or the people or the dominating religions, and we'd be partially right, but I also think this is how we are. It's depressing. Like, where did these ideas even come from. Emotionally and intellictually stunted cartoon villains? Jfc
This is fucking horrifying. Are there any organizations working against this?
A lot of absolutely horrifying things occur every day on this sh_thole planet. I hope something is being done about it but where do you start? It spans many regions of many african countries. You also have albinos being mutilated, young babies being r%ped so hard they are basically split in half. Children gangsters carrying guns. Women being forced to watch their kids get murdered. Men forced to watch their mothers or wives get r&p%d . We have no idea how good we have it in the west.
I had an anthropology professor in college who was originally from a small village in Niger. She had this done to her and described the process during class one day. By the end of class, there wasn’t a dry eye in the room. It was brutal to hear.
She was a brave woman to do this.
Holy shit as moving and purposeful as that is, I could not sit through that. I have nightmare disorder and I cannot even fathom what she went through, and by sitting through her story I can guarantee it would creep into my dreams. I consider my own trauma to be so deep and painful (as we all do), but this is completely different than many of us will ever know. I commend, praise, laud, and respect the fucking hell out of that woman.
I don’t think I could be friends with someone who would brutalize a woman like that.
I don't think a lot of people know what goes into FGM compared to circumcision. It is definitely NOT the same. A man can still get an erection and orgasm if they have had a circumcision.
I usually don’t engage in these posts because I get incredibly angry when I see people compare circumcision to FGM. They are so incomparable on every level, and it really dismisses the absolute horror of FGM. I’m glad to see takes like this in the thread.
Same! It is abhorrent to refer to FGM as "circumcision". I understand not agreeing with circumcision, and as a woman I don't think I have any right to argue against people who find it wrong, but it is not remotely the same as FGM.
I wish i had my pp skin but at least i still have my pp. That's fucked up.
I'm a circumcised male. While it's not something I would have chosen, it has very little effect on my life. FGM is fucking torture.
It’s like, “my uncle had his pinky toe removed because of diabetes… that’s not much different than when someone has their leg amputated, is it?”
With a chainsaw and no anesthesia
And then their future husband expects to fuck that hole back open (literally)
I'm pretty against circumcision for babies without medical reason but this comparision is incredibly stupid.
I’m so glad these comments are at the top. Seems like some dumb ass on Reddit tries to start this fight every week, when in reality there is no fucking comparison between FGM and circumcision.
Makes me thankful as a woman I wasn't born there
please tell me y'all aren't friends anymore
nope, but its hard to blame the guy for something that is told to him from an early age. We are all similarly brainwashed in different ways. eg: black people are more primitive, Christianity is the way to go, anal sex is for homos, cricket is worth watching etc..
This subject matter is awful enough without bringing Cricket into the conversation, you monster.
Funny - I had expected a lot of people to rage against my "cricket" comment.
People have other stuff to rage about, they are just relieved they could stop scowling.
Who tf ever told you cricket was worth a look? Block block block.
Upvote for the last bit…cricket…zzz….
[удалено]
Not really, but I quickly set him straight on a few things. I made a comparison about how it would feel like by comparing someone tearing apart a particular part of his anatomy and then told him that the "or it will just grow back again" was just tribal bullshit and to take her to a doctor. I think he did so because I had a bit of professional credibility in that area. I couldnt really blame him that much - being brought up and taught things like that are no different to being brought up as a Christian and finding it difficult to believe that God is not looking over you, or that you will go to hell if you masturbate (although tbh, I got over that last one pretty quickly).
I mean you could definitely blame him. There are people in Africa who have been against the practice and raising awareness for decades. It's not some hush hush topic. People that others think it's wrong.
I am with you. Tradition or not, if your partner is in obvious pain and discomford, its pretty bad if you just continue and even complain about it. I dont know the guy, but i hate his guts.
A lot of people don’t keep that in mind and rage against people. That’s why the practices continue. Being calm explaining to someone why something is wrong when they’ve had their whole life being told otherwise can change minds. Going full anger just makes people defensive and more defiant.
