Lisa Turtle: Any mothers who had their sons circumcised willing to have your prepuce (clitoral hood) removed as well?
Isn’t it the same thing?
And before you give me that hygienic or health crap, check out Europe. Almost all problems are corrected with antibiotics and soap and water. Most British men/boys are not cut with no problems.
And before you give me the religious line, which body part would you be willing to remove to please the invisible man in the sky? Would you cut off the clitoral hood?
Answers and Views:
Answer by Wisdom
Female circumcision is extremely dangerous. While male circumsicion can be dangerous too, female circumsision is even more dangerous. The girls are more likely to go into toxic shock, or even die. Expecially for babies. If a baby loses even 2oz of blood she could start hemoreging…
Countless girls have died because of female circumsision. That is why it is illegal.
Also science shows that there is no benefits to health by circumsision, no matter what people say.
Answer by Daniel JohnApples and oranges. There is no female correlation to male circumcisions. The procedure you mention for females would take away all sexual joy. Now, I have no opinion on whether or not to have my own children circumcised, but my fiancee who is a physician wants them circumcised. It’s a simple procedure she herself has done many times, and like a vaccination protects from some potential issues down the road which may or may not be prevalent… but neither is the mumps in modern society.
edit: additionally, religion is not the only reason for religious traditions, like circumcision, not eating pork, etc, etc… Uncured pork was very dangerous in ancient days, so there was a very practical reason not to eat pork, and a good reason to write it in legal books, which in the day weren’t separate from religious books. Jews weren’t the only ancient peoples to practice male circumcisions. Very few ancient people practiced female circumcision. (in fact, most anthropological writings I’ve read on it suggest female circumcision is a relatively new invention, designed in countries that way to subjugate women) Even you, who are for foreskins (lol) can’t say there is no medical benefit to male circumcision. As you said, with the right amount of soap and water, and with antibiotics (which are more and more complex each year, because of our development of resistances… antibiotics being far more dangerous to the human race than circumcision) problems can be avoided. . . but as someone who works and lives in this country, I can tell you soap, water and medical care aren’t well distributed in America to all children.
Answer by ¤Blackhoof Buccaneers Revenge¤Wow. There are no words.
Personally I’d prefer to leave the decision up to the father, it’s a guy thing…
It’s kind of a family’s own business.
Why did you even post it here if you aren’t going to related it to religious reasons.
Answer by nancyjoThe answer to your question is “NO”.Answer by Kevin Smith
Way to sidestep the question hypocrites. Circumcisions are done for religious reasons and nothing else. Let me chop off a woman’s clitoris before she tries to have her child circumcised. If she answers no then she cannot mutilate her boy either.Answer by sudonym x
I am an uncut man, and have no problems, and greater sexual enjoyment.
Circumcision kills, and should be outlawed.
Answer by SallyAs an English mum to a 5-year-old boy, circumcision as a regular surgery for BABIES seems bizarre to me. I have only ever been with one circumcised man and he had that done because he needed to for a tight foreskin.
Basically every reason I have come across for doing it to a child can be made null by, you know…teaching them how to wash.
If there really was a good reason for doing it, you’d think there’d be men going in by droves as a adults…funnily enough, there isn’t?
Answer by scaerdrys*Sigh*
No, FGM and male circumcision are not the same thing. It’s disgusting to compare the two–bordering on misogynist. You are spitting in the face of millions of women who have suffered from FGM if you believe that.
FGM exists to obliterate a woman’s sexuality and reduces any association she has with sex to the function of making babies for her husband/owner. The cliortis, in cultures where it is practiced, makes a woman an insatiable sex animal. Since these cultures assume that women really can’t controll their sexual appetites without a serious intervention, they cut off the cliortis-if the woman is lucky. FGM takes many shapes, from pricking and cutting the clit to taking the labia and rearranging the outer genatalia entirely. In Northeast Saharan Africa where the practice is ubiquitious, they take her inner & outer labia, as well, then sew the whole thing up to make the vagina smaller…a chastidy belt out of the woman’s own scar tissue. You have to imagine that this makes loosing one’s virginity to one’s husband/owner much more painful than it already is. You must also imagine that this makes the task that women in these societies were meant to do–make babies for their husbands/owners–much more dangerous, in areas of the world where maternal health is already in the crapper. It raises the risk of inferitility and infant morbidity—so there goes the one reason women in those cultures have to exist. It has no health benefits, and makes the need for additional surgeries a clear threat. It contains many health risks. It is traumatic–done as it is to 4-8 year old girls. It completely destroys most of the pleasure women can have from sex. And it’s sole purpose is to ensure that a woman is the complete and total property of some man.
