A post by Pat

It’s just a little nick “down there”. Similar to ear piercing. It’s much better than total mutilation. Probably not even as painful as male circumcision. What’s important is that it would “build trust” with immigrant families. Who came up with this lunatic idea? The American Academy of Pediatrics.

Doctors defend genital “nick” for girls

The American Academy of Pediatrics has suggested a new way to fight female genital mutilation in the United States: Allow doctors to give girls a “nick” down there. In a policy statement titled “Ritual Genital Cutting of Female Minors,” the Academy suggests that allowing such a ritual could serve as a way to “build trust” with immigrant families and prevent parents from sending their girls overseas for far more extensive, and potentially life-threatening, procedures. It’s a “possible compromise to avoid greater harm,” the statement says. [...]

Dr. Lainie Friedman Ross, one of the statement’s authors, compared it to an ear piercing. It wouldn’t involve the removal of skin, instead it would be more like “a pin prick, a drop of blood.” As she described it, the “nick” would be ritualistic and symbolic. Ross strongly disagreed with an Equality Now press release saying that the Academy’s statement “essentially promotes female genital mutilation.” Much of the five-page statement takes care to emphasize the Academy’s opposition to “all types of female genital cutting that pose risks of physical or psychological harm,” as well as the need for education to eradicate the demand for such procedures. “In an ideal world, there would be no female genital cutting,” said Ross, but we clearly do not live in an ideal world. “If you just tell people ‘no,’ they go elsewhere,” she explained, adding that a “nick” should be seen as an “option that’s not ideal but is better than its alternatives.”

It is certainly true the procedure performed as a cultural practice is barbaric as well as unhygienic. For the Academy to think there is any compromise or pretend substitute is to completely misunderstand why the mutilations occur in the first place. FGM is a misogynous practice with serious intentional consequences. It is a violation of a female’s human rights. The Academy is either naive or culturally patronizing to think a centuries old practice will be abandoned because Western medicine gives its approval to a substitute. The Academy is wrong in suggesting there is a benign form of FGM we all can live with.

*UPDATE* In response to some of the comments below: FGM does occur in Islamic countries and passages in the Koran are cited to support it. However, FGM predates Islam by thousands of years. It is practiced mainly in Africa and in parts of the Middle East and Asia. The practice has been studied by anthropologists, psychologists and physicians. It is predominately a social custom not a religious rite.

Here’s the link to Academy’s policy statement. See page 6 for the portion about the “nick”.

This section is for comments from tammybruce.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Tammy agrees with or endorses any particular comment just because she lets it stand.
39 Comments | Leave a comment
  1. thierry says:

    and iran is now on the commission on the status of women on the human rights council in the UN- and america sat there and said nothing, the moral equivalent of barry bowing to some genocidal jew and woman hating freak. because the rights council has previously ruled that it’s a hate crime to criticize islam and that human rights are relative to cultures.

    and slavery exists and is tolerated in many islamic countries in africa. would it be better if those modern day black skinned slaves be brought by their black skinned masters to america and still be allowed to still act as such- because’ a little bit’ of enslavement of black men is better regulated here in america than as practiced in a country where it is culturally, religiously (slavery is ok in the koran) and legally sanctioned?

    those the New World Order is coming people never thought that it would be the Islamic World Order ( aka the world caliphate) , did they? it was suppose to be halliburton, the freemasons, and the lizard people from outer space.

    while i listen to the crickets chirp, i’ll be waiting for the great feminist wave of outrage …

  2. aliencats says:

    You’ll be waiting a long time thierry. This is just a bad dream. We just need to wake up….Wake up…Wake up…Ofreddie is coming.

