Today came in a patient, a refugee from East Africa. We were doing a routine pap smear and lo and behold, she was missing something.
A clitoris. Hood and everything. Female circumcision.
I can't even imagine losing my clitoris. The g-spot is great and all, but it's nothing in comparison. Supposedly, women can still enjoy sex after a circumcision because of all the nerve endings in the vagina, but I wonder if the sex drive would be the same. I'm guessing not.
So very sad.
But before you gasp in disbelief of such "barbarism," keep in mind many of you have suffered from our society's version of genital mutilation - male circumcision. I've written on this before (
click here) so I won't belabor the point again, but the bottom line is that the bodies of these people (both men and women) were altered without their consent. Regardless of the extent of genital mutilation, the proclaimed reasoning behind it, or the safety of the environment in which it is performed, it is a forced act on a helpless being
who had no choice in the matter.
I mean if male circumcision is so great and so protective of your general health, don't you think there would be more uncircumcised adult men lining up to get it done?
What are your thoughts?Image Source
True
Comments (75)
I'm against circumcision for both males and females. Ugh, thinking about female circumcision makes me want to puke. :x
Female genital mutilation is a terrible thing. Infant circumcision in developed countries is inarguably less severe...but I don't think that's enough to justify it, at least for me.
I don't see a valid reason for it. Half the supporters claim "cosmetic" reasons, but I sure hope they aren't getting rhinoplasty for their toddlers...Female infants get UTIs more than males. But we don't hack away at their genitals. STDs...well, be a parent and tell them how to avoid STDs. Simple. My husband is uncircumcised and is adamant that any future male children will also remain uncircumcised; I fully agree. I don't think there's a good reason to perform cosmetic surgery on a newborn baby who cannot consent. In situations of trauma or legitimate need for the surgery, it's obviously different, but from what I understand, such situations are rare. It bothers me that it's considered to be so routine. Imagine how awful you'd feel if your son was the one in a million who lost his penis. I'll take my chances with the UTI, thanks.i am extremely pissed off that my mom forced me to get a circumcision. ignoring the obvious pain that i had to endure as a goddamn infant (seriously. i dare you to watch a video of a circumcision all the way through), and all the sexual pleasure i'm going to miss out on, i can't believe she'd put me through a barbaric ritual that is purely religious.
I'm against circumcision in males and females.
i'm also against male and female circumcision. obviously female circumcision is NOT okay for numerous reasons, and i just think that it's totally unnecessary to inflict that sort of pain on your son at such a young age for no real benefit at all. i've only been with one man sexually so far in my life and he is uncut, and numerous times i've wondered how we would do *things* if he was cut... it just seems weird... so for me, i don't see an aesthetic difference either. also, i'm not jewish (or necessarily christian, but i heard it was actually a jewish thing and not a christian thing...), so it's not a part of my religious beliefs.
The foreskin of a penis and the clitoris are two VERY different things.
I'm pretty indifferent to male circumcision. Most women I know prefer to be with men who are circumcised, and most men I know are circumcised. But that just might be a Western thing.
Regarding male circumcision, it's done for cleanliness. It's easier to clean themselves without moving the skin back & scientists said circumcised men are less at risk of getting STDS because they dont have foreskin with can get sores from being unclean. It's also easier to do it as a baby than an adult. Also, this does not affect the penis.
Female circumcision has no health benefits & is far more dangerous. I dont support it at all.
Finally!
@FIREExATxWILL@xanga - It's an American thing. Religious reasonings and Americans getting grossed out over the "ugliness" of intact dick.
@Shinbi_Belldandy@xanga - Actually, opinions differ on whether or not sensitivity of the penis is affected. There are no medically-proven benefits; they vary from study to study. And ..it's painful. I'm not sure why parents would put their infant through a painful procedure just so they don't have to take the extra five seconds it takes to clean an intact penis.
@PeriwinkleAdonis@xanga - Well I didnt mean my comment to say it doesnt hurt the baby, just to clarify. =D
It's not the parent's job to wipe a dude's butt after he's potty trained. I've heard stories from girls about guys who arent clean DOWN THERE & they get this waxy build up that's gross & when they pick at it, it creates the sores I mentioned in my original comment. Open sores=easy access for bacteria/STDs. Not EVERY guy is like that, just the unclean ones.