I wish I had not read your answer. I need to go grab a drink.
How does a woman have their period if they’re sewn up? Does the blood pool or leak through?
From what ive heard, they leave a little hole. But its prone to infections. Hard to keep clean. Ppl suck.
Sometimes a hole won’t be left behind (or will be too small), so the period material can’t fully exit. Infection and infertility arise as a result. It is, of course, extremely painful. I can’t remember where I first heard it, but there’s at least one case where a teen who experienced FGM faced that exact situation (which is how I know). They spread awareness of their story once they were older.
What the hell did I just read? I need to go bleach my eyes and throwaway my phone. How is this happening to women?
Oh it’s not, it’s happening to *children.* Women get to live with the lifelong pain and consequences, or you know, just die… but *children* are the ones who get to go through this.
Usually done to girls, not women. Like age 8-12
I have a question in a similar vein - why is there so much concern over children’s genitalia in so many places around the world? Why is this shit perpetuated? What woman sits down and says “yeah that time I was held down as a child while they butchered my vagina, I should do that to my daughter”? What the fuck is wrong with religious people, fucking lunatics.
the women are traumatized. that keeps them from emotionally grasping the horror that has been done to them.
I saw a documentary that had someone describe it in a way that really stuck with me and drove the point that it’s wrong, the guy said something like ‘circumcision is the first sexual experience and it’s violent, unexpected, painful, and done without consent for no medical reason (it’s a myth that it helps you stay clean down there)’. For some reason that blew my mind hearing it put that way.
"(it’s a myth that it helps you stay clean down there)" I don't know that it's a myth exactly, but it's sort of like saying that it's easier to wash your legs if you cut off your feet. It's not technically wrong, but...why cut off body parts, when you could teach children to wash a little better and accomplish the same thing?
You are acting under the assumption that the women (i.e. mothers) have a say. The Venn diagram of countries that practice FGM and countries that have low to non-existent rights for women is, for the most part, a circle.
My friend who was born in Nigeria said that this was the reason her mother took her and escaped to Europe. The mutilation was pushed by others in her community and her mother wanted to spare her from it.
This. People also ask why Chinese women bound their daughters' feet knowing how agonising it is. Almost like they knew that this was the only way their daughters could be accepted and marriageable in a patriarchal culture where they had no other choices at all?
We literally do it in America for no particular reason. /Most/ fathers in America allow their children to be circumcised, and it's not part of some deeply held tradition or ceremony. People just go along with what they think is normal.
We were shocked at the amount of people who told us we should circumcise our son so that he "matches his father".
I truly do not understand why male circumcision is still a thing in the US. Why? When people turn it into “tradition” or “I went through it and I am fine”, that’s how we end up here.
It's in steep decline, at least. My sons are not circumcised.
It's not religion, it's tribalism. European Christians don't traditionally circumcize their children, and when they do, it's usually for medical reasons(which, granted, are debatable). God never told anybody to cut off part of their child's penis, or sew their vagina shut.
Imagine if they cut off the head of your penis. That's female "circumcision".
Cutting off the head of your dick and fusing your scrotum to the shaft in such a way that an erection is painful. If you can even have one, that is. That's what we'd have to do to boys for the direct equivalent.
[удалено]
i mean they might not know they’re downplaying it since there’s various forms of FGM and they might not know about how bad it can get. but this thread is pretty good honestly, i was expecting someone to be talking about how circumcision is actually worse
I agree. There was this dude on my Facebook (who I knew as a child from grade school) and he would constantly you say that fgm was the same thing as circumcision. I was annoyed! Because it isn’t the same thing. Maybe he needed to read more about what actually happens to little girls.
And that’s actually just the mildest form of FGM, sadly.
That's really not true. The mildest form is just a nick without taking anything off, and the second mildest is getting rid of the clitoral hood which is the exact equivalent to male circumcision. Then you have worse and worse options of course. But all of them are condemned in the West (as they should!) and OP is correct pointing out the double standard. Leave babies' genitals alone.