    • thierry says:

      it better be covered under the deathcares law or some female mutilating pervert will have to sue papa doc barry for the islamophobia racisms.

      but, after all, barry is going to court to defend the burqua- one wonders how far he’d like to go with it. will he defend this- something hateful primarily done to black african females against their will?

      there is no mention of genital mutilation of females in the koran. none. it’s a twisted tribal form of slave branding and torture to keep women in line. shouldn’t this count as torture? it’s absurd to say you can’t water board terrorists or even allow them to see a woman without a bra on, that’s torture- but cutting off a girl’s clitoris and / or labia or infibulation is just a ‘ ‘symbolic nick’ . this is about the most hateful thing i have heard coming from dhimmi morons in quite awhile- i am fairly beside myself with rage. ever day it just gets crazier.

      i find it hard to believe doctors who one assumes didn’t get their degrees off of matchbook covers have no idea what exactly female genital mutilation is- which makes their deranged yet carefully worded pronouncement near theater of the absurd.

      http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en/

      • There is no mention of female genital mutilation in the koran, but Mohamet does give his blessing to some kind of female genital mutilation in bukhari hadith, the second most important book to islam. If circumcision of male infants can be considered protected religious expression in the U.S., then the bukhari hadith thing could make the same true for female genital mutilation, at least if we are talking about something that is not a threat to life and reasonably good physical health.

        • thierry says:

          the hadiths are NOT considered in the same light as the koran, which is the very word of god. the hadiths are not one book like the koran but collections of judicial rulings. different branches of islam hold to different sets of rulings.

          female genital mutilation is a tribal cross cultural practice in africa – it is not an islamic religious ritual. even catholics in africa, tribal ones, have been known to practice female genital mutilation. it pre-dates both islam and christianity. it is not carried out by male religious leaders but by female relatives. (females hold no significant religious role in islam.) calling it a religious ritual protected by our constitution is deeply confused and dangerous. it is not the same as ritual circumcision of males in judaism- calling the two the same is called moral relativism and is medically erroneous . again slavery is in fact mentioned in the koran and allowed- is it protected religious expression under the constitution therefore?

          muslim clerics have routinely denounced female ‘ circumcision’ especially the more severe forms as prohibited. in most countries where it is still prevalent it is in fact illegal. in the the hadiths , severe forms of genital mutilation are addressed and specifically prohibited, not ‘ blessed’ as you wrongly state . it is pointed out that it is something not mandated by the koran (in islam anything not mandated by the koran has been traditionally generally viewed as not prohibited. it is hardly a ‘ blessing’, not even a slight encouragement .). it is described in the hadiths as wrong if it is harmful and may effect female sexual pleasure- which in the koran women have a right to( they could divorce their husbands if they were not given sexual satisfaction from them) . hadith compilers like abu dawud viewed female circumcision as a preislamic cultural hold over that was merely tolerated (and mostly dying out) in it’s lesser forms (meaning minute pieces of skin removed that’ cause no harm’- probably where these tools get their ‘ small nick’ bull). today , the major islamic clerics, however, consider it prohibited. credit where credit is due.

          in 1996 female genital mutilation was outlawed in the united states. it is against the law. the law has not been challenged on religious grounds because it is not a religious practice but a tribal one. it is also against the law in most of the countries these immigrants we so want to ‘build trust with’ come from. it’s creeping barbarism to tolerate it.

          • the hadiths are NOT considered in the same light as the koran…

            I did not say that bukhari hadith is seen in the same light as the koran. I said it is the second most important book to islam, and it is. It is not considered the infallible word of allah, it is however considered to be the most correct record of mohamet’s teachings of the hadiths. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sahih_al-Bukhari

            female genital mutilation is a tribal cross cultural practice in africa – it is not an islamic religious ritual. even catholics in africa, tribal ones, have been known to practice female genital mutilation. it pre-dates both islam and christianity.

            The circumcision of male infants predates Judaism, the religion it is most associated with here in the U.S. It is also not required of Christians, who routinely have their male infants circumcised.

            it is not carried out by male religious leaders but by female relatives. (females hold no significant religious role in islam.) calling it a religious ritual protected by our constitution is deeply confused and dangerous.

            I didn’t say that it is protected by the constitution. I said that the passages in hadith could be used to make it protected religious expression. After having reviewed the passage in hadith dealing with FGM, I see that I was wrong about that. (Been a long time since I read it. Sorry.) However, the question remains, is it considered protected religious expression when Christians circumcise their male infants? If so, think in terms of cases making it all the way to the supreme court. Think of less severe forms of FGM (removal of the outer labia with no damage to the clitoris, etc.). Now think of the ‘justices’ we have on the supreme court…

            I am one of the the least confused persons here about this, thierry.

            it is not the same as ritual circumcision of males in judaism- calling the two the same is called moral relativism and is medically erroneous .

