FGM article in today's observer

[azazello]

here. I'm absolutely horrified by some of the comments, particularly the calls for circumcision of both sexes to be banned.

Now I wouldn't consider getting my DS circumcised and would be quite happy for it to be banned in the UK buyt unless we're talking about half the penis being chopped off, it is not the same thing as FGM.

Am I just late in realising that this is a classic example of men taking what is a really important feminist issue and trying to derail it?

I do think male circumcision is pretty bad, perhaps just as bad as female. They used to do it without any anaesthetic because they believed newborns didn't feel pain .

Its not the same as FGM but while it remains socially acceptable it makes FGM seem more acceptable too.

I have known about FGM for 26 years but every time I read about it I'm still left cold and numb with shock and reminded of how great is the tendency of men to hate women and to institutionalise that hatred.

Male circumcision is, obviously nowhere near as appalling; but it is still mutilation and abuse of a child who is, ipso facto, unable to consent. Barbaric; but not equally so.

I cannot believe that there have been NO prosecutions for FGM in this country. I can see that bringing prosecutions is difficult because of the need not to make life worse for girls who are powerless; but NONE? This sends the message (which may be true) that the UK will pay lipservice to feminist disgust but, given that it's only children, girl children, mostly poor and non-white girl children at that, the British community doesn't really care.

What is being done in schools? Are girls from susceptible communities and their parents being taught about the evils of this practice? Or are they tiptoeing around tthe "race and culture" excuse? What is actually being done to protect girls who might be taken away during the summer? The article had a lot of handwringing; but is anything being done?

This always makes me feel very helpless. What can your average white middle class woman do about this?

"particularly the calls for circumcision of both sexes to be banned."

Whats wrong with this they want both too stop surely thats a good thing?

I had this conversation with a male relative recently.

it sort of went

FGM is terrible and awful, something needs to be done
Yes so is circumcision
Hmm yes that's true but it's an accepted and legal practice here and to get rid of it would be really hard. Better to tackle one thing at a time
I see so you don't think anyone should bother about circumcision
No I just think that if you're going to get anywhere you need to focus on one thing at a time. Circumcision is miles further away from being got rid of than FGM in the UK so let's concentrate on that
Why? Don't you care about all the boys being circumcised
GAH!!!

Thanks ISNT - that is precisely what I meant. Personally I think it would be a good idea to ban circumcision but it really isn't anywhere near as horrific as FGM. Making the two equivalent seems to me to downgrade the awfulness of FGM and also postpone the prospects of any real action being taken (like prosecutions) because its all an accepted cultural difference.

It would just be nice if something which is a predominantly female problem could be acknowledged to be that instead of men having to be equal victims when they really aren't in this particular instance.

Have just read this article; an issue that I have known about for a while but brought into sharp relief now that i have a four year old DD. The thought of anything like this being done to her makes me feel physically sick.

I could not watch the video; the terror and pain in the face of the young girl in the still at the beginning was enough to reduce me to tears.

There are different types of FGM though. I'm not saying any are right - but nothing but removal of the prepuce of the clitoris is comparable to male circumcision.

So if you're accepting male circumcision (in a one thing at a time way), can you argue that all types of FGM need to be banned - or do you need to argue that it should be restricted to the least severe form in line with male circumcision? So why not take the line that any non-medical procedures should need the individual's mature consent and go for both male and female GM at once?

I think the after effects of male circumision are downplayed. there is a loss of sensitivity during sex for example. They also say they have to be done on babies because it'll hurt more later, that's why you can't wait until the boy is older and offers consent.
I think all forms of GM should both be banned for children, but if over 16 year olds (or another arbitrary age) want to have it done for cultural or religious reasons then I think that might be okay.

sorry, that wasn't clear. I think it's bollox that it's to be done on male babies under the pretence that it'll hurt more later. The idiot adults carrying out the procedure on babies simply can't empathize with a baby's pain (and the baby is too young to articulate it properly).

That's never going to wash with the Jewish community (maybe others? don't know about others) where the child must be circumcised at a certain age (AFAIK)

Intersting to see others taking my dad's line. Why as a feminist should I stop campaigning to stop something which is already illegal in the UK, and needs awareness raising and getting the police to do something about it and teachers and others to report it, and concentrate on campaigning against something which is legal and much more widespread and a major part of a very large and established group. Why can't I leave that to men, to get the law changed etc, and concentrate on women and girls? Why is that wrong?

