Parents found guilty of mutilating one year daughters genitals

One eyed Jack

Gynoid wrote: »

A lot of people don't seem to do scale or nuance anymore.

That statements about to keel over it’s so loaded with irony Ahh no, I get what you mean, I just thought it was funny On a more serious note -

Gynoid wrote: »

What culturally "perverted barbaric" practices do we have here? Remember now culturally implies they have some kind of support from people generally. And if you name some or even one how does it / they even remotely compare on any rational scale to cutting off a childs clitoris.

The whole idea of transgenderism and the way it’s promoted and celebrated in Western society qualifies for me at least, the whole idea of using fluffy euphemisms to describe what to me qualifies at least as a perverse and barbaric practice - “gender affirmation surgery” and “hormone treatment” and the way children are being exploited to promote it to adults, forcing children to participate in it in schools where there are measures to introduce it on the national curriculum.

I also think the way we treat people who are unable to live independently is perverse and barbaric, although we haven’t introduced euthanasia and assisted suicide in this country yet, it’s only a political party manifesto away. There’s another practice which seems to have flown under the radar lately as the only media source which seems to be following the story is the journal -

Vaginal mesh implants: Women complain of delay in aftercare for severe complications

A quote from that article -

“The stabbing pain can often feel like I’m sitting on a barbed wire fence.”


Abortion fluffied up as “women’s healthcare” is again a fluffy euphemism to describe what to me qualifies as a perverted and barbaric practice. I’m just giving you the examples you asked for which qualifies to me as perverted and barbaric practices, I’m fully aware that you may and most likely will disagree that they qualify as perverted and barbaric practices in your opinion, which is fair enough. I just don’t want the thread to be dragged off the topic of FGM, I’m not comparing them though, just to make that clear. They are perverse and barbaric practices in their own right.

Raconteuse

Can't understand the "we have our own barbaric practices" thing. Firstly, we don't (examples being given are tenuous at best). And secondly, if we did, there is no law that states we cannot criticise both.

Cultural relativism when we are talking actual harm to another, particularly a child, is of no use whatsoever.

One eyed Jack

Raconteuse wrote: »

Can't understand the "we have our own barbaric practices" thing. Firstly, we don't (examples being given are tenuous at best). And secondly, if we did, there is no law that states we cannot criticise both.

Cultural relativism when we are talking actual harm to another, particularly a child, is of no use whatsoever.

My comment was originally in response to this example of cultural relativism -

malinheader wrote: »

They can practice their cultural perverted barbaric practices in their own country, but not in mine please.

To which I originally responded -

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I know what you mean, but I don’t agree that they should be able to practice their culturally perverted barbaric practices in any country, precisely for the reason that it is a culturally perverted barbaric practice. We have plenty of our own culturally perverted barbaric practices without importing any more from other countries already.

I was aware that other people are going to disagree and say that “we don’t”, which is fair enough. I was asked for examples, I gave them. I see them as culturally perverted barbaric practices in the same way as I see FGM as a culturally barbaric practice whereas for the people who practice and promote it, I would understand and expect that they would disagree.

nozzferrahhtoo

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I don’t know why you would advocate separating the children from their parents when the vast majority of evidence we have suggests that it is generally not in children’s best interests to separate them

Strange that you do not know why someone would advocate doing that given I explained very clearly in the post above why someone would advocate doing that. It seems here "I do not know" actually means "I am pretending not to know, to serve petty point scoring"

But I am happy to repeat it and go along with the sham pretence you do no know it. The reason we would consider it is if we had good reason to think the other children, such as the one currently being breastfed, would be subject to the same crime. IF a crime is committed against Person A and we think the same crime could be committed against person B... then we have every reason to consider removing person B from the potential of harm.

But there is a lot of IFS there which is why we should be CONSIDERING it, not jumping straight to DOING it. But it absolutely should be an option on the table.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

from their parents, that the long term negative effects of separation by far outweigh any short term positive effects.

That would entirely depend, would it not, on what the positive and negative effects actually are. Your pretence this is a simple algorithm that can be universally applied is less than a joke, it is a wanton canard.

One eyed Jack

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

Strange that you do not know why someone would advocate doing that given I explained very clearly in the post above why someone would advocate doing that. It seems here "I do not know" actually means "I am pretending not to know, to serve petty point scoring".