            Who the hell called them the same, please? There are similarities, I said, only in that the child cannot either give or deny consent, and that it is the unnecessary (in most cases) removal of genital tissue. How the hell is that calling the removal of foreskin the same as the removal of the clitoris or any of the awful things done to the labia and the vagina?!? I NEVER called them the same, at any point. I am not falsely accusing you, please show me the same courtesy. Damn.

            again slavery is in fact mentioned in the koran and allowed- is it protected religious expression under the constitution therefore?

            Slavery is tolerated in the bible as well, and is not considered a protected religious expression.

            Social custom, religious rite…again, the genital cutting of male infants is not a religious requirement for Christians, as Christians are not commanded to do it. Yet in our society, most of the infants who have it done are from Christian parents. (Again, I did not call it the same as FGM. I know exactly what FGM is.) Is it considered a protected religious practice when Christians circumcise their male infants? I really don’t know. (And I know all the arguments about using it to prevent some infections, I’m not asking about that.) If it is, think about the legal implications of that, please. Do you understand what I’m saying?

            If you believe that the Supreme Court in it’s current configuration is just, then I guess I could understand your struggle with what I’m saying here.

            “muslim clerics have routinely denounced female ‘ circumcision’ especially the more severe forms as prohibited. in most countries where it is still prevalent it is in fact illegal. in the the hadiths , severe forms of genital mutilation are addressed and specifically prohibited, not ‘ blessed’ as you wrongly state . ”

            Okay, ‘blessed’ is not the word I should have used. But I didn’t say that he ‘blessed’ severe forms, as you wrongly accuse me of. I said ‘some form of FGM’, please read my words before making false accusations. It would save us both time. There is some kind of female genital mutilation mentioned in hadith. Read the hadith yourself, mohamet doesn’t condemn all FGM at all, not by a long shot:

            …a woman used to perform circumcision in Medina. Muhammad said to her, ‘Do not cut severely as that is better for a woman and more desirable for a husband.’

            Define severely in this context, please. Whatever the definition, he did indeed give his okay to female genital cutting, as you can see. Perhaps he meant a ‘nick’, hmmm?

            Now, again, Christians are allowed to have their healthy male infants circumcised for any reason. It is not commanded of them as it is of Jews. So, my question remains, is it considered protected religious expression when Christians have their male infants circumcised? If it is, then the very least we are looking at on the horizon for the daughters of some immigrants is a ‘nick’. In the meantime, many are getting far worse, regardless of the fact that it is very much illegal.

            As for islamic clerics condemning the practice, there are also some who support it. The ones who condemn it are of course right to do so.

  3. I have to wonder, what the heck do they mean by a nick? Are they cutting the clitoris in any way? Why aren’t they being specific? I see the words ‘ritual nick’ and I’ve seen the words ‘pin prick’ elsewhere, but I haven’t seen anything to indicate what part is being nicked or pricked. This is horrible. And any legislation making it illegal to send your kid abroad to have genital mutilation done, can be worked around by simply saying that you are sending her abroad to ‘visit relatives’.

    But hell, I don’t even believe in the circumcision of male babies, unless it is a necessary part of treatment (not prevention) of a bad medical condition. The foreskin is nerve-rich tissue, and most problems could be avoided by proper cleaning of the genitals, and giving the baby a proper diet. A person is free to observe his religion with this practice when he reaches manhood, but a baby has no choice in the matter. Taking the foreskin off a healthy normal penis before the person has fully matured physically can set up the male for sexual problems later in life. And while the percentage of males known to have sexual problems from infant circumcision is small, any is too many to justify performing the procedure when it is unnecessary, in my opinion.

  4. KatieSilverSpring says:

    I don’t know here. The previously posted points have me thinking. It can be considered along the lines of religious circumcision. But as with everything else of late, if we set a policy, stick with it and educate.

    FGM is a disgusting practice. We need to educate people, immigrant or not. I immediately become suspicious when a group as large as American Academy of Pediatrics get involved. They are the ones who approve Gardasil for 8 year old girls, and now boys too. They, pediatricians, disallow parents from sitting in with teens seeing a doc because as everyone knows all teens have secrets that a parent could never understand.

