Almost 500 cases of female genital mutilation identified in just one month in England

DoYouEvenLift

Lol @ infant genital mutilation still occurring in the Western world, when will religion just die.

JaseBelleVie

DoYouEvenLift wrote: »

Lol @ infant genital mutilation still occurring in the Western world, when will religion just die.

Sad part is, it's not just religion. It's deeply cultural too.

The United States, Canada, South Korea, Australia. Just off the top of my head, but there are 4 Western nations where the vast majority of men are circumcised and routine infant circumcision takes place a lot. Granted, the rates in Canada and in particular Australia have fallen dramatically, but the majority of adult men in both of these countries are circumcised. Having been done at birth.

In South Korea, it is a cultural phenomenon brought in by the American influence on the country following the Korean War. In South Korea, circumcision is performed on teenage/pre-teen boys as a rite of passage, rather than at birth.

But the biggest one amongst them is the USA. It is the USA that leads the charge in terms of "normalising" circumcision in the Western world. And the vast majority of circumcisions in the USA are infant ones and are done for no good reason other than the cultural ones.

I find it sickening, to be honest.

Potatoeman

Wibbs wrote: »

Hang on, so because one form is more culturally acceptable that means it's somehow lesser, even OK in a cultural context? Many people in those cultures that practice FGM would be in agreement with you, including the women who have been mutilated. That's the thing, just as circumcised men in cultures like the US are more usually insistent that their own sons are surgically altered at birth, circumcised women in those cultures insist on the same for their daughters. It's the women who perform the "surgery" in the majority of cases. As one Muslim Imam lad in Tanzania IIRC found out. He was dead set against the practice and was pointing out that it is not a requirement of Islam and the men in the culture were coming around, but headway with the women was much more difficult. Cultural biases and pressure run strong.

It really boils down to this; FGM of any form takes away the right to the bodily integrity of women and removes part of their genitals erogenous tissue and that is wrong. MGM takes away the right to bodily integrity of men and removes part of their genital's erogenous tissue and that is wrong. Severity between the practices is certainly a part of it, but both remove the right to bodily integrity entirely because of cultural reasons and as such both are equally and objectively wrong. To dismiss one type as not culturally relevant is subjective cultural bias.

That's really the only way you can argue this point across cultures. It's reduced to ethics where preforming an unnecessary medical procedure on a child without consent is unethical no matter the cultural norms. Western cultures should take a hard look at their own motivations and justifications for 'cultural' procedures.

Wurzelbert

DoYouEvenLift wrote: »

Lol @ infant genital mutilation still occurring in the Western world, when will religion just die.

what a daft post

Wurzelbert

JaseBelleVie wrote: »

[...]
But the biggest one amongst them is the USA. It is the USA that leads the charge in terms of "normalising" circumcision in the Western world. And the vast majority of circumcisions in the USA are infant ones and are done for no good reason other than the cultural ones.

I find it sickening, to be honest.

me too...i remember reading circumcision is in decline among the non-jewish and non-muslim population in the us nowadays...though the american circumcision industry would certainly do everything to stop that trend...

DoYouEvenLift

Wurzelbert wrote: »

what a daft post

Thank you.

DeadHand

conorhal wrote: »

My only question is, if 500 cases have been detected, why are there not 500 sets of parents sitting in police holding cells waiting to be questioned?
If 500 children from any other comunity had a hot Iron held to their genitals or their nose sliced off by their parents they certiantly would be. People can dance around the issue all they like, but that figure suggest that the authorities are simply ignoring child abuse. End of story. Rotherham 2.0

Hard to argue with this grim assessment.

Once again, the paralysing, poisonous political correctness that is so deeply ingrained in English officialdom conspires to allow evil in that country. Once again, it is the weakest and most vulnerable who are sacrificed at the altar of "diversity" and "race relations".

The fact is, this is an imported evil. It came to Britain with immigration.

As we saw on this very thread with the immediate, personalised attempts to vilify and shout down the OP, there is a significant body of left-leaning people here and elsewhere who believe ethnic minorities should be above criticism and that anyone highlighting barbarity like this is some kind of bigot.

This is dishonest and helps no-one.


Funny the things mainstream feminism gets sore over. The great enemy today is Page 3. On FGM among ethnic minorities in Britain? Deafening silence.

Of course, if FGM was something being forced on children by mostly white, indigenous men or anyone other than the pet minorities of the left, Harriet Harman and co would be out manning (personing?) the barricades.

As it is, it seems the exposure of pert boobs is a greater societal ill than the mutilation of baby girls.

DeadHand

DoYouEvenLift wrote: »

Thank you.

There's a button for that, you know.

Egginacup

obplayer wrote: »

Then would you take mine? I have never started a thread on Muslims or indeed Brown Skinned People but I still find FGM to be a vile, evil practice and am stunned that it appears to be so prevalent in Britain.

