AIBU to think that FGM ('female genital mutilation') should not be tolerated in a civilised society?

[dolcelatte]

Apologies if this topic has already been raised recently and I am duplicating, as I tend to come onto MN sporadically.

There has been a lot in the press recently about the horrific practice of FGM, whereby girls as young as 5 have part of their genitalia cut off, without anaesthetic, often leaving long term health problems. The rationale is apparently that if there is no clitoris, there is no pleasure, which therefore minimises the risk of future infidelity. Sometimes the 'operation' is carried out in the UK or sometimes the girls go back 'home' for it to be done, typically in the school holidays, so that they can 'heal' before the return to the new term.

This is child abuse and grievous bodily harm, yet the authorities don't appear to be treating seriously or devoting other than minimal resources to eradicating this vile practice.

AIBU to think that it is absolutely sickening and unacceptable that more is not being done to protect these children?

Actually the UK has just dedicated a huge amount of money to the fight to eradicate FGM, is currently assessing 5 cases to try and secure the first conviction for practicing FGM in the UK, and a pilot scheme of introducing FGM education into the national curriculum has been introduced in Bristol and it's planned to be rolled out in the rest of the UK too.

We can't just barge in and demand people stop practicing FGM, it doesn't work like that, in fact historically this type of approach has increased FGM rates.

If you would like to contribute to ending FGM, then I suggest you donate to an anti FGM charity like this one

FGM is one of those areas where multiculturalism just doesn't cut it. Tolerance is great, but not if it includes tolerating horrific violence against women, effectively excising their capacity for sexual pleasure along with massively complicating childbirth and even urination.

By all accounts the practice has massively fallen in Holland and France, where routine health checks are in place for at-risk girls and they do prosecute. Sadly, a lot of the families who practice this have left these countries - for Britain, where our famous tolerance allows young girls to be butchered with impunity.

There should be a more concerted and courageous will from both public servants and private citizens in this country to say 'no, this is utterly unacceptable according to the prevailing culture and we will come down like a ton of bricks on people who do it'. We should prosecute. Make an example of enough families who've done it, and the message will get through.

Quote OtheHugeManatee:
'There should be a more concerted and courageous will from both public servants and private citizens in this country to say 'no, this is utterly unacceptable according to the prevailing culture and we will come down like a ton of bricks on people who do it'. We should prosecute. Make an example of enough families who've done it, and the message will get through.'

What she said above....I don't agree with male circumcision either.

why? we're quite happy to circumcise boys, without their consent.

I tbink it is being taken seriously. I am aware of professionals who are investigating rhe problem at national level. I do not agree with circuncision (other than medical) but this is not the samsale

I am concerned by reference to France doing more through, for example, regular health checks on young women.

What kind of health checks? At what age? Does this mean being inspected to check whether or not you've suffered FGM?

Because I have an African father (not from a place that practises FGM, but in my experience a lot of people in the UK have only a hazy idea of who does and who doesn't) and I can quite imagine some school nurse do-gooder in the rural area I grew up in deciding I'd better have a health check. Horrendous, frightening, intrusive and likely to isolate and stigmatise the young girls in question.

It is easy to talk about doing more, much much more difficult to come up with well-thought out initiatives that don't end up causing more harm than good. In practical terms, what 'more' should we be doing?

Totally agree with Manatees - I would like to see parents prosecuted for child cruelty/actual bodily harm, and custodial sentences given out.

And no, it's not the same as male circumcision (which I also disagree with when done for spurious reasons). My DS had to have part of his foreskin used as a skin graft in a necessary operation - it was hell for him (he needed morphine afterwards) and he complained of pain for months afterwards. I can't see why on earth any parent would do this to their child just for fun. But it's still not comparable - I hope (though obviously don't want to know the details) that he will have a decent sex life as an adult, but this wouldn't be possible following the more extreme forms of female circumcision.

Eldritch yes, they check the genitals of girls from practicing communities. IMO it is degrading and futile, once the girls are 16, surely they will refuse to undergo checks and so parents will just postpone cutting until the girls are older.

I'm one of the posters guilty of making the comparison between FGM & circumcision - I was thinking more of the pain side of things & the fact that both (at least in the non-western world anyway) are done without pain relief. I completely agree though that the lasting consequences of FGM are of a much more devastating effect than those of circumcision.