I've seen both & really either or is fine. I have no preference. It's just that the uncut guy has to spend a few extra moments cleaning.
Go read "No Laughter Here" by Rita Williams-Garcia. It's a book intended for children/ young adults on the topic of female circumcision.
Pretty intense but a new perspective, most beneficial because it's not a first person account.
@Shinbi_Belldandy@xanga - Right, well. It is a parent's job to teach a child how to clean themselves. After they've been taught, they're on their own. As for the waxy build-up, both sexes produce that. So I would no more say a male should have his bits chopped off than a female because of that.
We need male circumcision sadly as in studies done in SA they have found that circumcised men lower the risk of infections and spreading of diseases to their partners. So a decrease in HPV, HIV and other STI's. However I do believe they must be done in hospitals with proper anaesthetic and so on. Female circumcision has no purpose however.
i don't see male circumcision as horrible as female circumcision, because a lot of times they do that to females as a way to keep them faithful to their husbands, considering that practice usually makes sex so painful that these women don't want to have sex with anyone. plus the way they do it in those countries is completely different from a male circumcision here, because they might not have proper medical supplies, so infection isn't doubtful, plus they might not even get pain relievers or the proper time to rest afterward. it is barbaric, & really sad. =[
@PeriwinkleAdonis@xanga - Damn, I've been trying to figure out what the name is! Thanks for the link!
Well no I wouldnt say chop it up because of that but yes the parents should tell their sons to clean themselves. I dont see how a guy could not, it will smell after a while.
Before hospitals automatically did circumcisions but now they leave it up to the parents. There was an episode of Strong Medicine (an awesome medical show) where in one of the side stories, parents of a newborn boy were arguing over whether or not they should circumcise their son. The mom wanted to but the dad said no. So the receptionist, Lana, told them basically it's not how it looks, it's what a man does with it. LMAO.
@tulipB@xanga - There is no "need" for male circumcision. The rest of the world has caught on to this fact. The US is the only country that performs these for no proven reason (other than religious groups). Here, take a peek. Why doesn't the rest of the civilised world seem to need circumcision?
@Shinbi_Belldandy@xanga - Never seen that show. Is it on currently or in syndication? I think, personally, the choice should be left up to the kid and nothing should be done until he's old enough to decide for himself. Just my $0.02, though.
@PeriwinkleAdonis@xanga - Well it started 10 years ago & ended in 2005. It was a Lifetime show about Womens health issues. Very informative. It inspired me to go into healthcare. I know "Lifetime" kinda puts people off but not everything on that channel is overdramatized. lol. The original programming & some of the movies are quite excellent!
I don't think male circumcision can be compared to female circumcision as equal situations. First, the clitoris is the main source of pleasure for most women, and it's biologically the equivalent of the penis. Therefore cutting off the clitoris is more equivalent to cutting off the penis.
I'd say foreskin removal is more similar to the trimming of the labia minora for women. Aesthetic purposes, mostly.
Also, a vast majority of men in the US who are circumcised had it done when they were little, and they also don't give a shit and/or actually appreciate it. That's why the movement against male circumcision is currently weak - the men who feel victimized are in the minority. Most women who are circumcised have it done when they are beings capable of making their own decisions, and they often have circumcision forced upon them when they don't want it.
@my_horizon@xanga - Thank yoooou.
You are awesome.
i used to be all for circumcision. then i was just indifferent. but now, i think i'm kind of against it.
i argued with my boyfriend about this the other day. he said he wants our sons circumcised because it's "not normal" to have an uncircumcised penis and uncircumcised penises get infected more. i really don't agree with either of those. not circumcising is becoming increasingly popular. and most parts of our bodies can get easily infected, it doesn't mean we go chopping them off.
i don't think circumcision should be illegal, however. what if a grown man wants to get circumcised? you or i have no right to stand in his way. even with infant circumcision, it's often a religious practice, so illegalizing it would be taking away a violation of one of the amendment rights- something i know none of us want touched.
