Awful, heart-rending photographs in the Sunday Times Magazine today

[squeaver]

5 year old girls undergoing female genitalia mutilation in Indonesia.

Can't get the images out of my head and it's made me think. What, if anything, can I - one individual - do to stop it happening?

I'd join any organisation/sign any petition/ give money. But if it's such a deeply ingrained cultural thing, really what difference would it make?

Just to clarify, you see one little girl's face as she's undergoing the procedure and others waiting.

But in a way that's worse than seeing the "procedure".

Also sad about the Day in the Life of the prostitute in Calcutta.

Yes it wasn't exactly a diverting read today.

Must have a look at Style and cheer ourselves up then.

The worst thing was seeing the faces of the mothers looking like they didn't have any worries at all about what they were doing.

Hi Squeaver. Have you seen this on the website of the Inter Parliamentary Union?

Thanks MadBad.

I also remembered that these guys do some work in the area.

Agree, kathy, just dreadful.

I assume this is not online, but it sounds like a reprint of a story that was in the New York Times quite a while ago.

See

www.nytimes.com/2008/01/20/magazine/20circumcision-t.html
www.viiphoto.com/detailStory3.php?news_id=676

The thing that gets me is they make all this noise about it, but male circumcision gets no mention.

If you read the story above, it goes on about FGM, and casually adds

" Over the course of that Sunday morning, more than 200 girls were circumcised, many of them appearing to be under the age of 5. Meanwhile, in a nearby building, more than 100 boys underwent a traditional circumcision as well.
"

The 'Meanwhile' sentence is the only mention of male circumcision. Which to me is absurd, given that male circumcision is the removal of the entire male prepuce, and is in fact a far more severe procedure than that usually practised in Indonesia, which is one of the following:

• incision (cutting, but not removing) of the clitoral prepuce
• excision (cutting off) part of the clitoral prepuce
• pricking the clitoris with a needle
• rubbing the clitoris in a symbolic fashion
• removing part of the clitoris

It appears that the most common procedure is cutting off part (but not all) of the clitoral prepuce (hood) (analagous to removal of the foreskin in male circumcision). It should be considered that this operation is sometimes done as an elective procedure by women to heighten pleasure

www.vibereview.com/how_to/clitoral_hood_removal_new_ways_of_heightening_arousal

While I'm certainly not endorsing female circumcision as it is practised in Indonesia, the hypocrisy of the NY Times condemning it while turning a blind eye to male circumcision (which is clearly more damaging to men than the form of female circumcision practised in Indoensia), simply because male circumcision is a common practise in mainstream American culture, is clear.

The other issue of course is that FGM as practised in some parts of the world is certainly horrific - as it is practised in Indonesia, however, it is not.

This behavior has really bothered me for years. These are not the first photographs I've seen and like others find it beyond vile. The mothers going along with it, thinking it is acceptable - where is their natural instinctive desire to protect their little girls?
Most of those carrying out this gruesome act are also women.
It is a truly sickening practice. Indonesia is only one country where this takes place. It is common in the U.K. amongst the Somalian population amongst others.

Thanks for the links, really feel I've seen enough and am now angry enough to add my small voice to say No to this barbaric practice.

There is a big difference between the form of circumcision that goes on among Somalians and that which takes place in Indonesia.

As I've said the form that takes place in Indonesia is clearly less invasive than male circumcision, where is the big hoo-ha about that?

It was those pictures, someguy, but not the article.

I don't really want to get into a debate about the relative acceptability of male vs female circumcision, tbh, but thanks for posting the links.

As you wish, but all I can say is that why did the photographers take all these photos of little girls with tears in their eyes, when clearly 100 boys having parts of their penis chopped off could have elicited similar images?

Cultural bias, nothing more. If male circumcision were unknown in the West, and if there were not the confusion with more severe forms of FGM, they would be writing the article about the boys instead.

The girls in those photos are in all likelihood having a small part of their clitoral hood removed while the boys are losing their entire foreskins.

The latter is much more dramatic.

Someguy, you really are some guy.

"analagous to removal of the foreskin in male circumcision"

I have no idea what your agenda is but this is simply made up. FGM and then infibulation is not analagopus to male circumcisiojn.

Haver a debate on the rights of male children not to undergo unnecessary surgery before they are old enough to consent by all means. There have been threads totallydedecated to male circumcision and human rights on MN before - do a search and find them.

But that's the only place these two debates meet, on the issue of the rights of children to undergo any type of surgery before they are old enough to reasonable consent.

The procedures however, in point of fact, are not analagous.

Thanks, monkey. I was hoping someone who knows more about this than I do would come along

My understanding of male vs female circumcision practices is that circumcised boys lose skin, whereas girls lose labia/vulva, clitoris, and get sewn up with only a tiny opening for pee & menstruation to leak through. They are then torn open by husbands, probably will never enjoy sex nor have an orgasm, having lost their clitoris.

Hardly the same thing as male circumcision.

Yes Cote, seconded.

Actually there is a form, perhaps the most common form, of female circumcision that involves only the removal of the clitoral hood. That is as close an equivalent to the foreskin as we have and it can be compared to male circumcision.

Female circumcision doesn't always involve removal of the labia, clitoris etc, and sewing up, that type,infibulation and excision, is less common than the one I mentioned above. There are considered to be 4 forms of FGM.

So yes in my opinion male circumcision can often be compared with the former type of circumcision.

Male or female,it doesn't matter. It's all incredibly wrong, cruel and unnecessary imho.

I posted that before I read Someguy's post. I'll add one thing, I think the way it is practiced in Indonesia is horrific. I think it's horrific and cruel no matter what the extent of the procedure is.

Shit - I looked at someguys links. Wish I hadn't. I'm sitting here with tears streaming down my face.

Why?!?!?!?

Yes, Tunkderduck. What SomeGuy is describing is the autonoumous practice of adults that is called female genital cutting. it is done by choice, under anaesthetic, in hygenic conditions and by a professional plastic surgeon, and is thought to improve sexual pleasure.

As we all know, female genital mutilation is practiced on children, without anesthetic, in back rooms, by non-professionals and is designed to remove the possiblity of sexual pleasure.

Not analagous at all then.

Someguy. Some men also choose to be circumcised, and not for health reasons, but because of personal preference.
Now that's fine but just because it or removal of the clitoral hood is an elective procedure for some doesn't mean that forcing either on a child or adult is at all acceptable.

I posted before I read Someguy's posts. I'm not comparing elective female circumcision with forcing it on a child. I'm comparing some forms of FGM with the male circumision of male infants and children.

The so called justifications for male circumcision are remarkably similar to those for FGM.

I had a link which compared the reasons for both which I'll post if I can find it.

I know you aren't TD. No worries.

MADBAD..... AND SQUEAVER - I looked at both your links but there doesn't seem to be anywhere where an individual ie. a mum sitting here in the UK, can do anything to help.

This has really got to me. Makes you feel so helpless.

One of my favourite holiday destinations is Bali where I'm returning again his year. The local children look like little dolls and in my ignorance I didn't know this practice was carried out ( Maybe it's not in Bali - maybe it's more Jakarta and other parts of Indonesia? ).

Is there anything Joanne Public can do?