    Always remember, just because a “culture” practices something doesn’t mean it has to be respected in all other cultures. Where is it, in cannibal “cultures”, the palm of a little boy’s hand is most tender and delicious.

  5. LJZumpano says:

    the world is now divided between those who consider women to be as valuable and important as men and those who consider them a lesser class, property to be controlled. Women hold up half the sky, and anyone who doesn’t get that is a barbarian not worth hearing from. I refuse to appease those who think women can be hidden, mutilated, enslaved and mistreated for no reason other than they are women. What an enlightened world we live in! Since many of these oppressed women are unaware that they have the human right to demand fair treatment, it is difficult to see how to get them that right. But there is no reason why we should in any way by our actions give the impression that we are supporting enslavement of women any where in the world.

  6. Laura says:

    An Islamic NWO with FGM implementation?? OH HELL NO!!! Lock and Load!

  7. Lock and load, indeed. But that is the only way it will be stopped. Legislation that says that it is illegal to send a girl abroad for FGM is useless to prevent it, as the parents can simply say that the kid is just going to visit relatives. In the end, they will be able to do what they want to the kid. And since a person is either crazy or evil to do this to a girl, why would they care about the legal consequences, if they are found out? Such nuts are the sort who blow themselves up.

    I would love to see a truly effective and legal solution proposed. I have no ideas.

  8. jgm219 says:

    So it’s barbarism light they’re promoting.

  9. Pat_S, even though it is a rule in Judaism, male circumcision predates Judaism. And since Christians are not commanded to have their boys circumcised, it could be said to be a social custom when Christians have it done to their boys. I’ve heard of atheists getting their boys circumcised, so they don’t ‘look different’ from the other boys they will meet. Most of the folks who have their boys circumcised in this country are probably not bound by any religious rule that says they must, so it could be said to be social custom. (I’m just thinking about legal arguments here, so don’t hit me.)

    That said, I don’t believe that the circumcision of male infants is comparable to female genital mutilation, except in that it is the unnecessary (in most cases) removal of genital tissue and the child cannot give or deny consent. Have read all about FGM as practiced in foreign countries, and even seen some of the horrible pictures. Anyone who does that to a girl or woman should burn in hell, after a drawn out, torturous death on earth.

  10. Artgal says:

    When we have people coming to this country who fail to assimilate and who have no intention of honoring our laws as much as fundamentally changing them, the result is a capitulation of OUR society to accommodate theirs – and yes, we should be very, very frightened by this report. Even if these ‘doctors’ are not going to perform an entire removal of the clitoris, just the fact they would even consider performing anything close to it on a girl is grizzly to say the least. It is a form of sexual abuse and torture and this organization needs to be confronted NOW! Just think of the wonders that will be possible once healthcare is totally in the hands of our government as it continues to force out Judeo-Christian concepts of valuing life and the uniqueness of each individual in place of espousing Islamic ‘immigrant’ customs.

    I worked on a human rights video for International Christian Concern about 7 years ago. One of the interviews took place in Indonesia where an entire Christian village was taken over by Islamic Jihad. Those who survived were taken as prisoners and forced to convert or die. The family on the video were forced to undergo genital mutilation. The males (youngest being 11) were forced into circumcision with scissors being the surgical instrument of choice by the Islamothugs. The youngest boy developed an infection that kept him from walking for a month. They were not allowed to have antibiotics. All the girls between the age of 1 month and 21 years were forced to undergo FGM with a bottlecap inserted inside of them while a Gillette razor was used to remove the clitoris. Just a nick, you know. Oh, and everyone was wide awake for their ‘procedures’ and the parents forced to watch as their children were being scarred for life.

    If we are going to embrace any ounce of this savage, archaic ‘practice’ in any way, shape or form, then we are NOT the country of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness anymore! We cannot tolerate ANY aspect of this WHATSOEVER!

    Oh, and for all those who complained about water-boarding being torture and inhumane, where are they on this matter?

    • There is a difference between ‘embracing’ it, and making a compromise that might possibly spare the genitals of a few female children. (Mind you, I said a few.)

      Does anyone have any legal and effective suggestions about how to spare children of immigrants the horror of FGM?

