Why is cutting off the clitoris considered female genital mutilation but cutting off the foreskin isn't consider male genital mutilation? Neither have any reproductive function.
I'm sick of all the jackasses who say "it's not a big deal", "man up" or "get over it bro." This is a human rights issue affecting everyone born in America, Canada, the Middle East, South Korea, Pissrael & Palestine, Southeast Asia, etc.
differences in degree of damage and loss of functionality, also what the fuck does this have to do with communism?, polite sage
It is 100% political because it needs to be outlawed except for medical reasons (ex. severe phimosis).
Yeah I agree dude. I don't even like piercings yet my dick is snipped against my will.
Good luck telling a country full of mutilated dicks that they're in fact mutilated though. Americans will just start being stupidly prideful about that too.
Circumcision is mutilation and unless you are jewish it serves absolutely no spiritual function. I unironically applaud secularists in Europe who are trying to outlaw male circumcision. If I had a fedora I would seriously tip it for them. I wish such activism were allowed in the US but unfortunately doing something like that would get you branded an "anti-semite" by the foreskin/cosmetic lobby and their shills.
Ostensibly because male circumcision serves a medical purpose in reducing the likelihood of some cancer, but really just because of inertia and nobody wanting to lose Florida. It's no more acceptable than circumcising infant females. My own circumcision was medically necessary but such cases are comparatively rare, it shouldn't be allowed on any and every infant boy.
not sure about the rest of the world but in America you can blame kelloggs
Muslims and jews
bad news
Should be banned on children. If adults want to mutilate themselves to prove manliness, well they should read some relevant research on the lack of benefits before making a decision.
.t oversocialized gynocentric leftoid
The problem is that the word "mutilation" is a mockery of the word if not plain melodramatic. Mutilation means inflicting severe damage, i.e. damage that is for social humiliation if not aesthetic disgust. For example, the old fashioned practice of cropping the ears of criminals or severing their noses or a pillaging army or guerilla band that mutilates enemies or bodies to humiliate the enemy and show that its rulers can't protect them thoroughly. Honestly body modification is a better word, maybe "involuntary body modification". The point is that it is done as a form of social or religious conformity and not as a means to harm. As for the aesthetic of the practice, that is entirely subjective, and so "mutilation" is entirely unnecessary rhetoric and a way of creating false outrage over what I think is an overblown subject. All that said, I think it's perfectly fine that circumcision is abandoned by society at large in the US. I would allow religious communities to do it though, as I'm personally "jewish" and I couldn't give a damn about the ridiculous handwringing over foreskins.
AMERICANS EXPLAIN YOURSELVES RIGHT FUCKING NOW
Ban it. Not mutilating children should be common sense.
Because of Abrahamic Spooks.
who says wear the ones who believe that?
imo, it's not as bad, but it's still fucked up and should be banned. Mostly because the clit is a sensory organ for sexual stimulation, something that should not be denied to a person. Additionally, it was probably (this is just conjecture) encouraged by repressive cultures that believed female sexual pleasure to be morally reprehensible. Also additionally, there were apparently hygene reasons for circumcision, but that might be bullshit. In either case, I'm against both, but female circumcision (of either vulva or clitoris) is fucking horrifying. tbh, I'm even critical of parents getting their young kids to have their ears pierced before the age of, idk, 12?
bomb cosmetic companies NOW
The foreskin serves the same function, specifically lubricating the glans to keep it healthy and moisturized. Without it, the glans keratanizes (becomes covered with tough, dry skin) and sensitivity is eliminated. The foreskin also contains millions of sensitive nerve endings, similar to a clitoris.
Yes, this is the reason why it's practiced in shitholes like Central Africa and the Middle East. "Funny" enough, the same sexual repression was the reason why circumcision became so prominent in America (fuck Kellogg).
There were, when we lived in tents and didn't bathe for weeks. Now all you need is a shower to clean it.
It's all genital mutilation done against an unwilling child who cannot consent for retarded barbaric reasons related to outdated concepts of sexual repression and more recently to make money.
thinkaboutnow.com
This.
Also
mayoclinic.org
Don't force anyone into religion until adulthood,
t. Cut cuck
...
My fellow country men are idiots, there's really nothing else to say.
by who?
It is genital mutilation. It should be banned.
t. cut cuck
Circumsision is mutilation, and this thread is nothing to do with communism. Polite sage as above, good discussion anyhow.
It is genital mutilation.
I will never ever understand amerimutts' obsession over this bullshit.
It stems from America being settled by puritans who though that sexual pleasure was evil and shit. So they did this to purposely reduce sexual pleasure, from there it just kinda stuck. This shit should be banned post revolution like the CPC banned foot binding after coming to power.
because of "muh wimmens rights"
universal moralizing is one hell of a drug. there is no universal morality, some cultures prioritize some things over others, to have the United Nations try and persecute third world nations for "inhumane acts" it comes off a silly and misguided. and sometimes even causes more grief than its worth. there is no global standard to which the world should operate, 1st, 2nd or 3rd world. ever. trying to cosmpolitanize these nations is an example of global capitalist overreach.
whatever faggot. I don't sit around thinking about cocks all day nor do I hold sexual pleasure as the be all and end all of existence. Nor has my sex life or drive been affected.
Because gynocentrism. Women are always seen as victims who must be protected, while men are seen as aggressors who can put up with anything, even when they're babies. An anecdote: a guy had a daughter, she cried as a baby, no prob; then he had a son, when he cried as a baby he often though to himself "won't he man up already?" He claimed he didn't act on those thoughts but all the parents who cut their boys dicks expect them to put up with it.
It's a mix of religious propoganda and Hippocratic oath breaking doctors looking for that extra $300 for every baby born.
The clitoris is more than just the visible part of it anyway. Just look up a 3D scan. I mean cutting off the visible part probably still reduces more sensation than cutting off foreskin but it's something to note.