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?

My thoughts exactly, Teri.

I know Womankind do work to educate women in Africa about the issues so I suppose a donation to them could help (I'm sure they would say it helps a lot - they're not a v big charity and they do good work).

But it seems such a big thing to change - it does make you feel helpless.

Teri - Yes, I was hoping that the IPU site might indicate which national or international organisations are campaigning in this area.

This is from Hansard, 7 October 2008 (Col 132):

1. Mrs. Linda Riordan (Halifax) (Lab/Co-op): What recent reports he has received on the practice of female circumcision in other countries; and if he will make a statement. [224420]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Gillian Merron): The UK Government condemn female genital mutilation as an extreme violation of women?s and girls? human rights?a violation to which the World Health Organisation estimates up to 140 million women and girls have been subjected. We work through international organisations to eradicate the practice, which is now a criminal offence in the UK.

Mrs. Riordan: I thank the Minister for that reply. At least 2 million girls are thought to be subjected to the barbaric practice of female circumcision every year. The process is painful, dangerous and extremely frightening; the girls are often held down and forcibly circumcised. Will the Minister confirm again that she will do everything that she can, working with the World Health Organisation and the United Nations, to put an end to that inhumane practice?

Gillian Merron: I certainly can confirm that. I congratulate my hon. Friend on being a long-standing campaigner against that abuse. Last year, the UK Government gave about £64 million to support the work of the UN agencies and the World Health Organisation in their commitment to stop female genital mutilation in one generation. That will be used to fund work with civil society and traditional, religious and political leaders, to help to change the attitudes of women as well as men, because that is what needs to happen.

So maybe it's worth contacting the UN or WHO to ask how they suggest you channel the money?

I think Save the Children do work on this issue too.

www.equalitynow.org/english/campaigns/fgm/fgm-campaign_en.html

www.ipu.org/wmn-e/fgm.htm

lots of facebook groups too

Thanks again madbad

I'm going to go through monkeytrousers links and the facebook groups and Save the Children as MadBad.... suggested.

There must be something.

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.

I don't have an agenda, I just happen to know about female circumcision specifically in Indonesia, unlike others on this thread, it appears.

Why are you talking about infibulation?

As I said, in Indonesia, the form of female circumcision that is practised is usually incision (cutting of) the clitoral prepuce, but also commonly excision (cutting off) of part of the clitoral prepuce.

Infibulation is not practised in Indonesia. Really.

And yes, removal of the clitoral prepuce, is indeed entirely analagous to removal of the penile prepuce. Although my experience is that, even in relative terms, the proportion of the clitoral prepuce that is removed in Indonesia is smaller than that which is cut off in male circumcision in the West.

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.

I agree, which is why I compared them.

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

Er yes they are.

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.

As well all know? Clearly your knowledge is deficient. For starters, FGM is performed, as is MGM, by medical practitioners in some cases and by lay people in others. As far as Indonesia goes, pressure groups actually REJECT the involvement of medical professionals, because a midwife with a pair of surgical scissors in her hands is far more likely (studies have been done) to actually chop something off, whereas in a traditional ceremony this is rather less likely.

I'm not defending the practice, merely correcting the completely wrong perception that what's being done in Indonesia involves women having their genitals chopped off and then sewn up. That is not the case, and as I've said you could find equally harrowing photos of little boys with tears in their eyes undergoing an equally unnecessary procedure.

Female genital cutting is analgous, female genital mutilation is not.

This is not a tricky definition. And we have the president of Java on reco0rd saying the purpose of female 'circumcision' is to lowe sex drive, while the procedure in men is to highten it.

You seem to be saying that these girls are being lined up aged 5 to be given the gift of multible organsms in later life.

Look on Indonesia Matters site.

omg this is terrible and needs to be stopped

Female genital cutting is analgous, female genital mutilation is not.

Er, that's a tautology.

My view is male circumcision is mutilation, as is female. In whatever form.

But, the cutting into or removal of a very small part of the clitoral hood, as practised in Indonesia, is not one of the world's great injustices.

This is not a tricky definition. And we have the president of Java on reco0rd saying the purpose of female 'circumcision' is to lowe sex drive, while the procedure in men is to highten it.

Java doesn't have a President. And anyway that's bollocks, it doesn't heighten male sex drive, nor, in my experience, does it lower female sex drive.

You seem to be saying that these girls are being lined up aged 5 to be given the gift of multible organsms in later life.

Eh? Where did I say that? All I said is that it is a less invasive procedure, as practised in Indonesia, than male circumcision.

Look on Indonesia Matters site.

I've read it, and contributed to it, when it was published.

SG, are you just attempting to push for more awareness of male circumcision? You can do that without trying to force an equivalence between FGM and 'benign' if you like, circumcision, which as I have already said, is an important issue, but it is not the same of FGM - which does occur in Indonesia, regardless of how verociously you assert it doesn't.