      • thierry says:

        yes it’s called ‘ against the law’. in fact it’s also against the law in their own countries.and that’s all you can do- people will follow the law or not. submitting to the demands of people who want to break our laws is not ‘ building trust’ but destroying our rule of law- a rule of law that will save more females from such practices in the end than any amount of tolerance for the practices.

        i’m celtic by birth, pagan by design and you don’t see me trussing up people and throwing them in bogs as human sacrifices- because we do not tolerate the religious sacrifice of humans. if you’d like to stay here- you don’t break the laws. if you don’t like the laws because they interfere with your barbaric hateful tribal customs- leave and go to a place more to your liking.

        of course killing your wife and chopping her head off is also against the law- but immigrants and non-immigrants still find ways to do it.next will we be suggesting tossing a few pebbles at homosexuals instead of dropping a wall of stones on them and killing them- because we’d so like to encourage those who hate homosexuals and think they should be executed. we want the trust of people who would do such a thing? we want them in our country as citizens voting?

        these doctors are suffering from creeping sharia over a practice that isn’t even specifically muslim. they’re doing their best barry bow to their new perceived masters in the hopes they’ll be spared.they are causing more damage by this sort of support- it only encourages what african human rights crusaders against FGM have been struggling to stop for decades. it’s called enabling.

        • Artgal says:

          Excellent, Thierry!

          Longviewcyclist: The compromise being made gives a level of acceptance. The moment we introduce this into our society as a common medical practice to serve the sadistic parents, it becomes part of our culture as well. When something outrageous is introduced into our society, it takes about 20 years until it is embraced as normal. Sure, not everyone will do this to their daughter, but those who want to can. Just think of all the other things we can introduce! Maybe 6-year-old brides in America can be next!

          As was pointed out in Thierry’s post and my previous one, we have laws. Because we have laws, instead of ‘compromising’ with the beastly remnants of a destructive culture, why not report the parents to law enforcement for making a request to have their daughters genitals mutilated in the first place? Any ‘parent’ who would want that needs to be locked up! Doctors report child abuse all the time – why should this be any different?

          This subject alone is why multiculturalism is an assault to our nation. Over the years, we’ve probably all been engaged in conversations about ‘tolerance of other cultures’ or being a multicultural society. I’ve said on many occassions to friends to be careful what they say because in some cultures, the genital mutilation of females is tolerated – something none of us accept; however, in a multicultural society, you don’t get to pick and choose the elements you like and dislike because nothing is right or wrong; therefore, the once intolerable or irrational thing becomes tolerated and rationalized thus totally changing the nation.

          • Pat_S says:

            Precisely, ArtGal. This has nothing to do with medicine directly. The Academy is attempting a sociological intervention with a pseudo medical procedure to placate minority groups. They deserve no credit for trying. Their attempt is futile to begin with. To suggest such a thing is to give tacit acceptance to the practice. Those who subject their female children to FGM do not do so as a symbolic act. The practice is result oriented. It is intended to sexually disable females. No physician should engage in a charade that involves disfiguring a child no matter how slight. It is these little girls we must protect not the sensitivity of their ignorant misguided parents.

        • “yes it’s called ‘ against the law’. in fact it’s also against the law in their own countries.and that’s all you can do- people will follow the law or not”

          I asked for legal and effective suggestions. If FGM is illegal in most of the countries where it’s practiced, then your suggestion wouldn’t seem to be very effective.

          Please read my comments before responding. It’s kind of necessary to a meaningful exchange.

          Also, making a compromise that is intended to save the genitals of a child from true harm is being condemned here. I understand the sentiment, and to a great extent I agree. There is nothing I would love more that to shoot the heads off people who would cut the genitals of a girl. But as has been said before, FGM is practiced in places where it is illegal. The people who would have it done don’t care about the law.

          • Artgal says:

            Your comments have been read, Longviewcyclist. Have you really read mine? If you did, you would have seen this in my previous post: As was pointed out in Thierry’s post and my previous one, we have laws. Because we have laws, instead of ‘compromising’ with the beastly remnants of a destructive culture, why not report the parents to law enforcement for making a request to have their daughters genitals mutilated in the first place? Any ‘parent’ who would want that needs to be locked up! Doctors report child abuse all the time – why should this be any different?

