2wsxcde3 wrote: » Here is the link again:https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/04/female-genital-mutilation-cutting-anthropologist/389640/Khazan: And where is the support for this practice coming from? Shell-Duncan: ...If we look at the data across Africa, the support for the practice is stronger among women than among men.
Khazan: Do you think it’s a global-health imperative that we work to stop this?Shell-Duncan: There's no question this is a global-health issue. In the U.S., adult women are capable of giving consent for surgical procedures. But what would it take to get a woman in an African country to the same position of being able to give consent? Social pressures [in the nations that practice FGC] are so strong that no woman could ever opt out. Everybody would come down on her. That’s the problem. Why can we give consent and they can’t?
mrkiscool2 wrote: » So....your evidence for women wanting to get FGM (or FGC, as they call it) is from cultures that have highly patriarchal societies that still, for the most part, view women as objects and breeders? Wow, much evidence, such persuasion! :rolleyes:
2wsxcde3 wrote: » Here is the link again:https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/04/female-genital-mutilation-cutting-anthropologist/389640/Khazan: And where is the support for this practice coming from? Shell-Duncan: ...But when you talk to people on the ground, you also hear people talking about the idea that it’s women’s business. As in, it’s for women to decide this. If we look at the data across Africa, the support for the practice is stronger among women than among men. I don't believe people should just be able to choose whatever they want to do. These women in support of this practice are perpetuating the problem in my opinion. That's why i don't agree with their support if it.
Khazan: I also read that in surveys, large numbers of women and men no longer favor the practice, but they have their daughters cut regardless. Why do they keep doing it?Shell-Duncan: This is not an individual behavior. For example, if I decide I want to lose weight, and that I'm going to start exercising on a daily basis, I can decide that all by myself. If I decide I don't want to circumcise my daughter, that’s not an individual behavior. I would have to answer to my husband, to my mother-in-law, my mother-in-law would have to answer to her friends throughout the community, my father-in-law would have to answer to people in the community, so there's societal pressure. So understanding what is a collective decision versus individual is really important. You can go and tell an individual mother what the health risks are and she can believe you, but it doesn’t mean, first of all, that she has the power to make that decision, or even that she has the authority to impart that information to her mother-in-law and other senior people in the society who are the decision-makers. Who wants to be the first one to change? Who wants to be the odd man out?Khazan: What seems like an eradication strategy that might work, given those pressures?Shell-Duncan: What we're coming to realize is that programs that target individual mothers are completely ineffective. Mothers are not solely in charge of the decisions for their daughters. We need to be targeting people who are in the extended family, and we know that we need to figure out who are the figures of authority in these families, and who are the influences on them in the community. We need to do male elders, but also female elders.
2wsxcde3 wrote: » We live in a patriarchal society. Just look at Dail Eireann. So, do you support these womens right to choose to have FGM done to them? It's kind of shameful we are making women travel abroad to other countries to have this done, making them feel like criminals.
Andrew Beef wrote: » Yes, I do. I support abortion in certain circumstances; medical cases (e.g. the Savita case), rape cases, and incest cases. And to answer another poster’s question, I support abortion in cases of rape and incest because I believe that the woman’s right to bodily integrity trumps the unborn child’s right to life in such circumstances. As previously stated, I oppose abortion in “plain vanilla” circumstances and believe that women who procure abortions either at home or abroad should be criminalised. My “Rape Committee” solution of a senior Garda, a GP, and clinical psychologist for rape/incest cases has already been put forward. My thought process is therefore clear and I have done my best to address the incessant and repetitive questioning from the pro-abortion lobby. Beyond that, I have nothing further to say, other than to express hope that the debate, both here and further afield, can remain civil.
david75 wrote: » Well the timing is very strange but this is happening Seven judges to hear appeal over rights of unborn Judgment may affect the wording of the referendum on the Eighth Amendmenthttps://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/courts/supreme-court/seven-judges-to-hear-appeal-over-rights-of-unborn-1.3399385
2wsxcde3 wrote: » mrkiscool2 wrote: » So....your evidence for women wanting to get FGM (or FGC, as they call it) is from cultures that have highly patriarchal societies that still, for the most part, view women as objects and breeders? Wow, much evidence, such persuasion! :rolleyes: We live in a patriarchal society. Just look at Dail Eireann. So, do you support these womens right to choose to have FGM done to them? It's kind of shameful we are making women travel abroad to other countries to have this done, making them feel like criminals.
2wsxcde3 wrote: » Some women are pressurized into FGM the same way some women are pressurized by abusive boyfriends into getting an abortion. But some women choose to do FGM of their own accord. Are you pro-choice for these women?
sondagefaux wrote: » You've either deliberately or mistakenly left out the parts of the interview which show that for many girls and women, their consent is not given freely and is the result of social pressures put on women in the societies they live. You also neglect to quote from the interview where the researcher explicitly says that decisions about circumcision are generally not individual decisions, but are collective decisions taken by the extended family and other influential members of the community. Once again, your argument is based on incomplete information.