Meanwhile, male circumcision is a fairly risk-free procedure. It is done to identify a boy as being part of a particular people, his covanent with G-d. He can enjoy sex without his foreskin. If it’s done when he’s 8 days old, he’s not traumatized (I have plenty of male relatives who’ve been circumcized. They’re fine). And, yes, I am giving you health crap—some boys can’t pull back their foreskin to cleanse it properly, or can’t retract it once pulled back. It can be too tight or stiff, causing men extreme pain, especially following an erection or during sex. Studies have squarely linked urinary tract infection to uncircumcision. Statistically controlled studies have shown that circumcized men are far less likely to suffer from penile cancer—only 1 in 10 afflicted are circumcized. And, by the way, this is true for Europe, and first world countries. ‘Antibiotics (which the first world has realized are problematic a long time ago, fyi), soap and water’ aren’t preventative, and they don’t solve for all those problems.
Or, to put it in simpler terms: Shaving off a bit of skin from the penis of a–something clinically proven to do a man more good in his life than bad–is not the same thing as gutting out a women’s external genatalia. If you really think that cutting off a foreskin and cutting out a woman’s sexual pleasure center are the same thing, there is something very wrong with you.
Peace
======================================…
And to all the silly people who are still trying to say that male circumcision is no different from FGM (including some scary apologetics for FGM): Not. according. to. the. WHO.
Answer by Miss 6Its not really the same thing. An uncircumcised man may be able to last longer sexually speaking. Whereas if you remove a woman’s clitoris she would not be able to enjoy sex until well into her 30s if even at all. Also there are many forms of female circumcision all forms end up ruining the woman’s vaginal area, which can cause many health concerns later on in life.
For most people circumcision is a cultural thing. Judaism and Islam both believe in circumcising a BOY & and ONLY BOYS! (many countries in Africa do female circumcisions and claim its in the Qu’ran to do so, this is not true, this is a cultural thing they did before they became Muslims).
As far as would I have my son circumcised? Despite mine and my fiance’s background we may not have our son (if we have one) circumcised. & HELL NO! I would NOT have a Clitoridectomy!
Answer by SutraEveryone here seems to have alot of excuses as to why its ok to mutilate little babies. There is no medical reason to do it. Its torture. My kids are intact and I actively spread the word so check out these sites. www.intactamerica.org doctorsaqgainstcircumcisn.com Its not your body leave the choice to them alone.
As far as the silly argument about fathers and sons should look alike, well if you got your eye poked out would you do it to your child so they will look like you. Its time to end the barbarism.Answer by mist covered
As a mother who had my son circumcised, I wonder why it bothers you so much…it is just a useless little flap of skin, for crying out loud…it is about as useless and aggravating as an appendix….
From a medical stand-point,it actually causes alot of problems in men who are not circumcised, and Scaerdrys made alot of good points in support of it, perhaps you might take the time to read what she has written?
If you don’t want it done or don’t want your kids to have it done, that is fine with me, by all means refuse it. (here in America we are still a FREE country, and NOBODY is forced to have a circumcision, or even compelled to for that matter..) But, don’t try to take away MY right to choose for myself what religious and/or hygenic practices are best for MY child.
Answer by 2worldsin1Actually the health crap is real. Yes, they have antibiotics, but how many doses do you think is good for your child? There are men out there who get infection after infection. My grandfather was one of them who did. He finally decided to get circumsised in his early sixties because of it. If he would have had it done while he was young, it would have been less traumatic for him. Babies don’t remember that day. Also, you cannot compare the two–men vs. women. Totally different.Answer by Matt
Agree! This is so strange practice in America and I don’t get it!
Whole Europe donesn’t do this – UK, France, Spain, Italy, Germany, Poland, Russia all males are INTACT. But when you come to America you find people cutting of pieces of skin and above all it’s FREE. Heck I would cut off clits of those women doing this to a baby!!
Answer by GingerCircumcision is wrong when done to unconsenting minors- period.
And to the mother who said that foreskin is a useless flap of skin….how would you like one of your fingers chopped off, or your fingernails ripped off, or your labia trimmed, or the outside of your ears hacked off, or your clitoris removed, without adequate pain meds and without your permission? Cuz you don’t necessarily “need” any of those body parts, now do you? Btw, foreskin contains 20,000 nerve endings and provides a huge amount of pleasure to both men and their partners during sex.
Answer by AnnaI can’t BELIEVE the ignorance of some people on here.
First off, there are many different types of female circumcision. It is actually UNCOMMON for the entire clitoris to be removed. Typically, female circumcision removes the hood of the clitoris like you said.
