Marion D. S. Dreyfus raises important questions in FrontPage (thanks to EPG):
In Frontpage’s recent symposium, The Radical Lies of Aids, I was dismayed and surprised that, in a roundtable discussion on the current state of HIV/AIDS, no mention was made of Islamic cultural habits and African tribal customs.... All viruses and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) picked up from the unfaithful sexually active mate find a hospitable environment in the misused wife and incubate into various forms of sexual disorder or, of late, especially into HIV. Sadly, the now visibly-ill women are frequently blamed for initiating the disease: beaten, divorced or otherwise abused. This is a frequent Islamic reaction from husbands, brothers, fathers, even sons, to the perceived ‘dishonoring’ of the family or rape of their (innocent) women.More relevant in this cultural inplication is that more than 100 million, even as many as 140 million -- that is correct -- African girls and women are estimated by WHO and ReligiousTolerance.com (among many others) as victim/recipients of female genital mutilation (FGM, also called infibulation). Infibulation in the medical literature or public arena is so widespread and so taboo that it assumes a special place in the history of hushed-up critical problems in the world. Like not mentioning that woolly mammoth smack in the middle of your living room.
Because it is considered a private, 'social' or often a “religious” issue, one that riles up many Muslim (male) “authorities” and average healthcare practitioners, infibulation –FGM -- is a major third-rail political agenda, one vociferously denied and hotly “debated” in outrage with anyone intrepid or foolhardy enough to bring up such a detonating topic.
Read it all.
An awareness Campaign - 2006 is Stop Female Genital Mutilation year.
A prominant head. Princess Diana is dead, Camilla is not popular enough, Madonna perhaps or Fifi Geldorf. She has youth on her side and her Dad's experience behind her.
Rallies, A series of high profile concerts (clit aid, no let's not go there) no G8 to lobby but plenty of other chances.
The odd documentary, the odd article in a woman's magazine, the odd report in The Lancet is not enough. This is over the years as big a disaster as any single famine. Most of the young girls I know are caring and intelligent despite their terrible taste. This could be for their generation what Equal Opportunities was to mine. Any more ideas anybody?
Genital Mutilation of either sex is abhorrent. Although male genital mutilation or circumcision is thought by many to have health benefits it is as evil as female mutilation and should be stopped. The pain, the loss of tissue, and the resulting lose of sensation are criminal acts perpetrated on helpless babies in name of pseudoscience and religion. All Genital Mutilation should be stopped.
If your little boy wants to cut off a large portion of his penis when he grows up (which is doubtful) then he can if he wants to. Let him at least have a choice in the matter. It is his body not yours.
Circumcision is done by some religions as part of a covenent with God. It is a widespread practice in North America, which has no such covenent with God. On a deep psychological level, this lets the new arrival know who is in charge. He no sooner gets here, his genitals are attacked with a knife. No pain killer no nothing...cold turkey pain. But who care's, the infant wont remember it anyway...or would he...The physical event may not be remembered but the psychological damage could reside behind the scenes forever.
Infibulation exists because muslims are sexually insecure and are afraid their wives will wander. Infant girls get this treatment because they are expected to be wives, someday.
If Allah had given muslims a little more confidence and muslimahs a little more credibility, sexual surgery may not have raised its ugly head...
"If Allah had given muslims a little more confidence and muslimahs a little more credibility, sexual surgery may not have raised its ugly head"
Muslims did not invent this practice, nor are they alone in persisting with it. The only support for it in Islam is from the Hadith, where Mohammed declines to prohibit the practice. It's not even considered one of the most reliable Hadiths.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/fem_cirm.htm
It's outrageous that anyone is made victim to this barbarism, but I don't think that Islam is really to blame for it. The Egyptian fatwas supporting mutilation have to resort to vague arguments about "curbing nature", which is an odd mirror-image of the Catholic pronouncements that proscribe behaviour deemed against "nature".
kj writes, "Although male genital mutilation or circumcision is thought by many to have health benefits it is as evil as female mutilation and should be stopped."
kj, how can you expect to be taken seriously after writing such a comment as this? Male circumcision is just as evil as female infibulation? Did you even bother to read the article that came before your comment?
Or perhaps the problem is that EVIL to you encompasses everything that you really dislike. For the sake of argument, let us agree that male circumcision is a really bad thing with long-term, harmful effects. (Although my former, circumcized, husband, claimed to delight in fellatio and sexual intercourse and orgasmed at least 6 times per week -- probably more than that, with any other bimbos he could find). Can we not also agree that it is in no way comparable to the horrors of female circumcision? It is not EVIL, just really disgusting and limiting for the man?