FGM website that gives more information

Crikey, Riots. Sounds like a lesson in how to alienate to me.

Really, are posters happy for the UK to adopt that practice? And if yes, do you not think it is because your daughters are unlikely to be among the number that get pulled out of lessons for a fanny check? How would people feel if their girls might be subjected to that? Not so sanguine, I suspect.

The French are quite prepared to do things that we would baulk at it seems-like the banning of the headscarf and lately, sending girls home because their dress is too Islamic. It must start to feel like the persecution of children from minority groups.

I take your point about it being stigmatising, Eldritch. But as I said this is one issue where I just don't think avoiding stigmatisation is a priority. If risking hurting some people's feelings is the price for seeing a significant drop in British girls being pinned down while parts of their genitals are sliced off (sometimes without anaesthetic) then it's a price I'd be willing to see paid.

But Manatee checking wouldn't stop it, just postpone it.
To end FGM, the practicing communities HAVE to be on board, otherwise they get marginalised and FGM is pushed further underground, meaning it is harder to protect the girls.

Education is key here, not enforced genital checks.

this is one issue where I just don't think avoiding stigmatisation is a priority. If risking hurting some people's feelings is the price for seeing a significant drop in British girls being pinned down while parts of their genitals are sliced off (sometimes without anaesthetic) then it's a price I'd be willing to see paid

Easy to say if you aren't in the stigmatised, humiliated or frightened group, I think. And I do worry that if you damage relations with the group you are trying to help, you become less, not more, effective.

And how, practically, do you do the health checks? By having British girls being pinned down while parts of their genitals are inspected?

Because some girls will refuse because it's horrid, and some will refuse because it has been done and angry as they are, they don't want mummy and daddy to go to jail. Others will submit and feel angry, afraid and violated.

You'd have needed a fucking Taser to get me to submit to that, even at primary school age.

basically they are saying girls that havent been abused should be violated in the name of saving those who have been abused....
We all know how traumatic it can be having examinations etc without consent and the effect this has on grown women, let alone young girls who will be examined without parents presence!

FGM there are many different types, Female Circumcision is same as clitoral hood removal which is done legally in the UK by plastic surgeons, and is something women pay to get done in order to increase pleasure during sex, this is the type of female circumcision which is refered to in hadith.

"Clitoral Unhooding, also referred to as Hoodectomy, is a minor feminine genital surgical procedure to remove excess Prepuce tissue?the surrounding ?hood? that sheaths the clitoral node on three sides. Normally, the Prepuce is anatomically designed to offer the clitoris a degree of protection against undue abrasion?or over stimulation?and naturally retracts during sexual intercourse, thereby leaving the highly innervated surface of the clitoral node?what is commonly referred to as the exterior G-spot?or Glans, to be more exposed . . . resulting in female sexual orgasms. Sometimes however, women with small clitoral nodes or those that have excess Prepuce tissue?both common conditions?find that they can?t achieve orgasm, or have a harder time reaching climax, because the clitoris is literally covered, or restricted by too much skin tissue, thus greatly lessening tactile sensation, and/or even eliminating it entirely.

In another closely related condition?and as was reported by researchers at the Boston University School of Medicine?roughly 25% of all women treated for sexual dysfunction suffered from what was medically termed Clitoral Phimosis, a condition whereby the Prepuce tissue is so closely aligned with the clitoral node, there is not enough tissue flexibility to allow the clitoris to naturally move beyond the surrounding skin and protrude, permitting needed stimulation to achieve climax. This condition, also addressed through Hoodectomy, involves the surgical retraction and/or excising of tissue surrounding the Clitoris.

Sometimes referred to as female clitoral circumcision, the Clitoral Unhooding procedure is somewhat analogous to penile circumcision in men, although male penile circumcision is still primarily performed from a perspective of genital hygiene. In women, however, Hoodectomy is done more commonly to allow women to experience heightened arousal, by reducing the tissue that forms the hood (Prepuce) covering the clitoris . . . almost always resulting in greater, faster orgasms. To some extent it has been suspected that excessive Prepuce tissue can also result in some hygiene-related issues as well for women, giving sanctuary to increased bacterial counts, and sometimes resulting in what are commonly termed ?yeast? or vaginal infections from the close proximity to the vaginal canal." www.clitoralunhooding.com/

you know thw way forced virginity tests sound totally abhorrent and unacceptable, to have someone force you to show them your genitals, under the guise of looking out for your best interests,

I dont see much difference

This is absolutely disturbing and so much more does need to be done about this issue. I don't agree with this happening to females or males at all.