We are an awfully long way from changing the law on circumcision, whereas FGM is already illegal.

This was the argument my dad was making and TBH if I have to campaign for outlawing circumcision when TBH I don't see any men marching for it, then in practice I need to set aside TGM as obviously the one that is not illegal then outweighs the one that is illegal.

It's a classic "what about the men" IMO

Is it really though ISNT? Or is it 'what about the children' which is very different IMO anyway.

btw - I do see what you mean about one being illegal and one not being. But I wouldn't look at it as needing to focus on the legal version to have it banned.

Its more in writing and conversation; people often say things like 'oh male circumcision is bad too, but FGM is much worse and we need to make sure it's stopped'

You can raise awareness of both, and refer to both with language that makes it absolutely clear that you think both are unacceptable without needing to campaign to make male circumcision illegal. (see, I'm wondering if I should have written MGM - given that even the comparable female version still comes under genital mutilation and not clitoral circumcision or some other not so bad sounding heading in all the official writing).

Personally, I think a blanket - all genital mutilation on children, who cannot give informed consent, of both genders is wrong - message is better.

Maybe my POV is slanted by the fact that I live in a very Jewish area, my huge school was mainly Jewish, I've been out with jewish boys, and my workplace is about 90% Jewish. And I've never met anyone who has a problem with circumcision (or at least no-one who has mentioned it). My friends have had their boys circumcised.

Whereas I have never met anyone (as far as I know) who has undergone FGM and obviously being female when I hear what it involves it is just awful. I just can't get as worked up about MGM if I'm very honest. I feel that it would be better if it didn't happen, but it doesn't sicken me in the same way that FGM does.

I just think that outlawing MGM is so so far away from ever happening (is there even an appetite for it amongst the majority of men?) that it waters down the FGM side of things.

Inevitably when I have had this conversation in RL it ends up being all about the men (boys).

I should mention actually that I have only had this conversation about twice in RL, and that was what happened. It isn't something that I chat about generally IYSWIM!

I also realise that I sound rather callous and also that I am buying into the cultural norms of people that I know.

Still, at the moment, that is me being very honest about how I feel.

I don't think you sound callous.

Male circumcision has an impact on women too though you know. American research suggests that women with circumcised partners are more likely to experience sexual 'dysfunction' - lack of lubrication, irritation, bruising or bleeding after sex, (5 times?) less likely to experience vaginal orgasms from intercourse, more likely to experience tearing as they age and the vaginal membranes thin.

And these are framed as problems with the woman - not as issues with male circumcision. So it isn't just a male issue.

Just come back to say - that obviously knock on impact on women of male circumcision not comparable to direct effects of FGM on women. I didn't mean to imply it was at all and it occured to me that it might sound like that.

Lube all the way I guess. When I was at school, the boys used to sometimes talk about what they used to masturbate with - I thought it was normal for a man to have to use a lubricant in order to masturbate

Yes, I had a partner who was circumcised and I believe he experienced lack of sensitivity directly because of it.
That's why I think the negative effects of male circumcision is downplayed: because it'll upset the muslim and jewish communities.
I think feminism must support children, because patriarchy doesn't. I count babies under the 'feminism' umbrella.

Actually, it's possible that the pain a little baby or boy experiences 'down there' may lead to all kinds of psychological problems connected to his penis, problems we can't know about unless studies are done on this, but who's going to cough up the cash for them?
I think circumsicing boys does affect women, and possibly society, if lots of boys are circumcized.

So to bring thread back on track - we can be outraged about both, but getting into debates about severity and impact derails from actually doing something. Fair summary?

Things that come to mind that could be done are:

Awareness/fund raising for the organisations that already do work in the area.

Keeping the topic active in government - asking ministers to raise it in with the violence against women and children topic that seems to be high on the agenda right now. Asking if we give aid money to countries that condone it. Asking what procedures LAs/Social services have in place to prevent or deal with cases. Asking for funding for a helpline like the Karma Nivarna forced marriage helpline for girls at risk. Asking for funding for organisations like this.

Thinking about education - on a local and a policy level. Asking schools what they do or would be prepared to do? If they have contact numbers on display, especially if they have a high number of at risk girls.

Ideas like that?

"asking ministers to raise it in with the violence against women and children topic that seems to be high on the agenda right now"

is it? i didn't know that. where can I find out more?