It's not a mutilation. The removal of the clitoral hood isn't necessarily considered genital mutilation either. I don't understand how you can say that medically removing an optional body part is mutilation.
Female genital mutilation as defined by the World Health Organization "
all procedures that involve partial or total removal of the external female genitalia, or other injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons."
As for the religious freedom to do male circumcision religious reasons is what's going on for FGM.
-Where FGM is a social convention, the social pressure to conform to what others do and have been doing is a strong motivation to perpetuate the practice.
-FGM is often considered a necessary part of raising a girl properly, and a way to prepare her for adulthood and marriage.
-FGM is often motivated by beliefs about what is considered proper sexual behaviour, linking procedures to premarital virginity and marital fidelity. FGM is in many communities believed to reduce a woman's libido and therefore believed to help her resist "illicit" sexual acts. When a vaginal opening is covered or narrowed (type 3 above), the fear of the pain of opening it, and the fear that this will be found out, is expected to further discourage "illicit" sexual intercourse among women with this type of FGM.
-FGM is associated with cultural ideals of femininity and modesty, which include the notion that girls are âcleanâ and "beautiful" after removal of body parts that are considered "male" or "unclean".
-Though no religious scripts prescribe the practice, practitioners often believe the practice has religious support.
-Religious leaders take varying positions with regard to FGM: some promote it, some consider it irrelevant to religion, and others contribute to its elimination.
-Local structures of power and authority, such as community leaders, religious leaders, circumcisers, and even some medical personnel can contribute to upholding the practice.
-In most societies, FGM is considered a cultural tradition, which is often used as an argument for its continuation.
-In some societies, recent adoption of the practice is linked to copying the traditions of neighbouring groups. Sometimes it has started as part of a wider religious or traditional revival movement.
-In some societies, FGM is practised by new groups when they move into areas where the local population practice FGM.
(again from W.H.O.)
Female Genital mutilation has been a federal crime since 1996.
It's a crime in the UK, Australia, and at least 20 states in the US.
This is why people try to tack this health benefit to male circumcision. Something that I have already shown to be using fudged data in the studies conducted. I see it as nothing more than an attempt to tack this health benefit argument on so they can have an excuse to continue mutilating kids. And yes it is mutilation!
But to some people it is more than cosmetic. The practice is still widely encouraged because it is said to give health benefits that uncircumcised doesn't. To some people it is also extremely important in culture. I don't think you should take away that right from parents.
Health benefits are fudged and I would be willing to bet likely don't exist or at the very least can be circumvented through other less evasive means. Both male circumcision and FGM have religious backing for doing it so I don't see that as being a reason to allow one but not the other when you're essentially doing the same **** thing.