Another point as to why this is spread so fast among mulsums is their abilty to rape and change wifes this was written about in 1912
By: Rev. J.L. Menezes " The life and Religion of Mohammed the Prophet of Arabia "
look to pg 58
He may repudiate his wife without any assigned reason and even with out warning;
"some mohommedans make a habit of continually changing their wifes.It is not an uncommon thing to find young men who have had 20 or 30 wives; a new one every 3 or 4 monthes; and thus it happenes that women are liable to be transfered indefinitely from one man to another and are obliged to accept a and a home where-ever"
This is also how this is spreading remember this was written in 1912!!!
Part of the American Tribe
Squirrel Hunter
Spider Killer
God Bless the USA and her Fighting Forces and ALL who Fight with her give them Strength, Wisdom, Sight, and Courage Amen
former liberal WF:
KJ wasn't the author, F.G. was. I do agree, however, that his/her comment is another good/bad example of moral equivalency.
Male circumcisions can, on occassion, result in significant damage to the male's genitals, and, even, through the transmission of bacteria or disease, may result in infant mortality in extreme cases (recently reported in the Canadian Jewish News, but I forget where the two deaths occurred).
FGM, however, always results in significant damage, if not death, and carries with it absolutely no positive effects on health, while the jury is still out on male circumcision.
"The circumcision of boy-children, in the form it is known in Australia, involves the removal of the foreskin, or prepuce, from the penis. This act is performed for reasons of religion, in the Jewish faith, or for culturally imposed concepts of hygiene or for aesthetic reasons. 'The degree of cutting in female circumcision is anatomically much more extensive [than in male circumcision]. The male equivalent of clitoridectomy (in which all or part of the clitoris is removed) would be the amputation of most of the penis. The male equivalent of infibulation (which involves not only clitoridectomy, but the removal or closing off of the sensitive tissue around the vagina) would be removal of all the penis, its roots of soft tissue, and part of the scrotal skin.'(Nahid Toubia, Female Genital Mutilation, p.9) Unlike FGM, male circumcision is not performed with the aim of diminishing the sexual desire or drive of the male, nor to ensure chastity or virginity."
----------
Quite a bit more than circumcision.
If the Catholic Church can forbid mere masturbation (prepuce or not) can't Islam forbid this mutilating sex crime against women? (Those "worth half of a man" members of their religion.)
Saying it is 'cultural' answers nothing, and simply shows the ongoing contempt for females that is supreme in the cult of Mohammad.
"Weak hadith' my ass.
Islam may not have invented FGM, but it has certainly embraced it. FGM is supported and sheltered by Islam because it's a great way for Muslim men to have control over women, which is a cornerstone of Islam. Muslim men with any influence do not condemn the practise.
Alhaji Banding Drammeh, president of the Supreme Islamic council said: “FGM is a recommendation of the hadiths of the Prophet. It is an honour for a lady to undergo the practice of FGM,' Drammeh said.
The Health Minister of Egypt managed to get FGM banned for a short while, until the ban was overturned by Sheikh Badri who claimed that FGM was Islamic.
Anti-FGM activities face an uphill, hopeless battle in light of such creeps' women-hating attitude, which is a basic tenet of Islam. When asked about the health implications of FGM Drammeh said: "It is just today that the practice is harmful. For me it is just an ordinary thing"
Ho hum! Just an ordinary thing. No problemo.
Claiming it is not an Islamic practise only lets them get away it. In typical Islamic fashion, blame somebody or something else, don't take responsibility yourself. With FGM, they blame it on ancient tribal customs and throw up their hands, as if to say, 'what can you do?'. All the while sniggering behind their hands at what a wonderful tool this is to keep those weak-minded females from running after every man, as they are so wont to do. In the meantime, it seems the men are the ones doing all the tomcatting around, and spreading AIDS far and wide.
You can bet your sweet bippy that if some Christian cleric went around advocating FGM, there would be a cacophany of an outcry, and the whole thing would be blamed on nasty Christianity. But because it is tolerated by Islam, even encouraged in some countries, nobody says anything. It's like "honor"-killings. Not Islamic per se, but a great way to subjugate women, which is very Islamic. So they use anything and everything to do that, even pre-Islamic barbaric, sick and evil customs.
"You can bet your sweet bippy that if some Christian cleric went around advocating FGM, there would be a cacophany of an outcry, and the whole thing would be blamed on nasty Christianity. But because it is tolerated by Islam, even encouraged in some countries, nobody says anything. It's like "honor"-killings. Not Islamic per se, but a great way to subjugate women, which is very Islamic. So they use anything and everything to do that, even pre-Islamic barbaric, sick and evil customs."
You can argue that Islam promotes a culture of inequality that to FGM being more acceptable. Does the evidence support this, though? True, it is most common in Muslim countries, mostly Sudan and Somalia. What do non-Muslims in these countries think about FGM? If Islam promotes FGM, how do you explain the lack of it in so many Muslim nations outside of Africa?