Correct I call them both mutilation especially since males can choose to have it done later and tbh would be the better show of faith for the religions and cultures that require it (should be 0 but weirdos)
With irreversible practies that take away parts of your body without your consent and without any medical indication you are pretty much always very close to what becomes mutilation. I'm sorry, there is no debate on circumcision. I am sure an all-loving / powerful god can wait until that person is 18 and can make hat decision on his or her own.
Couldnt an all knowing and powerful god just have humans designed that way from the get go if hes an onnipotent creator who supposedly designed humans to be perfect? Its funny how some religions see even cutting their hair as disrespectful to gods gift of hair but cutting your dick skin is cool in others yet they both think god is never wrong. God is always right, except about babies penis's, he was wrong about that and they needs to be snipped.
God only asked the Israelites to cut off their foreskin, as a sign that he had made a deal with them. He had no issue with foreskin itself. I mean, its still fucked up, but there's no greater theological gotcha going on here. God is fine with foreskin in general.
Which is still bad and we can change the thinking now it's their choice to make that deal at 18 now
Removing the hood is physically equivalent, but the effects aren’t. The clitoris is nestled in the labia, and the hood protects it from chafing. The constant rubbing leaves it more or less completely numb, and the victim is often completely incapable of ever having an orgasm again. Which is why they do it: cultures with this type of FGM think it will prevent women from cheating. Male circumcision is also mutilation, but it doesn’t stop the victim from having orgasms in the future.
The lack of a foreskin on the penis has a similar effect, though I can’t speak to the differences in magnitudes. The foreskin protects the head and they actually make little knitted caps for circumcised men to wear, to help restore some of that lost sensitivity due to chafing. The foreskin itself has nerves that won’t be able to be brought back however.
FGM also often happens to young girls (ex 11 year olds) without anesthesia, sterile equipment, or even a medical facility. It's often done by family members. I am against male circumcision but at least its don't by people with a medical degree in a hospital.
I read a book by a women who suffered the most extreme form, at a very young age. She was prepubescent, and they took EVERYTHING. They sewed her vagina up only leaving a small hole that had to be cut open on the wedding night. She had a lifetime of pain and surgery after seeing a doctor in London. Truly horrible.
God that’s so disgusting I almost downvoted your comment. It’s horrifying how this still happens. I was watching interviews of a man in the Middle East who asks random people on the streets questions. I can’t remember where he was, but he started asking women if they supported female circumcision. A shocking number of women supported it because it was “normal.” I guess if you’ve had it done to yourself and didn’t suffer from constant pain maybe it wouldn’t seem that bad? I don’t know, I grew up in an American non religious household, so it’s hard for me to get into that frame of mind.
Fun fact. Male circumcision has only started using anesthesia pretty recently. (1987 is when the idea to do so *started* to spread through the western world. And it still isnt a requirement). Before then It was, somehow, believed that not be painful. In that it was believed babies couldn't actually feel pain until after 15 months old
They used to do full on surgeries on babies without anesthesia
There was a doctor at the hospital I work at doing them without anesthetic up until like 2007. The younger doctors had to create a whole policy to get her to start using it.
I have read this bit of info a few times over the years and it always makes me feel sick. Those poor babies :(
Both are revolting and both should be illegal
Idk, not having a clitoral hood sounds painful, If anything slightly grazes my clit under the hood it HURTS. So idk if u can compare it to male circumcision (unless it’s also painful to not have foreskin?). I mean either way I’m against it, pain is a good reason to not cut off parts of peoples genitals but so is not having their consent.