And to say that female genital cutting is analogous with male circimcision and that FGM is not, is not a tautology at all actually.

If you are actually after a reasonable dialogue, it would help if you dropped the posturing.

From the Indonesia matters website

"Meanwhile the East Java secretary of the MUI, Prof Dr Hj Istibjaroh, said female circumcision was neither required nor forbidden but:

In general it is done.

The purpose was to reduce the sex drive of women, he said, while the purpose of male circumcision was to increase sex drive."

So my error was in calling him president, rather than secretary. The content remains the same.

SG, are you just attempting to push for more awareness of male circumcision? You can do that without trying to force an equivalence between FGM and 'benign' if you like, circumcision, which as I have already said, is an important issue, but it is not the same of FGM - which does occur in Indonesia, regardless of how verociously you assert it doesn't.

Could you clarify what you mean by your statement that 'FGM' occurs in Indonesia?

And to say that female genital cutting is analogous with male circimcision and that FGM is not, is not a tautology at all actually.

But yes it is, because you have not defined FGM as distinct from female genital cutting. You have said that FGM takes place in Indonesia, and said that it is not analagous to as male circumcision, but the female gential cutting is , but you have failed to define what you mean by either, by reference to actual procedures.

If you are actually after a reasonable dialogue, it would help if you dropped the posturing.

If we are talking about Indonesia, it makes sense to talk about what goes on Indonesia, rather than what goes in say Sudan.

And if we are going to talk about what goes on Indonesia, why the concentration on girls, when worse is being inflicted on the boys? Culturual bias, nothing more.

From the Indonesia matters website

"Meanwhile the East Java secretary of the MUI, Prof Dr Hj Istibjaroh, said female circumcision was neither required nor forbidden but:

In general it is done.

The purpose was to reduce the sex drive of women, he said, while the purpose of male circumcision was to increase sex drive."

So my error was in calling him president, rather than secretary. The content remains the same.

It is still bollocks, on both counts, and he is a cleric, not a politician, the MUI is an Islamic group.

Hmm. A group of women are discussing one of the harms that is done to women and girls. They agree that this harm ought to stop and try to find a way of supporting international efforts to make it stop. A man then turns up, to suggest that the harm in question isn't actually that great and they ought to be discussing a different (although related) harm that is done to men.

It's an overworked word, but can anyone else spot the irony there?

Er, yes, when the man is actually informed about the subject and most of the women aren't, and are wondering if it would somehow impact on their holiday to Hindu Bali.

SG, you are boring me now. I have a life, a partner and a child - however much you like the attention, I'm withdrawing it - arguing with idiots, etc...

SomeGuy, you're being an arse. This is what TeriHatchet said:

"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?"

She didn't say "OMG, this is affecting my plan to holiday in Bali, whatever shall I do?" You're misquoting her for effect. Not cool.

We all appreciate that you are opposed to male circumcision.

But you will garner no sympathy for your point of view by dismissing any aspect of female circumcision or FGM, with statements such as "but, the cutting into or removal of a very small part of the clitoral hood, as practised in Indonesia, is not one of the world's great injustices".

Your concern for little boys' penises is equal to our concern for little girls' clitorises and vulvas. It does not have to be one or the other, both concerns can coexist and both situations can be protested against.

Gatecrashing a thread posted by a woman about female circumcision and castigating the OP and subesquent posters because you think they should be more concerned about male circumcision is a very rude hijack.

She didn't say "OMG, this is affecting my plan to holiday in Bali, whatever shall I do?" You're misquoting her for effect. Not cool.

Nope, I was responding to the poster before me who implied that I'm some sort of sexist prig. Somebody felt fit to attack me on the basis of my gender, and I don't think that's reasonable. I'm not having a go at people who want to find out more, I think that's great, what I'm opposed to is people making sexist attacks, and also people persistently clouding the issue by reference to extreme forms of female circumcision, which are about as relevant to this particular issue as castration is to male circumcision.

Gatecrashing a thread posted by a woman about female circumcision and castigating the OP and subesquent posters because you think they should be more concerned about male circumcision is a very rude hijack

Ah, more personal attacks on the basis of my gender. WTF has the fact that the OP was a woman got to do with anything?

I'm not gatecrashing anything, in fact is I know considerably more about female circumcision in Indonesia than anyone in this thread, and I'm trying to explain that what goes on there is not the chopping off of labia, sewing up, etc., that goes in Africa. Do I need to send the fucking photographs?

Your concern for little boys' penises is equal to our concern for little girls' clitorises and vulvas. It does not have to be one or the other, both concerns can coexist and both situations can be protested against.