            If a parent said they were going to break their childs’ arm because it was part of their culture, would we assist them in doing so or suggest they go back to their country of origin to do it? Why should doctors then participate in cutting a little girl’s genitals in ANY manner?

            It’s true that just because a country makes something illegal does not mean they enforce it (sort of like America not enforcing her border laws and look where we are). We’re also talking about countries where Islam is largely practiced where clerics (not judges) interpret the law very loosely on any given day. They do not regard the law – or life or humans in general – in the same light as we do. Women and girls are already subjugated on every level in such societies, so are we going to compromise our laws when a Muslim man decides he wants to stone his wife to death? Maybe our domestic abuse organizations could make the compromise to where he uses only small stones that will bruise her up really good, but not allow him to kill her. Sound outrageous? Sure! SO IS MUTILATING A GIRL’S GENITALS IN ANY WAY!

            A ‘little nick’ is just as insane and damaging as a full-blown castration of a girl! How in the world is that saving these little girls from torture? Oh, so it’s not a full castration – just damaging (mentally and physically) and therefore, altering a very sensitive area for the rest of her life. We cannot compromise on ANY of this!

            If a parent in America is requesting such an evil to be performed on their child, they need to be arrested and prosecuted! So there! That’s the legal and effective way of deterring – hopefully, eliminating – such horrors! I don’t give a damn about the country of origin’s traditions – when people come to live in America, they accept our laws and begin a new life here; we do not change our laws and way of life to accommodate theirs – nor should we give parents threatening to mutilate their daughters the ability to be mobile to carry out the crime in another country!

            We are America. We lead nations forward – we don’t compromise with the backward beasts of the world (only our president does). The moment we do, we lose our way of life. Compromising on FGM is a step toward Shariah Law – it has no place in America and, frankly, it should not have a place in the world. Why is that so difficult to understand?

  11. chicky says:

    Build Trust, build trust! they can go “F” themselves! Chicky

  12. RuBegonia says:

    The Death of Right and Wrong – here we go again. I’m a strong proponent of tort reform – but the medical malpractice suits that could and should follow from such “medical care” would find me a sympathetic juror. The AAP policy renames the practice “female genital cutting” because “mutilation is an inflammatory term that tends to foreclose communication and that fails to respect the experience of the many women who have had their genitals altered and who do not perceive themselves as ‘mutilated’.” OK, I can live with that logic. The remaining concept, though it toys momentarily with our common sense brain cells, comes out the other end as a huge NO, NO, and NO. The AAP notes: All policy statements from the American Academy of Pediatrics automatically expire 5 years after publication unless reaffirmed, revised, or retired at or before that time. RETIRE it.

    • RuBegonia says:

      Update on discussion: Why Are American Doctors Mutilating Girls, article by Ayaan Hirsi Ali ~ excerpt:

      I am familiar with this debate in two ways. First, I come from a culture where virtually every woman has undergone genital cutting. I was 5 years old when mine were cut and sewn. Second, while serving as a member of parliament in the Netherlands, I was assigned the portfolio for the emancipation and integration of immigrant women. One of my missions was to combat practices such as FGM.

      To understand this problem, we need to begin with parental motives. The “nicking” option is regarded as a necessary cleansing ritual. The clitoris is considered to be an impure part of the girl-child and bleeding it is believed to make her pure and free of evil spirits.

      But the majority of girls are subjected to FGM to ensure their virginity—hence the sewing up of the opening of the vagina—and to curb their libido to guarantee sexual fidelity after marriage—hence the effective removal of the clitoris and scraping of the labia. Think of it as a genital burqa, designed to control female sexuality.

      When the motive for FGM is to ensure chastity before marriage and to curb female libido, then the nick option is not sufficient.

      Moreover, the nick option does not address the main problem in Western liberal democracies where FGM is outlawed, which is that it can almost never be detected, so that few perpetrators are brought to justice. Even if we were to consider tolerating it in its most limited form, how could we tell that parents who want to ensure that their daughter will be a virgin on her wedding night will not have her (legally) nicked and then a few months later (illegally) infibulated? I applaud the compassion for children that inspires the pediatricians’ proposal, but they need to eliminate this risk for little girls.