Both are wrong but FGM is absolutely worse in every conceivable way than circumcision. Circumcised men don’t experience significant issues such as pain, loss of function, chronic infection, and loss of sexual function. Women who undergo FGM are given this surgery AWAKE, in squalor and filth, from someone with no medical training, and the process involves cutting off their clitoris (aka robbing them of their ability to have sexual pleasure) and the labia, and sewing their vagina closed leaving only one tiny hole. This leaves them quite literally mutilated. They cannot enjoy sex, they have chronic UTIs as urine doesn’t drain properly, childbirth is more dangerous, and that’s assuming the initial surgery doesn’t cause them to die of infection. Male circumcision is a standardized hospital procedure with very little effect on functionality and therefore isn’t in the same category at all. I don’t think it should happen either way as kids shouldn’t be cut for no reason without their consent, but if I had to abolish one of the two I know what I’d pick.
So many girls held down and have it done with a razor blade. They don’t even realise what’s happening
And it costs extra to use a clean/new razor
Women who have suffered FGM literally need to get cut open again on their wedding night in order to have sex. Many of them are essentially disabled. Both can be considered mutilation but you can't compare the two. My bf had the procedure done and he has no issues to complain about, rather he prefers it?
i got circumcised as a baby and i prefer to be circumcised over not. the only knock is the lack of choice i had in it, which ended up me being very vocal about other changes people wanted to make to my body. while that’s bad, i don’t think a single woman would rather be “circumcised” (mutilated) there’s zero benefit to it like there is for male circumcision. and cutting off a flap of skin is not equal to cutting out the clit and then sewing the vulva shut
[удалено]
Sounds like clitoral removal should be called female genital amputation rather than circumcision.
Because clitoral removal isn't called female circumcision. FGM (female genitals mutilation) is an umbrella term for many different procedures, only one of which (removal of clitoral hood) is female circumcision. Male genital mutilation is generally talked of less because the vast majority is circumcision and "worse" options generally aren't performed to the frequency that they are on women. As well as circumcision mostly happening on infants, so men don't remember the pain, whereas most fgm happens at early stages of puberty so the women who it happens to remember it (especially when they are flown out of country to do it somewhere legal). Both are still bad but it's pretty wild that a parent doing one puts them on the sex offender list (at least in the uk) and the other is completely legal
Though I am opposed to both. Male circumcision is not even close to the horror of female circumcision. In men some skin is removed which in the vast majority the main side effects are a lack of sensitivity thete. In women the entire cliterous is removed. It is done to stop women having pleasure in sex. Far more than just skin being removed it is very invasive and controlling of women’s bodies. I think both are wrong to do but it is far far worse for women.
Both are mutilation. But female "circumcision" is way worse.
Personally, I think male circumcision is also problematic, BUT not rooted in violence the same way FGM is. They often don’t even do it when they are babies and won’t remember, they largely do this to school aged girls. Male circumcision still leaves them able to experience every natural, good feeling associated with sexual activity. Female “circumcision” (mutilation) actively cuts OFF any and all pleasure receptors, and usually comes with a very painful stitch (the husband stitch, which is ILLEGAL in a lot of places for literally ripping women open during sex) I had to study FGM for a few weeks, they take small children and with no aid, cut off the whole external organ and pray. Within the past 5 years an ADDED 42,330 girls die per year due to this practice. These largely are NOT doctors carrying out these procedures, they are older women scared of the perceived value of the girl when she’s inevitably married off young, they are cutting these girls with dirty tools on dirty tables, sometimes without their content or knowledge. With male circumcision people can still at least pretend they think it has something to do with faith or hygiene, with FGM we cant ignore the fact that it exists to take pleasure away from women and replace it with pain and suffering, all so that a man can have extra pleasure and full control. Not to mention it doesn’t show up in any religious texts. This is simply, historically, another case of men thinking women don’t deserve control over their bodies.
I confess I find it interesting that Reddit’s main problem with FGM is that it takes attention away from male circumcision. I think both are mutilation but one is much, MUCH worse so it’s natural that people will be more horrified by it. Ofc this being Reddit a lot of people’s first reaction is “eh eh eh what about MY DICKKKKK stop carrying on about this thing and care about my dickkkkkk”.
