ABC Radio National

RN Drive





Date/Time 21 Dec 2013 12:13:40am
To Kumar, Skeptica, and Jhau:

If people are serious about stopping female circumcision, they also have to be against male circumcision. Even if you see a fundamental difference, the people that cut girls don't (and they get furious if you call it "mutilation"). There are intelligent, educated, articulate women who will passionately defend it, and as well as using the exact same reasons that are used to defend male circumcision (hygiene, religious, cultural, disease prevention, cosmetic), they will also point to male circumcision itself (as well as labiaplasty and breast operations), as evidence of western hypocrisy regarding female circumcision. The sooner boys are protected from genital mutilation in the west, the sooner those peoples that practice FGM will interpret western objections as something more than cultural imperialism.

Some forms of FGC don't even touch the clitoris btw, and women can still have orgasms after FGM, even the most severe type of infibulation: Pleasure and Orgasm in Women with Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C) published in Journal of Sexual Medicine, Vol. 4, Issue 6, pp. 1666-78 (Oct. 23, 2007).

Compare that with this:

Is there really much of a difference between trained surgeons removing the prepuce of a male or the prepuce of a female?

It's illegal in Australia to cut off a girl's prepuce, or to make any incision on a girl's genitals, even if no tissue is removed. Even a pinprick is banned. Why don't boys get the same protection? Everyone should be able to decide for themselves whether or not they want parts of their genitals cut off. It's *their* body. It's not like it can't wait - there are just two countries in the world where more than 50% of baby boys are circumcised: the USA (at 55%) and Israel. Other countries circumcise males, but not babies - it's generally anywhere from the age of seven to puberty or late adolescence.