      Legislation is only a first step and even with that there is no uniformity. Some states have passed bills that define FGM in all its manifestations and punish it. Some states have none, but place FGM under existing laws of child abuse. So Rep. Crowley’s next move should be to push for uniform enforcement of his bill.

      But even once the legislative flaws are fixed, there remains the really difficult question of detection.

      For the law to have any meaningful effect in eradicating FGM in the U.S., we need to work out a way of knowing when a girl has been mutilated. As a legislator in the Netherlands, this was for me the thorniest issue. In the United States, where civil liberties are even more jealously guarded, the thorns are likely to be sharper still.

  13. animalfarm says:

    In Islamic cultures, male circumcision is a celebratory and coming of age occasion for a boy, an exultation of his manhood. It is usually occasioned with a party and gifts. With women it is the opposite – there is no party. Her sexual desires are to be denied, her potential physical pleasures and happiness are nothing. For the males, their sexual satisfaction is everything.

  14. ffigtree says:

    This disturbs me beyond belief. . . female and male circumcision. Tomorrow is Mother’s Day. How can any Mom subject their child to this heinous and barbaric procedure.

  15. Slimfemme says:

    To think a WESTERN medical association is condoning mutilation. But this raises fundamental issues. Why is this wrong for girls but suitable for boys?? Wouldn’t the medical association have to be consistent? If males have it done, wouldn’t pediatricians have to offer the same thing for their Middle Eastern patients, but in a safe environment of a hospital? Why not make it easier? Since they are products of the same educational system, they think all cultures are equal; and they believe that it’s permitted to cut off the skin of a newborn baby. I saw pictures of this being done to an infant, and I was repulsed. Who would want this barbaric practice done to their son?

    • morecowbell says:

      I agree. It’s not fair that infant females do not have the same opportunity to have their genitals mutilated that men enjoy

      • KatieSilverSpring says:

        ah, hey-zeus, morecowbell, you give me the willies; while I understand your point, the willies nonetheless

      • Tammy says:

        Morecowbell, FGM is not the equivalent of male circumcision. It’s like saying getting your hair cut is the same as having your head chopped off. Or, to put it another way, the male equivalent of FGM would require the involvement of Lorena Bobbitt.

  16. KatieSilverSpring says:

    Thanks for the update, Tammy or Pat_S; as a social custom, screw it. I have had the whole day to think about this, and I have, so … you come here – and we are an exceptional country – you leave behind bizarre customs. Test them in the courts like the peyote Indians (sorry, “Native Americans”, but since I am part-Algonquin, I can make that “mistake joke”), test them like all other groups who have cultural thingys that don’t jive with American norms (I’ve given up all the attempts at right-speech).

    Like I said earlier, “Always remember, just because a ‘culture’ practices something doesn’t mean it has to be respected in all other cultures. Where is it, in cannibal ‘cultures’, the palm of a little boy’s hand is most tender and delicious?” This isn’t a joke, it is a reality. Cultures have wierdys, and we need to step up and say, no, I don’t think so. NO circumcisions of the female genitalia here, sorry boys, you want to keep your girls virgins? keep it in your pants, your pants, boys, or plan to go to prison.

  17. Laura says:

    When we have people coming to this country who fail to assimilate and who have no intention of honoring our laws as much as fundamentally changing them, the result is a capitulation of OUR society to accommodate theirs – and yes, we should be very, very frightened by this report.