No, what it means is that I don’t know why ILYB specifically would advocate the removal of children from their parents when I know she is aware of the negative long term suffering of people who were separated from their parents as children due to their parents failure to adhere to an overbearing ideology at the time, namely that of a collusion between the State and the Church to promote Mother and Baby Homes (where babies were separated from their mothers and the nuns received a gratuity from the wealthy purchasers).

Of course I know why people advocate separating children they perceive to be at risk from their parents, because they believe it is acting in the children’s best interests. Society hasn’t actually changed all that much since the Church has fallen out of favour for keeping “undesirables” out of sight of “civilised society”. We only need look at the example of condemnation of Margaret Cash to know that much, and I only mention her by name because she was the most recent high profile example who would have been a prime candidate for detention in one of these “homes” in the past. Nowadays we refer to them as “direct provision centres” and “family hubs”. Again with the fluffy euphemisms to describe what in reality are essentially the same thing.

nozzferrahhtoo

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I don’t know why ILYB specifically would advocate the removal of children from their parents when I know she is aware of the negative long term suffering of people who were separated from their parents

And again, I simply do not believe you do not know. It is obvious why anyone would advocate removing children from their parents DESPITE the long term consequences of doing so. Simply that they believe the benefits of doing so would OUTWEIGH those consequences. Feigning ignorance for effect does not help here.

Generally the reason people advocate doing something that will cause harm, is that they see the benefits as paying for that harm.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Of course I know why people advocate separating children they perceive to be at risk from their parents, because they believe it is acting in the children’s best interests.

And sometimes it is. The last three posts from you that I have replied to have you amalgamating the whole thing into one and generalising it into a statement that it is a bad thing to do. No nuance or consideration of individual cases.

Which is why I disagree with you refusing to advocate for "any initiative" that allows it, rather than advocating initiatives that have it as an OPTION on the tables that we choose with care.

biko

https://www.thejournal.ie/female-genital-mutilation-trial-ireland-2-4909913-Nov2019/

In one exchange, the woman told gardaí she believed she was charged with allowing FGM to happen “because I am Muslim, I am black, and in my country they do that”.

If she has come to Ireland then Ireland is her country. And we don't mutilate people here.

One eyed Jack

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

And again, I simply do not believe you do not know. It is obvious why anyone would advocate removing children from their parents DESPITE the long term consequences of doing so.

Apart from the fact that I really don’t care for what you do or don’t believe, it’s because it wasn’t obvious to me why ILYV specifically would advocate separating children from their parents. That’s why I said “you”, and not “anyone”, because I was questioning ILYV on her position, which I didn’t understand.

One eyed Jack

biko wrote: »

If she has come to Ireland then Ireland is her country. And we don't mutilate people here.

Unfortunately biko we do mutilate people here, it just isn’t called mutilation. Rather more specifically we refer children for treatment to centres in the UK where my sister lives. The reason I mention my sister is because when she moved to Scotland she met a man whom she later converted to Islam to marry (she would say she “reverted” to Islam) and is fully supportive of FGM. They had four boys before they recently divorced, in part due to the fact that her ex-husband who is a doctor is opposed to FGM. It was somewhat of a bone of contention between them that could never be resolved.

Gynoid

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The whole idea of transgenderism and the way it’s promoted and celebrated in Western society qualifies for me at least, the whole idea of using fluffy euphemisms to describe what to me qualifies at least as a perverse and barbaric practice - “gender affirmation surgery” and “hormone treatment” and the way children are being exploited to promote it to adults, forcing children to participate in it in schools where there are measures to introduce it on the national curriculum.

I also think the way we treat people who are unable to live independently is perverse and barbaric, although we haven’t introduced euthanasia and assisted suicide in this country yet, it’s only a political party manifesto away. There’s another practice which seems to have flown under the radar lately as the only media source which seems to be following the story is the journal -

Vaginal mesh implants: Women complain of delay in aftercare for severe complications

A quote from that article -

“The stabbing pain can often feel like I’m sitting on a barbed wire fence.”


Abortion fluffied up as “women’s healthcare” is again a fluffy euphemism to describe what to me qualifies as a perverted and barbaric practice. I’m just giving you the examples you asked for which qualifies to me as perverted and barbaric practices, I’m fully aware that you may and most likely will disagree that they qualify as perverted and barbaric practices in your opinion, which is fair enough. I just don’t want the thread to be dragged off the topic of FGM, I’m not comparing them though, just to make that clear. They are perverse and barbaric practices in their own right.