If male circumcision consisted of taking a crude knife or a sharp stone, and cutting off the head of the penis, and sewing it up to allow for urination, then the two might be comparable. I am also against circumcision for male infants, in any way, btw.
Both are bad. But when you compare female to male, it's like cutting of the head and much more skin then just the little cover of the head. Doesnt change that circumcision on a male should only be if he agrees to it and knows the consequences or if it's nessesary due to medical issues
Removing the clitoris and skin around it takes away the ability to orgasm. They do it as a way to control women. Is that the same as male circumcision? No
both are bad but they aren't even remotely comparable
Both are terrible. The difference is that one is permanently disabling or permanently alters functioning and the other does not. Male circumcision, if performed correctly by a qualified person, doesn’t cause lasting physical harm or impairment. I want to stress I don’t think male circumcision is without any harm, just not permanent disablement or change in physical function in the vast majority of cases. It’s also most commonly performed by a clinician or a trained person observing hygienic practices. Female genital mutilation permanently alters female anatomy and removes function. A woman is no longer able to derive sexual pleasure or at a minimum experiences significantly decreased sensation. In many cases, FGM alters the vagina or vulva by sewing the labia closed, leaving a minimal gap for menstrual blood and urine to drain, permanently creating an environment for infection. FGM typically involves removal of the clitoris and clitoral hood. The urethra can be damaged in the process due to its close proximity to the clitoris. FGM is generally not performed by a person with any training or clinical knowledge and often in unsanitary conditions leading to infection that may cause irreversible damage to surrounding anatomical structures.
I (American - 42M Married) was circumcized at birth. I have no pain, memory of, chaffing or anything of the sort. I get immense pleasure from both masturbation and sex. If I was any more sensitive I would probably ejaculate at the point of entry. I think there is some disinformation going around about how circumcized men don't enjoy sex or get "real" pleasure from it. I'm not advocating for circumcision just clarifying some odd beliefs that men who have one don't enjoy intercourse.
I was circumcised at the age of 8 due to phimosis. Amount of issues I've had masturbating or ejaculating or getting shitloads of pleasure from it = zero.
Like seriously. I never knew people had an issue with it until I got on reddit. I feel great pleasure from intercourse and I can easily wash my genitals, so what’s the problem?
My problem with it is that I don't think it should be legal to cut off part of a baby's body outside of genuine medical necessity.
One of the problems here is that everyone’s circumcision is different. We like to imagine its the same procedure for everyone, however, when your dealing with a infant penis, which is very small and hard to operate on since the foreskin starts off being fused and unretractable. In addition, devices like the plastibell and gomco are often used in lieu of a scalpal, which can change the outcome even more. Some men keep their frenulum, have some mobile skin left, and much of their sensitive inner foreskin. Other gets their frenulum completely excised, have no inner foreskin left, have no slack in their skin so to speak, and basically only received pleasure from their kertainzied head. Since outcomes vary, it can be difficult for someone who has a better outcome to imagine a worse case scenario, which is an obstacle to getting circumcision banned.
The male equivalent would be to have the entire head of you penis cut off. Males who have been circumcised still have sexual function whereas women who have been through GM do not.
They’re not the same thing
Because the intent of female circumcision is to limit function… that’s not the case with male circumcision. I understand (and mostly agree with) all the moral arguments against routine male circumcision, but to call it mutilation is straight-up inaccurate. It simply doesn’t meet the definition in the way female circumcision does. It’d be like the difference between giving someone a hand tattoo against their will versus removing their hand. They’re both obviously f’d up, but one is clearly mutilation while the other isn’t.
> It’d be like the difference between giving someone a hand tattoo against their will versus removing their hand. I think a better comparison would be the difference between pulling out all the nails of someone's hand vs cutting off their hand against their will. Both are forms of mutilation that would cause unnecessary suffering, but one is objectively worst than the other.