Shouldn't Britain be bombed or sanctioned then?

bodice ripper

DeadHand wrote: »

Hard to argue with this grim assessment.

Once again, the paralysing, poisonous political correctness that is so deeply ingrained in English officialdom conspires to allow evil in that country. Once again, it is the weakest and most vulnerable who are sacrificed at the altar of "diversity" and "race relations".

The fact is, this is an imported evil. It came to Britain with immigration.

As we saw on this very thread with the immediate, personalised attempts to vilify and shout down the OP, there is a significant body of left-leaning people here and elsewhere who believe ethnic minorities should be above criticism and that anyone highlighting barbarity like this is some kind of bigot.

This is dishonest and helps no-one.


Funny the things mainstream feminism gets sore over. The great enemy today is Page 3. On FGM among ethnic minorities in Britain? Deafening silence.

Of course, if FGM was something being forced on children by mostly white, indigenous men or anyone other than the pet minorities of the left, Harriet Harman and co would be out manning (personing?) the barricades.

As it is, it seems the exposure of pert boobs is a greater societal ill than the mutilation of baby girls.

I never said anything like that. I would be happy to see people locked up for engaging in this practice. I just amn't stupid enough to believe RobYourBuilder gives a **** outside of his little sphere of interest.

DeadHand

bodice ripper wrote: »

I never said anything like that. I would be happy to see people locked up for engaging in this practice. I just amn't stupid enough to believe RobYourBuilder gives a **** outside of his little sphere of interest.

Did I mention you?

Happy to see people punished for it but, apparently, unhappy to see people highlight it...

Incidentally, Rob just started an excellent thread on homophobic bullying.

Check it out.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Wibbs I'm on the phone so can't quote your post but you've taken me up wrong. Genital mutilation of infants is abhorrent regardless of their gender apart from that one huge similarity the practices have many very important differences and imo need to be tackled differently - though both need to be stopped. MGM is culturally acceptable in many western societies, FGM is not. One needs to have its wide spread, liberal western acceptability questioned and demolished; the other needs to be eliminated amongst immigrant communities of mostly non-western origin. The fact that MGM is culturally acceptable means that vastly more FGM operations are carried out in secrecy and taken to greater extremes, which, combined with te fact that penises, menstrual blood and babies go in and come out of vaginas means that the likelihood of complications for FGM victims is far higher. MGM doesn't constantly have to be compared to FGM (or at least there doesn't need to be this constant insistence that they're exactly the same) in order to argue against it, it's a barbaric practice and that can be understood by discussing it by itself.

I mean look at the OP. How many babies are sent to the UK for MGM? Few to none I'd wager, because it can bring done anywhere. Does that not illustrate the differences (which, no to labour the point, I don't mean in a moral sense but in regards to efforts to eliminate the practices)? There are going to be vastly different educational, legislative etc tools needed for the eradication of each and I just do not understand this insistence that one is not allowed to be discussed without it turning into a competition with the other.

DeadHand

Heavenly Mammoth Earphone wrote: »

I just do not understand this insistence that one is not allowed to be discussed without it turning into a competition with the other.

Me neither.

ALWAYS happens on FGM threads.

spikeS

Heavenly Mammoth Earphone wrote: »

Wibbs I'm on the phone so can't quote your post but you've taken me up wrong. Genital mutilation of infants is abhorrent regardless of their gender apart from that one huge similarity the practices have many very important differences and imo need to be tackled differently - though both need to be stopped. MGM is culturally acceptable in many western societies, FGM is not. One needs to have its wide spread, liberal western acceptability questioned and demolished; the other needs to be eliminated amongst immigrant communities of mostly non-western origin. The fact that MGM is culturally acceptable means that vastly more FGM operations are carried out in secrecy and taken to greater extremes, which, combined with te fact that penises, menstrual blood and babies go in and come out of vaginas means that the likelihood of complications for FGM victims is far higher. MGM doesn't constantly have to be compared to FGM (or at least there doesn't need to be this constant insistence that they're exactly the same) in order to argue against it, it's a barbaric practice and that can be understood by discussing it by itself.

I mean look at the OP. How many babies are sent to the UK for MGM? Few to none I'd wager, because it can bring done anywhere. Does that not illustrate the differences (which, no to labour the point, I don't mean in a moral sense but in regards to efforts to eliminate the practices)? There are going to be vastly different educational, legislative etc tools needed for the eradication of each and I just do not understand this insistence that one is not allowed to be discussed without it turning into a competition with the other.

But FGM is culturally acceptable in the communities it's done in, the question is should we be pushing our culture onto them.

It's like the prime directive in Star Trek, we should not interfere in other cultures they need to evolve on their own not be forced by our morality

Nodin

spikeS wrote: »

But FGM is culturally acceptable in the communities it's done in, the question is should we be pushing our culture onto them.