    Artgal you hit the nail on the head and I am going to take this a step further; in that this is the bottom line aspect of Islamic conversion of America, this accommodation is in actuality a submission to Islam, this is part of the overall agenda; subtle changes over a period of time, more and more ‘Islaming’ of America, add a little Islam culture every day into our society then all of a sudden one particular day we wake up infested with it; hence, Sharia law implemented over night. IMO we need to stop letting in Muslims in our country, close the border, and deport all known muslims. There are approximately 35 Islamic training camps on our soil preparing to kill all of us yet our government sits back and does nothing, why should OUR Constitution apply to Islamic terrorists! None of this makes any sense! During World War II, all Japanese were rounded up, today we coddle these terrorists and give them coloring books, Doritos and cookies!! Civil rights for foreign terrorists??? NO WAY!!! The foreign regime in the White House that has taken control of our country is accommodating these terrorists for what I think is an agenda based on Islamic/Communist conversion of America, otherwise the government would be doing the complete opposite of everything it has been doing. UN+Iran=Women’s rights??? I don’t think so. The AAP seems to me to be quite accommodating to the beliefs of Islam otherwise they would be vehemently opposed. I think we have an Islamic influence starting to spawn at every level of our government and governmental agencies, and on down into our local agencies, our charter schools are owned by Turkish Islamics, the Sonoran Science Academy in Tucson is one of them. Islamic terrorist have already infiltrated our military, (Ft Hood) who is to say they are not already anywhere and everywhere else. We need to stay alert and pay attention to these subtle signs before they eventually are no longer subtle but right in our faces. That is the Islamic terrorists goal and now we have an accommodating US government. I would be more than happy for someone to tell me I am crazy, paranoid and wrong, but I don’t think I am. I would like to be proven wrong but this administration has not given me any reason to believe otherwise.

  18. Tinker says:

    This is a timely discussion for me because last night I watched The Stoning of Soraya M.
    It was so hard to watch, I cried out loud, it made me sick. And I’ve thought about it all day today. But I felt that I had to. We need to remind ourselves of just how evil our enemies are so we don’t go soft. I’m am so weary of the world’s accomodation of evil. And I still can’t believe we have a government that is now a part of that accomodation.

    Also during the movie I kept thinking of the absolute polar opposites of Islam and Christianity—our Lord Jesus Christ who stood by the woman who, unlike Soraya M., actually was guilty of adultry and said “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.”

  19. glwinch says:

    Male circumcision was bashed for years by the likes of the AMA;Now Muslim ‘Clit Snips’ are just peachy keen wonderful with the AMA…utterly amazing.

  20. Laura says:

    I am still FUMING over this!!!

    I looked up that Doctor…. GAWD…She’s repugnant looking, why am I not surprised. Progressive women are just so physically unattractive…

  21. [...] by “we” I refer to authentic feminists, not the Left’s faux-feminist misogyny apologists like Amanda Marcotte (h/t The Other McCain): I [...]

  22. CynDaVaz says:

    My dear Tammy … US doctors and our society as a whole have been allowing genital mutilation of boys to go on for decades while girls have been largely *protected*. In fact, since the mid 90s, cutting females has been deemed illegal.

    This is, of course, unconstitutional because boys are not granted the same protection under the law (well, technically, infant male cutting *is* illegal, but authorities turn a blind eye to such technicalities).

    Is it any surprise, then, that the tide might eventually turn against the females here as well?

    The only positive to this stupidity on the part of the AAP is that it brings infant male genital mutilation (MGM) into the discussion.

    Both forms of genital mutilation should be banned outright. No compromises for culture. Or religion.

  23. CynDaVaz says:

    I’m going to try this again, because I don’t think I did the links right, darn it!

    Tammy said upthread: “Morecowbell, FGM is not the equivalent of male circumcision. It’s like saying getting your hair cut is the same as having your head chopped off.”

    Actually, it fundamentally IS the same as male cutting. Both are forms of genital mutilation and BOTH are wrong.

    There are different degrees of female genital mutilation; for instance, removing the clitoral hood and/or the labia/vulva would be pretty equivalent to what we routinely subject baby boys to in this country.

    “FGM vs. MGM”
    http://www.angelfire.com/ca5/intact/fgm.html

    “Description of the different types of female genital mutilation”
    http://www.circumstitions.com/FGM-defined.html

    There is a huge misconception in American society that FGM is somehow so much worse than MGM – this is not true, but even if it were, does this make MGM okay? I think not.

    Take a look at this:

    “Comparative Quotations on Misconceptions about Ritual Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) and Ritual Male Genital Mutilation (MGM)”
    http://www.boystoo.com/fgm&mgm.htm

    And for a great overall source:
    http://www.circumstitions.com/

  24. [...] by “we” I refer to authentic feminists, not the Left’s faux-feminist misogyny apologists like Amanda Marcotte (h/t The Other McCain): I [...]

You must be logged in to post a comment.