@my_horizon@xanga - Out of curiosity, do you have a source of some kind that says that most men in the US are indifferent or glad they were circumcised?
You're out of your mind to compare the horror of female genital mutilation to male circumcision. The two are NOT the same. Male babies (particularly Jewish ones) have been circumcised for thousands of years and they can still enjoy sex. Seriously, get over it.
Did you also know that FGM was covered by insurance in the US for many, many years? And I'm talking up to the 1990s. I need to find a link, but I've read that stat many, many times recently.
And I totally agree with you. I did not circumcise my son because I didn't want to remove part of him for no reason. I'm not taking away his right to choose when he's older just because I'm his parent and have that kind of control.
It's ludicrous.
@my_horizon@xanga - Just for aesthetic purposes? No. The foreskin is full of nerves and has many important functions. You can read more about that here. (that link is generally NSFW).
To answer your question, I don't think that female circumcision would decrease the sex drive - since your sex drive is a chemical attribute within the body. And also psychological. I guess the psychological trauma could affect the sex drive but that would vary from woman to woman. Most of what women suffer from after being circumcised is psychological trauma.
I'm indifferent about male circumcision. I don't think there's anything wrong with being circumcised. And I don't think there's anything wrong with not being circumcised. I would probably have any sons I had circumcised - I guess I'm just a cultural sheep that way. If my husband didn't want our sons to be circumcised, I'd be fine with that too. It's not my penis, I could really care less.
But male circumcision and female circumcision are two completely different things. Male circumcision is more or less done in a healthy, sanitary fashion. It's done early in baby's life, in order for them to not remember as well as for them to heal quickly. It's done in a hospital, with the baby having proper anesthetic, what have you. And in the end, they still have all that they need to have proper sexual function of their penis.
Some people argue that circumcision allows a man to have more sexual
pleasure because of the exposed head of the penis. And some people
argue that being uncircumcised allows for more sexual pleasure, due to
the fact that the foreskin protects nerve endings in the head of the
penis from becoming desensitized, as they say happens with circumcised
penises.
Not that'd I'd know, seeing as I don't have a penis. But that's what I've heard.
On the other hand, female circumcision is done specifically as a method of deterring women from being "sexually promiscuous." The girls that go through this ritual are specifically older - usually late child hood to early teens, to they will remember what happened to them as a deterrent from sex. It's usually done in secret and it's done in unsanitary conditions. The girl lured into a secluded area by her mother where a female shaman or someone of that nature, slices off her clitoris with the sharp end of a rock. It's safe to say she will have no anesthesia and proper care of the injury afterward will probably be minimal.
So in my opinion it's extremely hard to compare the two. Because they have completely different ethical, physical, psychological and cultural contexts.
But If you put it in context, the male version of female circumcision would probably be chopping off the head of the penis with a rusty machete - forskin and all. And the female version of male circumcision would probably be removing the clirtoral hood, while leaving the clitoris in tact.
As others have said, circumcision and FGM are apples and oranges. Removing the clitoris removes the only organ in the female body designed specifically for pleasure. Removing the foreskin affects sensitivity in the penis very little comparatively. Far easier to keep the penis clean when circumcised, no build up of smegma.
Most circumcision is done when the baby is an infant, and usually a topical anesthetic is applied prior to the procedure. Unpleasent? Yes, momentarily. But lets not dramatize it, make a big production out of it, puleeeze....
I knew a few guys who were circumsized as an adult, hurt like hell, sore for weeks, the head of their penises were supersensitive until they got used to underwear against their heads, etc. Sweat and heat rash affected them more too. Glad I was circ'd as an infant, don't remember it. Most women I've been with would rather go down on a circ'd penis than an intact one anyway, far less "taste" and odor, real or percieved. Most male circs are done for hygiene reasons, Jewish do it more for the religious stuff.
FGM is not a hygiene issue, nor is it done as an infant. Yes, the G spot still works, but to me it's more the mental baggage that she will carry, the horror of having it done (usually at puberty, and usually without proper anisthetics and sterile conditions) and knowing (at least in our society) that she cannot experience pleasure the way other women do. Has to make them feel less feminine...I would think they would harbor a lot of anger and depression...