It's like the prime directive in Star Trek, we should not interfere in other cultures they need to evolve on their own not be forced by our morality

Why is it I doubt the sincerity of the above post?

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

spikeS wrote: »

But FGM is culturally acceptable in the communities it's done in, the question is should we be pushing our culture onto them.

It's like the prime directive in Star Trek, we should not interfere in other cultures they need to evolve on their own not be forced by our morality

If "pushing our morality" on them means stopping them from slicing up children's genitals then yeah, we fcuking should be. How that's gone about is a different question.

obplayer

Grayson wrote: »

It still involves mutilating the genitals of little boys. can you honestly imagine anyone excusing FGM because it provides a minimal health benefit?

I have never at any time said I approve of circumcision of infant boys, indeed I would happily criminalise it. I have said male circumcision can have medical benefits, even just personal ones when the foreskin is too tight, but it should be a voluntary procedure not available until the male is at least 12. That is my last comment on male circumcision in this thread.

spikeS

Heavenly Mammoth Earphone wrote: »

If "pushing our morality" on them means stopping them from slicing up children's genitals then yeah, we fcuking should be. How that's gone about is a different question.

To Muslims and Jews it's part of their culture why do we get to push our western ideals onto them, how do you suggest we change their culture.

obplayer

spikeS wrote: »

I am torn on this FGM is awful but I don't think we should be interfering with Muslim culture either, maybe we should try to discuss it with them and eventually they will change their mind on FGM over time without us forcing our ways on them.

It is a part of some cultures, not necessarily Muslim, but not all cultures are equal. It was the culture in India to burn widows alive on the funeral pyre beside their dead husbands but as one British general commented, it was British culture to hang murderers, and Suttee was rightly stamped out. Some practices are just wrong and should be ended and I don't care about being 'culturally insensitive' when eradicating them.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Andreward wrote: »

You have made it a competition in your post above by comparing the harm done by both and then you complain that people are making it a competition.

Which I would not have done if the "hey MGM is bad too look how bad it is it's totally as bad as FGM I suppose you're probably grand with milder FGM" posts hadn't come up. That's what turned it into a competition, I was simply responding.

jackofalltrades

Heavenly Mammoth Earphone wrote: »

I just do not understand this insistence that one is not allowed to be discussed without it turning into a competition with the other.

Which I would not have done if the "hey MGM is bad too look how bad it is it's totally as bad as FGM I suppose you're probably grand with milder FGM" posts hadn't come up. That's what turned it into a competition, I was simply responding.

People only starting discussing MGM when posters claimed incorrectly that there is no comparison between the two.
And this only happened after someone complained about MGM being brought up in threads like this, even though it had not been mentioned at that point.

I think both FGM and MGM are abhorrent and should be banned.
But the double standard in how they are treated can be very annoying to put up with.

Raging_Ninja

Gotta say, I kind of disagree with being called mutilated because I was circumcised due to having phimosis as a child.

Never caused me any problems and the woman likes it as well.

reprise

DeadHand wrote: »

Hard to argue with this grim assessment.

Once again, the paralysing, poisonous political correctness that is so deeply ingrained in English officialdom conspires to allow evil in that country. Once again, it is the weakest and most vulnerable who are sacrificed at the altar of "diversity" and "race relations".

The fact is, this is an imported evil. It came to Britain with immigration.

As we saw on this very thread with the immediate, personalised attempts to vilify and shout down the OP, there is a significant body of left-leaning people here and elsewhere who believe ethnic minorities should be above criticism and that anyone highlighting barbarity like this is some kind of bigot.

This is dishonest and helps no-one.


Funny the things mainstream feminism gets sore over. The great enemy today is Page 3. On FGM among ethnic minorities in Britain? Deafening silence.

Of course, if FGM was something being forced on children by mostly white, indigenous men or anyone other than the pet minorities of the left, Harriet Harman and co would be out manning (personing?) the barricades.

As it is, it seems the exposure of pert boobs is a greater societal ill than the mutilation of baby girls.

True.

In Ireland of course, the road to enlightenment in all matters FGM has been equally glittering.

Time was, you couldn't open the Irish Times without being bombarded with the latest tale of another (inevitably) Nigerian "asylum seeker", apparently being ruthlessly forced out of the State to return to an inevitable fate.

No truck was given to those who suggested that internal relocation was possible in a country of the size of Germany and France combined. Overnight experts abound from the usual ranks of the loony left. One could only cower at the shear vitriol and hatred for those who would inflict fgm, as though they were a species apart on home soil.

Turns out, the resistance to the practice wasn't quite as robust as appeared and those who would perform the acts, were quite happy to join the "asylum seeker" route with the prospective errr victims.