2wsxcde3 wrote: » Would you object to FGM being legalized in this country so? Some want it legalized. Or would you try to impose your viewpoints and morality on others by insisting it stay illegal. Are you pro-choice for these women:Why Some Women Choose to Get CircumcisedAn anthropologist discusses some common misconceptions about female genital cutting, including the idea that men force women to undergo the procedure.(Source: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/04/female-genital-mutilation-cutting-anthropologist/389640/ )
Charmeleon wrote: » That was the case before contraception and the right to travel were corrected in law. If you want to prevent pregnancy, have an abortion or the morning after pill the state will not stand in your way. The question is whether abortion should be permitted as a service within the state.
Grayson wrote: » What has it got with the right of a woman to chose to terminate a pregnancy.
2wsxcde3 wrote: » I'm testing the consistency of the pro-choice position (which is a fair thing to do in any argument). If you truly believe a woman should be able to do whatever she wants with her body, then you have to follow that position to its natural conclusion. But we seem to be seeing that pro-choice people don't believe that women who follow a religion or culture different from their own should have the choice to do whatever she wants with her own body. Pro-life people are often viewed as "controlling a woman and her body" if they are against abortion. But you can see from your own position on FGM (which i presume you are against it), your position is out of compassion for how the procedure impacts other people (such as women who don't want FGM) and children who are given no say in the procedure (like the unborn child). And so you don't believe the procedure should be legalized simply to placate women who do want FGM ...due to the effect it will have on those who don't want it.
Grayson wrote: » For what it's worth, if anyone of their own free will wants to change their genitals then they can work away.
2wsxcde3 wrote: » sondagefaux wrote: » You've either deliberately or mistakenly left out the parts of the interview which show that for many girls and women, their consent is not given freely and is the result of social pressures put on women in the societies they live. You also neglect to quote from the interview where the researcher explicitly says that decisions about circumcision are generally not individual decisions, but are collective decisions taken by the extended family and other influential members of the community. Once again, your argument is based on incomplete information. We have societal pressures too. Women must have a good career etc etc. And so a child would stop that. Women who stay at home minding children are often stigmatized in this country for "scrounging off the state". Women are under pressure from society to not be one of these moms.
Women who stay at home minding children are often stigmatized in this country for "scrounging off the state".
2wsxcde3 wrote: » Grayson wrote: » What has it got with the right of a woman to chose to terminate a pregnancy. I'm testing the consistency of the pro-choice position (which is a fair thing to do in any argument). If you truly believe a woman should be able to do whatever she wants with her body, then you have to follow that position to its natural conclusion. But we seem to be seeing that pro-choice people don't believe that women who follow a religion or culture different from their own should have the choice to do whatever she wants with her own body. Pro-life people are often viewed as "controlling a woman and her body" if they are against abortion. But you can see from your own position on FGM (which i presume you are against it), your position is out of compassion for how the procedure impacts other people (such as women who don't want FGM) and children who are given no say in the procedure (like the unborn child). And so you don't believe the procedure should be legalized simply to placate women who do want FGM ...due to the effect it will have on those who don't want it.
mrkiscool2 wrote: » No, you can ask questions. Never said you couldn't. And actually, originally, I thought you were asking should we in the sense should we make it law, which was fine. Again, I can find your question revolting but you have every right to ask it. And no, the question isn't asking do we think it's okay to abandon one's sick child because it is sick. It is asking whether or not a woman should be allowed to choose whether they go through with 9 months of highly difficult pregnancy followed by (at minimum) 18 years of supporting that fetus once it's born (and becomes a child). Gonna give you the benefit of the doubt. The link doesn't work. You can repost and I'll read it and THEN answer you.
mrkiscool2 wrote: » Secondly, if a grown woman, above the age of 18, wants to have her genitals mutilated to leave a scar and never feel pleasure for sex, more power to her. The same way guys can get circumcised to make their penis look better, even if it means the sex isn't as good for them. !
Spanish Eyes wrote: » The decision should be between the woman and her medical advisor and no one else.
ForestFire wrote: » You did not sat you found it disgusting, you said it was disgusting to even ask it, as if I should not, but let's move on. I'll ask again, can you see how the referendum question could be seen as the same type of question to some people and they might just find it too much too far?(Not to you or possible even me , but to some people who believe the fetus is life, right or wrong, proven or not ,with our current understanding.)
2wsxcde3 wrote: » That's what Ali Selim said!
2wsxcde3 wrote: » Spanish Eyes wrote: » The decision should be between the woman and her medical advisor and no one else. That's what Ali Selim said!
Spanish Eyes wrote: » Looks like the referendum will pass. Too many lunatics in the asylum now making no sense at all really. Shame on them. The decision should be between the woman and her medical advisor and no one else. But sure that would mean no one else has control over women.