Okay, you make some fair points and I probably agree more than disagree with you on most of them, with nuance.
For now though I am unfollowing the thread as yourand nozz's multiquote battles make my poor eyes spin.

boring accountant

The Satanist wrote: »

It's only allowed in hospitals afaik


https://www.rte.ie/amp/68368/

If we can't bring our values to bear in deciding a case then what's the point of a jury?

nozzferrahhtoo

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Apart from the fact that I really don’t care for what you do or don’t believe, it’s because it wasn’t obvious to me

Nor do I care either, it is for the benefit of OTHERS I call out nonsense. Rarely for the benefit of the person I am replying to directly. I simply do not buy the feigned ignorance here. I do not think anyone else should either.

It is blatantly obvious why someone would advocate a potentially damaging solution.... because they clearly believe the benefits outweigh those potentials. Play dumb on that obvious fact if you like, someone might buy it. I don't is all.

What I also do not buy into however is your assertions about how children removed from parents generally fare. And predictably enough when I referred to data or citations on this score you did your usual thing of suddenly not replying to the posts any more.

IS there data on this? If so what is it and what does the data ACTUALLY say? Does the data distinguish between the varying success measures on a correlation/causation basis for example? OR does it simply assume that all the measures that go down do so because they children were removed from their parents? Does the data generalise in the way you do? Or does it distinguish between kids where the benefits DID outweigh the detriment and vice versa?

Because the assertions you are making to back up your opinions are very vague, very generalised, and very limited so far. So as one of my favourite you tubers Dr. Carroll would say "To the research!". Lets see it and what it ACTUALLY says? I really really doubt it supports the "Lets never take kids away from the parents cause it ends poorly for them" mantra at all. I strongly suspect the data will support a "This is a risky choice, not one to be taken lightly, but there are ABSOLUTELY many situations where it is overall the right thing to do" mantra. Lets have at it! Whenever you are ready.

Gynoid

Gynoid wrote: »

I don't think a valid comparison can be made. The line of thought seems to imply we have state sponsored child prostitution etc. We really do not.
.

You didn't ask for a comparison. You asked for barbaric practices.

What culturally "perverted barbaric" practices do we have here? Remember now culturally implies they have some kind of support from people generally.

Subsidies provided by the state to promote and support traveller culture, in turn, supports the continuance of any negative Traveller cultural behavior because there is no outright demand for it to stop. The State supposedly represents the people of the nation.

Mezzotint

I have to say this the existence of practices like FGM and the twisted logic that's being deployed by some on this thread to defend it with abstraction and whataboutary just leaves me wondering about humanity.

Put all that aside and it comes down to a little girl who was mutilated. The rest is just waffle and nonsense attempting to justify it.

There are times I just feel like putting on headphones, grabbing a book, finding somewhere nice and just shutting it all out.

Humanity can be really grim sometimes.

One eyed Jack

Mezzotint wrote: »

I have to say this the existence of practices like FGM and the twisted logic that's being deployed by some on this thread to defend it with abstraction and whataboutary just leaves me wondering about humanity.

Put all that aside and it comes down to a little girl who was mutilated. The rest is just waffle and nonsense attempting to justify it.

There are times I just feel like putting on headphones, grabbing a book, finding somewhere nice and just shutting it all out.

Humanity can be really grim sometimes.

I sometimes wonder what it must be like to disappear so far up ones own fundament that one loses sight of the fact that they are as much a part of humanity as the people who don’t share their “unique” perspective.

suicide_circus

biko wrote: »

https://www.thejournal.ie/female-genital-mutilation-trial-ireland-2-4909913-Nov2019/


If she has come to Ireland then Ireland is her country. And we don't mutilate people here.

but actual integration of migrants into Irish society is not a factor in out migration policy. This woman is a CITIZEN OF IRELAND but is so unintegrated into our society and cultural norms that she is mutilating her child's genitals. this couple live in an entirely seperate and parallel society. this is multiculturalism and cultural relativism in action.

Muahahaha

Sentencing today on this case

THE PARENTS OF a young girl who is deemed to have undergone female genital mutilation (FGM) have today been jailed after being found guilty last year following a trial.

On 28 November, a jury at the Dublin Circuit Criminal Court unanimously found the married couple guilty of FGM and of a separate charge of neglect related to the same incident on 16 September 2016.