Now the problem is on our soil, we can pursue a well worn path, trod by our British betters and therefore supported by Sinn Fein (if not their voters) and others and simply "celebrate diversity".

Problem solved.

WakeUp

fgm is an abhorrent practice and it would appear its an issue for us aswell. not only is it abhorrent its criminal making those who carry out the act criminals.
_____________________________________________________________________________

DESPITE FEMALE GENITAL mutilation being outlawed in Ireland in 2012, there have been no prosecutions to date under the legislation.

The gardaí confirmed to TheJournal.ie that no one has been prosecuted yet under the Act.

The Criminal Justice (Female Genital Mutilation) Act 2012 makes it a criminal offence for someone resident in Ireland to perform FGM. The maximum penalty under all sections of this new law is a fine or imprisonment for up to 14 years or both.
It is also a criminal offence for someone resident in Ireland to take a girl to another country to undergo FGM.

It is estimated that 3,780 women in Ireland have undergone female genital mutilation (FGM), although it is estimated that the numbers could be much higher. Many of these women would have had it carried out in other countries, though AkiDwA, a minority ethnic-led national network of migrant women living in Ireland, believes that it is still being carried out here.

The difficulty is detection. The only way to know if FGM has been carried out on someone is to have a physical exam and while it has been floated by other countries that perhaps young school girls should be screened, this raises a whole host of legal, privacy and child welfare issues and it would also be an invasion of the privacy of young girls.

Mbugua said that FGM is usually detected by GPs or doctors in maternity hospitals. “Often the women had FGM carried out on them when they were very young and may not even remember it. Doctors often notice when women present in maternity hospitals when they are having a baby,” she said.
http://www.thejournal.ie/female-genital-mutilation-no-convictions-ireland-1600231-Aug2014/
____________________________________________________

because of the medical ethics involved perhaps doctors and such should be given powers to file a report if they suspect a case of fgm and then let the guards take over. once that happens an investigation can begin and the person questioned under oath to figure out if someone can be taken to task for it. anyone who engages in this practice is a criminal by way of the laws of this state. and if you support it or turn a blind eye to it then they are no better either.

Aurum

DeadHand wrote: »

Funny the things mainstream feminism gets sore over. The great enemy today is Page 3. On FGM among ethnic minorities in Britain? Deafening silence.

Of course, if FGM was something being forced on children by mostly white, indigenous men or anyone other than the pet minorities of the left, Harriet Harman and co would be out manning (personing?) the barricades.

As it is, it seems the exposure of pert boobs is a greater societal ill than the mutilation of baby girls.

Feminist groups regularly campaign about the issue. However, there is so much more media coverage for Page 3 debate because the story will get so many more hits than an "Earnest FGM Report Published" article ever would. Unless you're actively involved in campaigning or policy analysis you're not going to see most of the anti-FGM reports, speeches etc. because they're not widely reported. Also, Harman has spoken against FGM a number of times over the years.

DoYouEvenLift

Raging_Ninja wrote: »

Gotta say, I kind of disagree with being called mutilated because I was circumcised due to having phimosis as a child.

Never caused me any problems and the woman likes it as well.

Doesn't every boy have phimosis as a child? As you grow older the foreskin begins to retract more and more due to pulling it back/stretching it bit by bit to clean it and, well, masturbating. An uncut and cut penis should still look pretty much the same erect. It's when someone's an adult who wasn't lucky enough to naturally cause the foreskin to retract over time and now it is impossible to pull back, even when erect, to the point it causes pain that surgery/circumcission is needed. Some American parents who have actually changed their opinions on circumcission and chose to not cut their sons even help them learn to properly do this while cleaning to best make sure they don't end up with phimosis.

JupiterKid

FGM is a wicked, vile and barbaric practice that has no place anywhere in the world. It is all about making life a misery for women and denying them pleasure from sex. I'm shocked that the practice is happening in the UK.

ALiasEX

Raging_Ninja wrote: »

Gotta say, I kind of disagree with being called mutilated because I was circumcised due to having phimosis as a child.

Never caused me any problems and the woman likes it as well.

If i cut your arm off it wouldn't be mutilation because some people are amputated?

Akrasia

spikeS wrote: »

But FGM is culturally acceptable in the communities it's done in, the question is should we be pushing our culture onto them.

It's like the prime directive in Star Trek, we should not interfere in other cultures they need to evolve on their own not be forced by our morality

Imagine if it was their 'culture' to chop off the index finger of every female baby

Now are you still in favour of it?

What if it's their culture to kill the first born baby as a sacrifice to their god.....

Potatoeman

Akrasia wrote: »

Imagine if it was their 'culture' to chop off the index finger of every female baby

Now are you still in favour of it?

What if it's their culture to kill the first born baby as a sacrifice to their god.....

No they shouldnt but its a bit rich when many western cultures cut the foreskin off baby boys.