As far as I'm concerned it should be made illegal. However, that would obviously lead to this procedure being performed secretively and could cause added problems with regards to infections etc.

This practice shouldn't be tolerated. Abuse isn't tolerated so why on earth should cutting off parts of a child's privates be accepted?

The solution to this problem will be very hard and will likely take a very long time as it has been tolerated for such a very long time.

It is illegal MrsD

The Boston study was based on photo taken of 200 women who were been seen at a sexual health clinic.

I don't know about you but when I have a planned gone exam everything shrinks, withdraws etc, I really don't think that it is a very good study to us in this case.

Riots I meant in other countries as well.

Posted too soon. I meant in other countries as well as circumcision being made illegal. I don't agree with that happening especially to young babies who obviously can't have a say in the matter.

Female genital mutilation

Fact sheet N°241
Updated February 2013

Key facts

Female genital mutilation (FGM) includes procedures that intentionally alter or cause injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons.
The procedure has no health benefits for girls and women.
Procedures can cause severe bleeding and problems urinating, and later cysts, infections, infertility as well as complications in childbirth increased risk of newborn deaths.
About 140 million girls and women worldwide are currently living with the consequences of FGM.
FGM is mostly carried out on young girls sometime between infancy and age 15.
In Africa an estimated 101 million girls 10 years old and above have undergone FGM.
FGM is a violation of the human rights of girls and women.
Female genital mutilation (FGM) comprises all procedures that involve partial or total removal of the external female genitalia, or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons.

The practice is mostly carried out by traditional circumcisers, who often play other central roles in communities, such as attending childbirths. However, more than 18% of all FGM is performed by health care providers, and this trend is increasing.

That was from the world health organisation. It's really not something anyone would pay for to increase sexual pleasure. To suggest that they would is vile.

Maybe, just maybe, if the men in these cultures decide not to want wives who have been mutilated, then perhaps the practice would cease. How fucked up do you have to be to expect that level of injury in a partner?

From the who again. These are the different types of fgm...

Procedures
Female genital mutilation is classified into four major types.

Clitoridectomy: partial or total removal of the clitoris (a small, sensitive and erectile part of the female genitals) and, in very rare cases, only the prepuce (the fold of skin surrounding the clitoris).
Excision: partial or total removal of the clitoris and the labia minora, with or without excision of the labia majora (the labia are "the lips" that surround the vagina).
Infibulation: narrowing of the vaginal opening through the creation of a covering seal. The seal is formed by cutting and repositioning the inner, or outer, labia, with or without removal of the clitoris.
Other: all other harmful procedures to the female genitalia for non-medical purposes, e.g. pricking, piercing, incising, scraping and cauterizing the genital area.
No health benefits, only harm
FGM has no health benefits, and it harms girls and women in many ways. It involves removing and damaging healthy and normal female genital tissue, and interferes with the natural functions of girls' and women's bodies.

Immediate complications can include severe pain, shock, haemorrhage (bleeding), tetanus or sepsis (bacterial infection), urine retention, open sores in the genital region and injury to nearby genital tissue.

Long-term consequences can include:

recurrent bladder and urinary tract infections;
cysts;
infertility;
an increased risk of childbirth complications and newborn deaths;
the need for later surgeries. For example, the FGM procedure that seals or narrows a vaginal opening (type 3 above) needs to be cut open later to allow for sexual intercourse and childbirth. Sometimes it is stitched again several times, including after childbirth, hence the woman goes through repeated opening and closing procedures, further increasing and repeated both immediate and long-term risks.

nailak The removal of the prepuce as a method of FGM is extremely rare according to WHO. Since everything being done in your description is a choice made by an adult for the improvement of their sexual pleasure, there is no comparison to the barbarity of FGM performed on unconsenting children.