Circumcision: A Social Status in the UK ?

[Amazonia]

Curiously in the UK, circumcision is now a matter of social class. While the "ordinary" folks rarely circumcise, circumcision is prevalent in the upper class as well as in the Royal family.

There is no such thing as genital mutilation in both sexes.

The continued assertion that FGM and male circumcision are equivalent is disgraceful misogyny.

It is offensive to the highest degree to equate FGM with male circumcision.

It is pure misogyny to compare FGM, which eliminates all hope of ever experiencing sexual pleasure in its victims and greatly increases the chance of experiencing life threatening difficulties both during and after childbirth, to mother and baby alike, to male circumcision.

It is demeaning and insulting to the victims of FGM, women and their babies alike, to compare it with a procedure on males that has no effect on sexual functioning or pleasure and no effect except a positive one on future general health.

If posters here are going to persist in demeaning and insulting women who are victims of FGM by comparing a benign procedure on males that has no ill effects on sexual function and sexual pleasure and that confers lifelong health benefits with one that mutilates for absolutely no reason except to reinforce the notion that women are the property of men, destroys all hope of ever experiencing sexual pleasure, and jeopardises maternal and infant health at childbirth, then I will call that misogyny because that is what it is.

You don't have to agree with me. You have the right to be wrong. But you don't have the right to be offensive.

The continued assertion that FGM and male circumcision are equivalent is ......

.....is only in the imagination of math.

Nowhere else.

There is no such thing as genital mutilation in both sexes.
This is a rather bizarre statement without any actual meaning. However, I'm interpreting it as "circumcision isn't mutilation". This is of course incorrect if you check that dictionary.

The continued assertion that FGM and male circumcision are equivalent is disgraceful misogyny.

No one on this thread has equated the two except Math through repeatedly posting this same sentence. Neither has any discernable health benefits. Any scientific studies you might want to quote which support circumcision as a preventative measure for cancer will be old. It is no longer believed to be the case.

It is offensive to the highest degree to equate FGM with male circumcision.

I wouldn't say the highest degree. Equating eating ice cream to rape, for example, would be a considerably higher degree. Whilst I do agree that FGM is worse, they are still both unnecessary procedures performed on babies.

If posters here are going to persist in demeaning and insulting women who are victims of FGM by comparing a benign procedure on males that has no ill effects on sexual function and sexual pleasure and that confers lifelong health benefits with one that mutilates for absolutely no reason except to reinforce the notion that women are the property of men, destroys all hope of ever experiencing sexual pleasure, and jeopardises maternal and infant health at childbirth, then I will call that misogyny because that is what it is.

No one is doing this but you. I feel like you're quoting all this crap from somewhere.

You don't have to agree with me.
We agree on something at least, then.

You have the right to be wrong.
As do you.

But you don't have the right to be offensive.
Although I do have the right to challenge outdated beliefs and poor understanding of the science, especially in a debate situation.

Incidentally, repeating the same statements over and over without directly responding to anyone is quite a poor debate technique. You might want to work on that one.

There is no such thing as genital mutilation in both sexes.
This is a rather bizarre statement without any actual meaning. However, I'm interpreting it as "circumcision isn't mutilation". This is of course incorrect if you check that dictionary.

The continued assertion that FGM and male circumcision are equivalent is disgraceful misogyny.

No one on this thread has equated the two except Math through repeatedly posting this same sentence. Neither has any discernable health benefits. Any scientific studies you might want to quote which support circumcision as a preventative measure for cancer will be old. It is no longer believed to be the case.

It is offensive to the highest degree to equate FGM with male circumcision.

I wouldn't say the highest degree. Equating eating ice cream to rape, for example, would be a considerably higher degree. Whilst I do agree that FGM is worse, they are still both unnecessary procedures performed on babies.

If posters here are going to persist in demeaning and insulting women who are victims of FGM by comparing a benign procedure on males that has no ill effects on sexual function and sexual pleasure and that confers lifelong health benefits with one that mutilates for absolutely no reason except to reinforce the notion that women are the property of men, destroys all hope of ever experiencing sexual pleasure, and jeopardises maternal and infant health at childbirth, then I will call that misogyny because that is what it is.

No one is doing this but you. I feel like you're quoting all this crap from somewhere.

You don't have to agree with me.
We agree on something at least, then.

You have the right to be wrong.
As do you.

But you don't have the right to be offensive.
Although I do have the right to challenge outdated beliefs and poor understanding of the science, especially in a debate situation.

Incidentally, repeating the same statements over and over without directly responding to anyone is quite a poor debate technique. You might want to work on that one.

"there is no such thing as genital mutilation in both sexes "

You're wrong, did you even bother to look at the link I posted?

math, you have your head in the sand.

"there is no such thing as genital mutilation in both sexes "

You're wrong, did you even bother to look at the link I posted?

math, you have your head in the sand.

"there is no such thing as genital mutilation in both sexes "

You're wrong, did you even bother to look at the link I posted?

math, you have your head in the sand.

Wondering how mathanxiety would react to my "modest proposal" that baby boys should be given vasectomies as newborns because condoms are not effective at preventing pregnancy. A quick bit of minor surgery -no consent needed obviously- job done.

math, you have your head in the sand
Unfortunately not, or we wouldn't have to keep reading the same drivel.
If mutilation of children wasn't such a serious subject, this would actually be quite funny.

I agree baron it sounds hauntingly familiar! Stands to 'reason' that religious argument supports circumcision though.

It is pure misogyny to compare FGM, which eliminates all hope of ever experiencing sexual pleasure in its victims and greatly increases the chance of experiencing life threatening difficulties both during and after childbirth, to mother and baby alike, to male circumcision.

It is demeaning and insulting to the victims of FGM, women and their babies alike, to compare it with a procedure on males that has no effect on sexual functioning or pleasure and no effect except a positive one on future general health.

If posters here are going to persist in demeaning and insulting women who are victims of FGM by comparing a benign procedure on males that has no ill effects on sexual function and sexual pleasure and that confers lifelong health benefits with one that mutilates for absolutely no reason except to reinforce the notion that women are the property of men, destroys all hope of ever experiencing sexual pleasure, and jeopardises maternal and infant health at childbirth, then I will call that misogyny because that is what it is.

You don't have to agree with me. You have the right to be wrong. But you don't have the right to be offensive.

BaronDent your conclusions about 'religious arguments' and 'techniques' are as preposterous as the rest of your posts, and equally as offensive.

"It is pure misogyny to compare FGM... to male circumcision."

Well you had better stop doing it then.

Math

Directly copying and pasting the same paragraphs is not going to persuade anyone of your point.

Why do you keep saying FGM and circumcision are not the same? No one is disagreeing with this - no one has ever disagreed with this.

I absolutely agree with you, math. And have argued the point on this and other forums. I got banned from one well know men's rights forum for arguing it.

Now please get back to the point?

NOBODY IS COMPARING CIRCUMCISION TO FGM BUT I STAND BY ANY MAN'S RIGHT TO FEEL MUTILATED IF THEY HAVE BEEN CIRCUMCISED WITHOUT CONSENT. AND MGM IN OTHER FORMS DOES EXIST.

Please stop copying and pasting the same fucked up post, it is highly insulting and imo a brainwashing technique.

Four just give up. You can't debate with someone who can't engage in a sensible way.