Egyptian girl dies during female circumcision

[almaty 19]

savages

stupid and senseless..

[*JG* 2]

Amusing to see though that while most Americans find female circumcision barbaric and horrifying, they're just fine with male circumcision.

I don't believe in either.

The comparison is odd. Do you really believe that is a valid comparison?

Do you know what is being cut in case of female mutilation vs. male circumcision?

Do you?

Yes, I do consider it a valid comparison. Both are called circumcision and both change the way the genitals function. As female circumcision occurs when the female is old enough to have some input for or against it, in a lot of ways, I consider male circumcision to be worse because it is typically inflicted on a helpless baby!

One of the basic flaws in your argument is the supposition that the 6 - 12 year old girls that have the genital mutilation inflicted upon them have any kind of input into whether or not that is done. If you believe that these girls line up voluntarily to have this cruel procedure performed on them - mostly w/o any anaesthesia - then you're seriously kidding yourself.

Those girls have input in the whole thing? I think not.

[thetreble 19]

I think it's funny that there was a comment that little girls can just run away if they don't want it done. I mean , come on, be realistic about it. A girl doesn't have the choice, nor can she "run away".

Secondly, how many of these operations (if that is what you want to call them since I'm sure there are a lot done without proper protocol in villages somewhere) are done incorrectly to the point where a woman's physical parts "down there" do not function properly anymore? Male circumcision in the West at least is done correctly and leads to little to know complications, whether you believe in it or not. One of the reasons it is done is to deny girls/women pleasure. And if a certain percentage of them are done incorrectly, that is exactly what the outcome is.

Thirdly-Please show me data on where female circumcision was prevalent in America in the early 20th century until the 1950s. I studied history at university and never came upon this in America's history. Please enlighten me.

At the end of the day, it is not a circumcision in my eyes, it is mutilation. I couldn't imagine, in my wildest dreams, having this done to me. Not only would I have to deal with the physical side affects (if there were any at the time) but the mental side effects that are almost worse. That is an important part of my body to me as a woman.

Edited August 13, 2007 by thetreble

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Where did this practice originate? It is truly barbaric.

[Queen Jenn 0]

I agree with the last post. The physical side effects which include hemorrhaging, shock and infection following the operation and painful intercourse and complications during childbirth later, are terrible as are the emotional/mental side effects. And I do not believe that ANY of these girls can just "run away."

I have read a moderate amount of literature on this subject and I do not claim to be an expert. That being said, I believe that this practice should stop. The complications and physical/mental/emotional ramifications are too great. In most cases, this practice is done to keep women chaste before marriage and faithful after marriage. However, it IS possible to be chaste and faithful WITHOUT female circumcision.

As far as the comments on male circumcision - I can't say for myself as I am not a male. However, I believe that ALL the men I know are circumcised (many of whom I can talk to about this) and they have never complained about it.

Anywho . . that's just my thoughts on this.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

One of the basic flaws in your argument is the supposition that the 6 - 12 year old girls that have the genital mutilation inflicted upon them have any kind of input into whether or not that is done

But if you're dead set against it, at least you have the opportunity to run away. But when it's a cultural issue and is presented as a rite of passage, why would you be against it?

Have you ever met or had a conversation - personally - with any female that has been mutilated as a child? Have you told them that they chose to have this done since it seems that they agreed with it or failed to run away? I can't believe this nonsense...

[Mephys 2]

In general it may include as little as sticking the ####### with a needle or as much as removing the whole hood of the ####### (this is almost equivalent to a common male circumcision, even if this is milder). In some cases also parts of the ####### minora are removed.

The female circumcision, even the Egyptian/Sudania/Somalian type, doesn't prevent females from having an orgasm. Even if the top part of the ####### is removed most of the ####### still remains, even if it's located below the skin. Even if it's totally removed by digging it out there's still the Gräfenberg spot (commonly know as the g-point or the g-spot) which enables females to have an orgasm.

Oh yeah whatever, I'm sure it is totally given to EVERY woman out there to just say " Hey screw it, I dont need my clito, I still got my G spot, im gonna be just fine" Yeah they got 2 thing why not take one out?

This is barbaric, horrible, unecessary, and a pure act of control over women. It is sooooo far from behind close to man circumcision. And most of the time it is made in horrible conditions, with unsanitary tools ( piece of broken glass, dirty razorblade, etc) and it is more than likely going to harm or kill the little girl. I dont think man curcumcision has ever been that bad.

[GaryC 7]

I feel like posting graphic pictures of a female circumcision and let some of you restate your views. But I won't, it's just to gross to look at.

[thetreble 19]

Well I would like to post this or just put a link to it. There are "different" types of female circumcision, and often times, the ####### is not the only thing removed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:FGC_Types.jpg

[isleta521 5]

Barbaric and horrible!!

[thetreble 19]

I just want to also add this.

Among practicing cultures, FGC is most commonly performed between the ages of four and eight, but can take place at any age from infancy to adolescence. Prohibition has led to FGC going underground, at times with people who have had no medical training performing the cutting without anesthetic, sterilization, or the use of proper medical instruments. The procedure, when performed without any anesthetic, can lead to death through shock from immense pain or excessive bleeding. The failure to use sterile medical instruments may lead to infections.