Indeed, all I am saying is that people should be in possession of the facts about what actually goes on in Indonesia. And yes, little boys' penises are quite relevant, and no it is not a 'hijack', because the photos that were in the article in the OP were taken at an event where both boys and girls were circumcised. But the boys were not photographed, only girls.

It's clear to me from some of the responses here that people find this quite disturbing. I agree that it's not a necessary procedure, but the fact is the photos were taken by an American photographer (a country where most boys are circumcised) in a deliberate attempt to elicit this shock horror reaction.

People going on holiday to Bali, Java, or wherever, really do not need to worry about the 'little dolls' on this account, any more than when they go to Florida they should approach small boys queuing in Disney World and ask if they have been scarred for life.

Women being mutilated in Africa is a different story, but it's not helpful to blur the two.

Surely it's obvious that removing bits of er, red flesh is different to removing general flesh?

Sorry to be grim but the vulva and clitoris are full of nerve endings unlike the loose foreskin. I would say FGM is similar to cutting the glans of the penis in terms of sensitivity.

Do certain cultures cut chunks out of the male glans and then use thorns to sew it all up again to be ripped open by the lucky bride? If this hypothetical barbaric practice is commonplace then I would expect MNers to be protesting against it!

This is NOT to say that I agree with male circumcision btw. The argument that babies don't feel it because they can't articulate it is downright stupid. I feel the same about "cultural" excuses for piercing girls' baby ears too

Surely it's obvious that removing bits of er, red flesh is different to removing general flesh?

Sorry to be grim but the vulva and clitoris are full of nerve endings unlike the loose foreskin. I would say FGM is similar to cutting the glans of the penis in terms of sensitivity.

But what we are talking about in this case is removing a part of the clitoral hood. Not the whole hood, and not the clitoris itself.

And as a matter of fact the foreskin is full of nerve endings, that's proven.

Do certain cultures cut chunks out of the male glans and then use thorns to sew it all up again to be ripped open by the lucky bride? If this hypothetical barbaric practice is commonplace then I would expect MNers to be protesting against it!

Well that would be practised in Africa/Middle East, but not in Indonesia.

Certain cultures do indeed throw away part of their boys' penises, a part that provides sexual pleasure - and justify it as inhibiting masturbation (i.e. sexual pleasure).

This is NOT to say that I agree with male circumcision btw. The argument that babies don't feel it because they can't articulate it is downright stupid. I feel the same about "cultural" excuses for piercing girls' baby ears too

My wife got my DD's ears pierced when I was away. I didn't approve (she didn't ask me before doing it) as a matter of fact. Anyway we lost one of the earrings, and her ears healed over in matter of days. There's no longer, nine months later or so, any sign of the piercing. People do get quite het up about ear piercing of babies, but it's hardly child abuse.

I will second that the foreskin is rich in nerve endings.

When you say that the cutting, sewing up and ripping does happen in Africa and the Middle East but not in Indonesia, do you mean it happens to boys as well?

Wrt ear-piercing in babies, my childminder got DD's done. She kept on and on and I kept evading then one day she surprised me with it Nobody knew for certain although it was suspected that my daughter had a blood-clotting disorder and she spent two days in hospital and I more or less lost my job. Hardly child abuse

Your childminder had your dd's ears pierced without permission and she's still breathing?

When you say that the cutting, sewing up and ripping does happen in Africa and the Middle East but not in Indonesia, do you mean it happens to boys as well?

I mean with regards to girl, they cut and sew up in Africa/Middle East (although this does vary in extent). In Indonesia they perform a much less severe procedure.

When it comes to boys a fairly standardised 'chopping off' is performed, wherever you are in the world (or nothing at all).

Wrt ear-piercing in babies, my childminder got DD's done. She kept on and on and I kept evading then one day she surprised me with it Nobody knew for certain although it was suspected that my daughter had a blood-clotting disorder and she spent two days in hospital and I more or less lost my job. Hardly child abuse

Eh? Evading? I don't understand. She says 'you should get your daughter's ears pierced'. You say 'No thanks'. I don't see why you would 'evade' that?

I'm enrolling my DS (6) on a rock climbing course. He could have a horrible injury from that and never walk again (unlikely, but possible). It doesn't make it child abuse (although a childminder doing something like this is clearly not on).

Thunderduck I am sure it is. We are all human and we feel.

But this is Mumsnet after all, home of many women who have had their bits cut with scissors, thus crushing as well as slicing delicate tissues in order to give birth to children. With no anaesthesia might I add and none for the repairs afterwards despite the grazing and bruising.

Compare that to the average bloke-op.

I'm thinking more of male infants who have been circumcised. Often with little to no pain relief. Crushing, clamping and slicing are all involved. And there is almost never pain relief given while they heal.

It's a rather different scenario than a willing adult male who choose to undergo the surgery,with sufficient pain relief during and after.