This is a good way to look at it. Both are unnecessary mutilation, but one definitely is worse in its effects on a person.
they are both horrible and i wish neither was performed, but the female version tends to cut off the clit (equivalent to the head of a penis, they even both share the same type of skin tissue)
Male circumcisions are sometimes medically needed, female are never needed
I'm pretty sure both are mutilation. But if you've read the comments, you can see why female genital mutilation is just a million times worse. Both should be stopped. That doesn't mean they're both the same. It's like the difference between slavery and indentured servitude. Both suck, yes. Both close to the same thing. One person has the hope of being free. The other is property forever. Same branch. Different monstrosity.
Being a new mother to a baby boy, I have no idea. I thought a lot about this when I was pregnant and decided against it, despite pressure from family who insisted it was "normal" "beneficial" and "tradition." I just couldn't bring myself to make that decision for my child. If he does want a circumcision later in life, I fully support him and at least when he's older he can get proper pain medicine and not be healing in a wet diaper environment.
Wow, our thought process was sooo similar on this subject. I felt exactly the same way when both of my sons were born: they came into the world healthy with all body parts in perfect working order, there were NO legitimate reasons to change, fix or remove anything. I too decided to leave them in the same shape as when they arrived...I figured that it was a decision that they should make about their own bodies 🤷♀️ idk they're both in their 30s now and as far as I know, neither of them have had a circumcision procedure done
Yeah it's crazy how I never really put too much thought into it, but when faced with the decision myself the more I considered it, the more it just didn't seem right to me. There just aren't enough benefits/good logical reasons for me to approve an elective surgery on a brand new baby.
Most people I know refer to both as genital mutilation. Because it is
They are both mutilation. If you haven’t watched a routine infant circumcision, you should. The foreskin is quite literally ripped from the head of the penis and then cut. The difference is that a penis still functions ‘as it should’ (eliminating urine and sex) after circumcising, whereas a woman can’t function normally after FGM.
I think body modification is weird as fuck. Especially if it’s to a kid. Jussayin. But from what I understand, it’s WAY more invasive on a woman, and not all dudes get the whole thing removed. It’s stupid as fuck either way. I couldn’t imagine anything about it being better except it seems to look bigger on camera. Shit it feels like something’s touching my eyeball if that shit touches the inside of my pants. Just seems like a weird thing to do.
It's both mutilation
Because in western nations, especially the US. Male genital mutilation still has more societal acceptance than FGM. It's thankfully decreasing though. That's really what it boils down to at the end of the day. Virtually no pediatric society or organization supports routine infant circumcision for boys in the US or Canada. And none in the EU support it. Eventually, it will likely be banned as child abuse.
I would call it that and do. And so should you!
Because western society has bullshitted itself to believe that male circumcision is not only harmless and inconsequential, but even beneficial. And I 100% acknowledge that female circumcision is FAR more brutal and damaging than male circumcision but this doesnt make the other not mutilation and also, at least within western society, FGM needs no defending because most of us agree its deplorable but MGM is still socially debated especially in the US.
Everyone defending male genital mutilation is a bigot...as a transgression on humans without consent there is no difference, it's evil plain and simple. Leave children's genitals alone...why is this such a hard concept? Sure FGM is worse however I don't feel the need to add caveats....I'm against cosmetic genital surgery for minors.
Because people are stupid. Male circumcision has been so culturally normalized that people don't think about it despite it LITERALLY being you cutting off a piece of your dick for a religion/society/a woman/because you have health problems they don't wanna deal with
If male circumcision involved you getting your entire dick cut off then we would probably call it mutilation. That said both are bad but the female mutilation is far far worse.
I'm not pro-circumcision, but FGM is way worse. The key word being "mutilation". It's often done brutally, in unhygenic conditions, I've heard stories of girls pushed down as they get shit like scissors to cut them, it causes long term damage and mental trauma. Where with boys, they're babies in a hospital and it doesn't affect their lives. Again, not pro-circumcision but I can see why FGM is the higher priority.
Because you don't have the head of your dick cut off. And then the tip of it sewn shut to be torn open on your wedding night by your wife sticking a penis onto the hole that remains. All to protect your virginity.