Other serious long term health effects are also common. These include urinary and reproductive tract infections, caused by obstructed flow of urine and menstrual blood, various forms of scarring and infertility. The first time having sexual intercourse will often be extremely painful, and infibulated women will need the ####### majora to be opened, to allow their husband access to the #######. This second cut, sometimes performed by the husband with a knife, can cause other complications to arise.

A June 2006 study by the WHO has cast doubt on the safety of genital cutting of any kind.[36] This study was conducted on a cohort of 28,393 women attending delivery wards at 28 obstetric centers in areas of Burkina Faso, Ghana, Nigeria, Kenya, Senegal and The Sudan. A high proportion of these mothers had undergone FGC. According to the WHO criteria, all types of FGC were found to pose an increased risk of death to the baby (15% for Type I, 32% for Type II, and 55% for Type III). Mothers with FGC Type III were also found to be 30% more at risk for cesarean sections and had a 70% increase in postpartum hemorrhage compared to women without FGC. Estimating from these results, and doing a rough population estimate of mothers in Africa with FGC, an additional 10 to 20 per thousand babies in Africa die during delivery as a result of the mothers having undergone genital cutting.

If you severe the areas of a girl's outer reproductive area, she is unable to secrete those chemicals which make sexual intercourse actually performable. Do you know what it is like to have sexual intercourse without secretions for women? It can be very painful. How much pain should a woman be subjected to in her life?

[Stabu 0]

Secondly, how many of these operations (if that is what you want to call them since I'm sure there are a lot done without proper protocol in villages somewhere) are done incorrectly to the point where a woman's physical parts "down there" do not function properly anymore?

I’m a political scientist and an economist. I don't really know the medical side fully of the issue. I just know what is done and where and to which part of the population. In any case the failure rate is largish, especially in Somalia. Often the female may be even paralyzed by the operation from the waste down. It is truly horrible.

Male circumcision in the West at least is done correctly and leads to little to know complications, whether you believe in it or not. One of the reasons it is done is to deny girls/women pleasure. And if a certain percentage of them are done incorrectly, that is exactly what the outcome is.

Well male circumcision in the West mostly means in the US, since it's not done almost anywhere else. Canada has it a bit, but that's about it. Egypt used to have quite sanitary female circumcisions until it was banned officially in the 90's. When the population still wants to do something but it becomes banned the operation is just taken into the streets and the results are horrible. Today it's often made by barbers or anyone with some cutting equipment. The results are far worse. The correct way to get rid of this would have been to change the culture by enlightening the people and thus changing their attitudes. The practice prevails since mothers and fathers want it to continue.

Thirdly-Please show me data on where female circumcision was prevalent in America in the early 20th century until the 1950s. I studied history at university and never came upon this in America's history. Please enlighten me.

Both male and female circumcision started in the US for the same reason, which was masturbation panic. The medical/religious establishment saw it as a health hazard and thus wanted to reduce masturbation for both sexes. The found out that male and female circumcision reduced the pleasure for both sexes and thus was effective in reducing masturbation. The male circumcision in the US is said to be started in the 1870’s (and it still continues). The female circumcision started in the 1910's and ended in the 1950's. I don't have that much data about this, but I recommend this, this and this (which includes old pictures of the procedure and one technique). I really don't know that much more about this issue I only accidentally stumbled upon the topic and decided to say a few words.

At the end of the day, it is not a circumcision in my eyes, it is mutilation. I couldn't imagine, in my wildest dreams, having this done to me. Not only would I have to deal with the physical side affects (if there were any at the time) but the mental side effects that are almost worse. That is an important part of my body to me as a woman.

By no means what-so-ever do I support any types or kinds of female (or male) circumcision. I just would like to put them on approx the same line as many types of female circumcision are far less damaging to the person than the typical male circumcision is. There exist tribes in Oceania (if I recall correctly) where they mark female tribe members by mutilating some parts of their little fingers. No Western would defend this. How do the same Westerns defend removing parts of male genitalia I wonder? In Europe male circumcision find very few defenders, but once you move over to the US you run into millions. The reason for this has to be, that what started as masturbation panic has evolved into culture and no-one likes to have their culture challenged. Still, it remains utterly irrational.

[Miranda&James 8]

C

The practice, which affects both Muslim and Christian women in Egypt, was banned in 1997 but doctors were allowed to operate "in exceptional cases."

link

My question is, what could possibly constitute an exceptional case where this kind of surgery would EVER be needed? It is absolutely disgusting! Religious reasons for this baffle me, well I don't know about in Islam, but it's made pretty clear in the Bible god made sex as a good thing to be enjoyed between husband and wife and make it a horrible experience for a woman (including childbirth, already bad enough) wouldn't be in that original plan!

Edited August 13, 2007 by Miranda&James

[Heracles 417]

What is interesting is that just the other week public hospitals in Australia have stopped providing male circumcisions..

[Stabu 0]

Where did this practice originate? It is truly barbaric.

It's said to have started in Ancient Egypt around 3000 to 2000 BCE. It's climed that the practice started among Pharaoes and was from there spread on to the general public. This is also the reason why the practice is still most common in the area where the Ancient Egyptian Empire once flourished.