The most minor types range from a pinprick or nick of the genitals to draw blood. No amputation at all, just a quick blood-draw.
And the most major (this type is very rare) removes the clitoris, clitoral hood, inner labia, and sews the outer labia together.
The clitoral hood is DIRECTLY analogous to the foreskin on a man. In fact, both parts are more scientifically termed the “prepuce”. Girls DO have a ‘female’ foreskin.
I can’t believe the peope who are answering you are talking about a man’s foreskin as if it’s useless. It’s not. It’s a double-layer of skin containing 2/3rds of the total nerve endings in the penis. It’s sensitive, erogenous sexual tissue. The foreskin protects the penis AGAINST infection (like your eyelids protect your eyes) and also keeps the penis sensitive. The head of the penis is meant to be an internal organ, so when it’s not protected by the foreskin it dries-out and loses sensitivity.
The foreskin is natural, normal, healthy, FUNCTIONAL, and meant to be there.
ALL forms of circumcision are mutilation. Male circumcision is more similar to female circumcision than most people think — both remove healthy, functioning parts of the genitals for no medical reason, both reduce sexual pleasure, both have no medical benefits, both are harmful, both are done for the same reasons even:
-Because mommy or daddy is
-Because it’s just what’s done in that society
-Because no man wants to marry an uncircumcised women/ no woman wants to marry an uncircumcised man
-To make the genitals look better
-To make the genitals healthier or cleaner
Obviously we know that all those above reasons are RIDICULOUS. But people who circumcise their daughters justify it in the same ways as people who circumcise their sons.
I’m SICK AND TIRED of people blabbing on and on about the injustices of female circumcision in Africa, and then they turn around and inflict the exact same mutilation onto their sons.
EVERY baby or child deserves to be protected from genital mutilation, not just girls. Boys too.
I can’t answer your question as I would never circumcise my son (unless it’s required for medical reasons), but I can say this: I would give up my clitoral hood before allowing my son to be cosmetically circumcised.
EDIT; Wisdom said “countless girls have died because of female circumcision”.
Every year in the USA, 500 baby BOYS die from their circumcisions.
Most British men are uncircumcised but quite a few have problems. You just dont want to hear it.
In case you dont know, a penis and a vagina are two different things. If they were the same there would be no need for women with all their nagging.
This is a Troll question set up by the anti circumcision brigade. Welcome to answers website your account is a whole two days old.
The best gift you could give to your son is to have him circumcised. It will give him a lifetime of protection against stds, hiv, phimosis, balanitis, hpv. This protection is also for his future sexual partners.
circumcision is the gift that keeps on giving.
https://groups.yahoo.com/group/Inter-Circ…
https://www.penisdoctor.com/
https://www.circumcisioncenter.com/
https://www.aboutcirc.com/
https://www.medicirc.org/
https://www.circumcisioninfo.com/index_ho…
https://www.circinfo.net/
https://men.webmd.com/guide/circumcision-…
Peter
ps there hasnt been a death from circumcision in the USA that was done by a competent circumciser in over four years, but a number of uncircumcised boys do die from urinary tract infections.
Im against FGM but I think that you should get your clitoral hood removed; it may clear the cobwebs in your thinking logic.
helmets protect
CIRCUMCISION IS THE GIFT THAT KEEPS ON GIVING.
Answer by jack sFemale and male circumcision, do have a lot in common, nobody says they are identical. Infibulation, , the most severe form and worse than male circumcision, which involves removal of the clitoris. is actually rare. Often people assume all female circumcision is infibulation, which is not the case.
The most common form is removal of the clitoral hood, less severe than male circumcision which removes 75% of the nerves in the penis (more than in the clitoris), a thin layer of muscle, many blood vessels etc.
https://www.circumstitions.com/FGMvsMGM.html
Female GCMale GC
Cutting?YESYES
Of the genitals?YESYES
Of babies?YESYES
Of children?YESYES
Without consent?YESYES
At parents’ behest?YESYES
Removing erogenous tissue?YESYES
Supposedly beneficial?YESYES
Justified by aesthetics?YESYES
Justified by supposed health benefits?YESYES
Justified by religion?YESYES
Justified by sexual effects?YESYES
Justified by custom?YESYES
Justified by conformity?YESYES
Effects minimised by its supporters?YESYES
Performed by its adult victims?YESYES
Extremely painful?YESYES
Can cause harm?YESYES
Very severe damage?USUALLYSOMETIMES
Can cause death?YESYES
Legal in Western countries?NOYES
Some people (especially in the US) are in denial that there might be anything in common.
This may because they think male circumcision is some trivial thing and they do understand what it really is and would prefer not to question it.
Leave a Reply