"Most western seminars or media focus on FC as a Muslim custom or among African Muslim groups. This is interesting because this custom, not only originated in Africa during pharonic (pre-Judaic, Christian or Islamic times), but it is still practiced in the continent among African groups practicing traditional Judaism (in Ethiopia); traditional Coptic Christianity (Ethiopia, Sudan, Egypt); some of those who became Christian during or after the European colonial era; and among some Muslim groups."
So says Aisha Samad Matias, director of Women's Studies at CUNY (http://www.ccsu.edu/afstudy/upd3-2.html#Z3
). Is she wrong?
Viking, you're making excuses for Islam re FGM. Yes, it is practised by non-Muslim segments of the population, but at a much lower rate. Christians at about 5%, animists at about 20%, Muslims at about 80%. What does that tell you? The Christians and animists are probably desperately hanging onto ingrained, ancient customs despite what their religion says. Christians in countries where it is practised actively discourage it, pointing out that there is nothing in the Bible that says it is necessary. Islam uses a so-called "weak" hadith to justify "tolerance" for it, and men with influence encourage it, even stating it is Islamic. That is the difference.
It is also practised in the Middle East: Oman, Yemen, UAE. And in Indonesia and Malaysia. We read horrifying stories of women in East Timor forcibly mutilated during the struggle for independence. Haven't heard of any Christians doing that anywhere, have you? Excuses, excuses.
KJ wasn't the author, F.G. was. I do agree, however, that his/her comment is another good/bad example of moral equivalency.
Moral equivalency? What the hell? Are you even in touch with reality in the least little bit? You're suffering from a double standard. Why stop one and not the other? Moral equivalency! Your comment borders on the idiodic. What I had to say in no way down plays the wrongness of female genital mutilation. Sometimes I wonder about you people.
f.g.
Carolyn2-
I know this thread is old but this just popped up at DRUDGE . . . relevant to FGM.
African patients now living in Toronto who were forced to undergo genital cutting to remove their clitorises can now experience vaginal orgasms after having the G-spot injections.
feralee: "Viking, you're making excuses for Islam re FGM. Yes, it is practised by non-Muslim segments of the population, but at a much lower rate. Christians at about 5%, animists at about 20%, Muslims at about 80%."
Interesting. Muslims commit FGM more than those of other religions from similar cultural backgrounds? Please post a source for those numbers. Thanks in advance.
Hi miira, I've heard of the labial surgery but the G-spot thing is new to me.
This article is very disturbing to me, this man should be strung up. This is betrayal of the worst kind.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,159049,00.html
(Nothing to do with jihad, but it just stuck in my mind)
Carolyn - Something useful from the DBC for once http://www.bbc.co.uk/relationships/sex_and_sexual_health/enjsex_gspot.shtml
I would hope that the incised women successfully utilising this area will among that generation of women who are resisting subjecting their daughters and grandaughters to FGM.
I am re-posting your link from the last FGM thread.
http://www.middle-east-info.org/gateway/womenchildabuse/index.htm
These are further links posted by Kali on that same thread. http://www.womankind.org.uk/resources/issues/fgm.html
http://www.godparents.net/
Everyone needs to stand up for their kids and their grandchildren at least. Educate people. The genital mutilation of infants of either sex should be a crime. People should not be allowed to mutilate others without their consent no matter what the age. This subject makes me extremely angry for a couple of reasons.
Every time FGM comes up I bring up MGM and get bashed for it. Why? Come to think of it, why isn't MGM morally equivalent to FGM? In both cases irreversible changes are made to infants most private organs without their consent. This isn’t about what is worse. Obviously, it would seem that the worse medical and emotional complications are on the FGM side. MGM effects sensation as does FGM but obviously not to extreme the complete removal of the clitoris does. It’s more like removing a third of the clitoris instead.
MGM and FGM are evil. It does nothing but harm but the majority of people are ignorant of this and refuse to hear the truth. They continue to cut a large portion of the most sensitive tissue on the human body from babies and wonder why I find that barbaric and criminal.
f.g.
f.g., I just wrote you a long post about my son's circumcision (my husband gave permission) and the damned Typekey said I wasn't signed in and my post was lost (does this happen to anyone else?) Well anyway, I said in effect that FGM is without a doubt a lot more radical. But little baby boys should have pain control at the very least.
Carolyn: "f.g., I just wrote you a long post about my son's circumcision (my husband gave permission) and the damned Typekey said I wasn't signed in and my post was lost (does this happen to anyone else?)"
The trick is not to sign in, as that will destroy your post. Hit "back" on your browser, and copy the text that you want to post to the clipboard. Then hit forward, sign in, and paste your text.