Judge Elma Sheahan today sentenced the girl’s father to five and a half years in prison for the FGM charge, and three years for the neglect charge. The sentences will run concurrently. The girl’s mother was sentenced to four years and nine months years in prison for the FGM charge, and two years and nine months for the neglect charge. The sentences will also run concurrently.

The maximum sentence for an FGM conviction in Ireland is 14 years, while the neglect conviction has a maximum sentence of seven years.

Article also goes on to say that the parents are from east Africa and have been in Ireland several years. The mother is an Irish citizen but the father is not and is currently subject to a deportation order which he has appealed. The child is being cared for by her aunt under the supervision of Tusla while her parents are in prison.

Most disturbing part is that the judge said the parents did not carry out the FGM themselves but instead someone was procured to do it for them. The parents did not tell Gardai who this person is so they are free to continue on offering genital mutilations in immigrant communities.
https://www.thejournal.ie/fgm-trial-sentencing-ireland-4975318-Jan2020/

Sardonicat

mcmoustache wrote: »

Replying to my own post here...


What are the realistic options here in terms of sentencing? A long custodial one would be fine if not for the fact that there's a child involved. What happens to the child here?


While I like the second proposal of Still Waters, we don't have any such provisions in our legal system. It's custodial or nothing.

AFAIK, the children, along with her siblings, is loving with her aunt (mother's sister ). Would the children be deported if the parents are?

wellwhynot

Sardonicat wrote: »

AFAIK, the children, along with her siblings, is loving with her aunt (mother's sister ). Would the children be deported if the parents are?

The mother won’t be deported. The father most likely will not either. What happens when they get out of prison? Do they get their children back? If for cultural reasons the mother is pro-FGM what about her sister?

Conall Cernach

If the mother is an Irish citizen by naturalisation then I would support her being stripped of it and deported on her release. Her children would be Irish citizens as they are children of an Irish citizen so they could stay.

Lollipops23

It should be mandatory 20 year sentence for that barbarity. Send a message.

Incidentally, FGM has nothing to do with religion; it's a cultural ritual. It predates Islam.

terenc

Why were these people allowed into this country in the first place and then allowed to practice this barbarity , when released from jail (which will be shortly)deported back to their country of origin.

wellwhynot

terenc wrote: »

Why were these people allowed into this country in the first place and then allowed to practice this barbarity , when released from jail (which will be shortly)deported back to their country of origin.

It’s become in excess of a hundred million euro per year industry. All paid for by us. I don’t understand why the government allow it.

Eric Cartman

Lollipops23 wrote: »

It should be mandatory 20 year sentence for that barbarity. Send a message.

Incidentally, FGM has nothing to do with religion; it's a cultural ritual. It predates Islam.

Sadly its become interrwined with it and some african minority religions. Non EU migrants really need to be heavily screened for Beliefs on FGM

Rodin

The lack of ability to deport is a consequence of handing out citizenship after too short a time.
Should be much, much longer.

Circumcision for cultural reasons shouldn't be allowed either in my opinion.

Still waters

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Sadly its become interrwined with it and some african minority religions. Non EU migrants really need to be heavily screened for Beliefs on FGM

You'd think they'd face a test or an interview on entry to see if potential irish citizens or asylum seekers are compatible with irish laws and customs along with a training course if necessary to educate these animals on why fgm and other barbaric beliefs and acts are not tolerated in Ireland.

I'm happy with the sentences today but i wouldn't object to sticking on another 5 years to send a message to any other sub human scum who might think it's acceptable to mutilate little girls, I'd also have no problem with them being surgically steralised before they enter back into society

Eric Cartman

why did the father get a longer sentence ?

Kidchameleon

Eric Cartman wrote: »

why did the father get a longer sentence ?

Patriarchy

Calhoun

The not cooperating with the guards probably the why behind the long sentences. Good enough for them but feel something like this should result in expulsion.

Not sure where that would be though as they are only saying African country in the media.

Atlantic Dawn

Why is their country of origin not being released? East Africa is not a country.

tdf7187

While its welcome that the parents are going to serve a sentence what is going to happen to the poor child?

4068ac1elhodqr

This is the 1st legal case of it's kind in Ireland.
Yet there is very likely hundreds of FGM incidents similar to this each, and every year.

Atlantic Dawn

tdf7187 wrote: »

While its welcome that the parents are going to serve a sentence what is going to happen to the poor child?

Likely they will be given to foster parents suitable to look after a child.

tdf7187

suicide_circus wrote: »

its difficult not to see (medically unnecessary) circumcision of baby boys as the thin end of the wedge when it comes to FGM.

If you tolerate this...

what?

Kidchameleon

Kannon Yellow Bullfrog wrote: »

This is the 1st legal case of it's kind in Ireland.
Yet there is very likely hundreds of FGM incidents similar to this each, and every year.

About 2,000 in 2013, I'd imagine that number is higher now...



https://www.irishexaminer.com/lifestyle/healthandlife/parenting/to-cut-or-not-to-cut-239186.html

In 2011, more than 2,000 paediatric circumcisions were performed in acute public hospitals in Ireland. The procedure is available in most public hospitals and, if carried out in such a setting, there’s no cost to parents. If performed privately, parents can pay in around €900. The majority of male paediatric circumcisions carried out here are culturally motivated.

4068ac1elhodqr

Kidchameleon wrote: »

......

FGM isn't circumcision, look it up in a dictionary.


Guesstimate it's hundreds per year (similar to this FGM), performed in back yard unregistered doctors yards, garden sheds and so on. Yet only one single conviction so far.



Obvs can't be performed in a proper hospital, as it simply isn't legal.
The hospitals pick up the pieces, and fix the botched operations when presented at A&E.

Rodin

Kidchameleon wrote: »

About 2,000 in 2013, I'd imagine that number is higher now...



https://www.irishexaminer.com/lifestyle/healthandlife/parenting/to-cut-or-not-to-cut-239186.html

In 2011, more than 2,000 paediatric circumcisions were performed in acute public hospitals in Ireland. The procedure is available in most public hospitals and, if carried out in such a setting, there’s no cost to parents. If performed privately, parents can pay in around €900. The majority of male paediatric circumcisions carried out here are culturally motivated.

Should be illegal. Unless medically necessary.

Eric Cartman

Eric Cartman wrote: »

why did the father get a longer sentence ?

I’d like to think it’s in light of his abject failure to do the one thing the lowlife is supposed to do as a father above all else - protect his child.

Scumbags, the pair of them. I hope they get the sheite bet out of them in prison.

JP Liz V1

Patrick2010 wrote: »

What kind of savage looks at their poor little baby girl and thinks it’s time to take a blade to it ?? This needs a severe sentence to discourage it being established in our new Irish community

The blade should be used on the parents, sometimes prison is too easy

Pronto63

Atlantic Dawn wrote: »

Likely they will be given to foster parents suitable to look after a child.

The RTE news reported that she was now with her mothers sister (aunt)!

Is she safe now?

Pronto63

Pronto63 wrote: »

The RTE news reported that she was now with her mothers sister (aunt)!

Is she safe now?

Not at all.

Sarcozies

Eric Cartman wrote: »

why did the father get a longer sentence ?

The gender sentencing gap. Men receive longer sentences than women for the same crimes.

It's larger than the racial sentencing gap.

Kidchameleon

JayZeus wrote: »

his abject failure to do the one thing the lowlife is supposed to do as a father above all else - protect his child.

Do you think a woman should be held to account less than a man?

FishOnABike

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Do you think a woman should be held to account less than a man?

Maybe there are circumstances in this particular case but it would seem our courts hold some to account less than a man.

Such a blatant discrepancy should require an explanation.

seamus

IIRC in this case the father was deemed to have been the one in the driving seat, who instigated the mutilation and the cover up afterwards. In his defence he also claimed that he was a leading anti-FGM campaigner, which indicates an active and malicious awareness that what they did was legally and morally wrong.

I'm not saying I agree with the disparity in sentencing, but this might be the explanation.

Wibbs

seamus wrote: »

In his defence he also claimed that he was a leading anti-FGM campaigner

:eek: Right, well it seems science has found a material harder than diamond, his neck.

Hector Savage

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

RTÉ haven’t put it on their Facebook either.

We all know who RTE will sympathize with here ...

garyskeepers

Eric Cartman wrote: »

why did the father get a longer sentence ?

what WERE the sentences?

Eric Cartman

garyskeepers wrote: »

what WERE the sentences?

4 years 9 months for her and 5.5 years for him

spurious

Eric Cartman wrote:

why did the father get a longer sentence ?

Maybe he organised it? I don't know. What I do know is a female child has been butchered and it is sickening that the usual suspects here try to somehow use that to play the 'poor men' card and bash women again. You and others really need to take a look at yourself.