Is female circ ever medically necessary?

[BlessedMommy2006]

Just curious if there are any actual medical indications for female circ. It just strikes me as funny that all these men are "having to get circ'ed" later in life, but somehow you never hear of women getting circ'ed for medical reasons.

Didn't they ban female circ over in Egypt "unless medically necessary?" (Really, that's probably just a loophole to get away with continuing to do them)

Somehow they generally manage to fix female problems without surgery. But is it possible to develop malignancy, gangrene, frostbite, or severe trama on your clitoral hood? Or to have recurrent infections on your labia?

[Sailor]

I can't imagine a medical reason for it unless it was something pretty severe, i.e. trauma due to some type of mutilating accident, maybe(?) cancer, etc.

I actually don't like the term female circumcision, although I know it's used, so maybe it's just my quirk. It just sounds so mild compared to what is actually being done to these women. I can't even think about the process before the anger takes over.

Anyway, I do agree ... I've never understood the whole "I had to be circumcised as an adult for medical reasons." My theory is that, if there is a problem, there are other solutions beyond circumcision, it's just that doctors like to point to that one immediately.

[Papai]

Actually, there is a medical reason for it.

It's called clitoral phimosis (trapped clitoris). Similar to phimosis in the male, if the prepuce in the female (the clitoral hood) is unable to retract, circumcision of the prepuce is a way to treat this condition. It's called a hoodectomy when it's done to a woman. Google it.

[Papai]

Any actually, while there aren't many medically-necessary reasons for doing female circumcision on women, many women in the UNITED STATES are opting for it. Oh, they don't call it female circumcision though. They call it vaginal rejuvenation.

But it's the same thing as female circ: They trim the labia, trim the clitoral hood.

[leila1213]

Originally Posted by Papai

Any actually, while there aren't many medically-necessary reasons for doing female circumcision on women, many women in the UNITED STATES are opting for it. Oh, they don't call it female circumcision though. They call it vaginal rejuvenation.

But it's the same thing as female circ: They trim the labia, trim the clitoral hood.

:Puke

[Yulia_R]

Originally Posted by Papai

Actually, there is a medical reason for it.

It's called clitoral phimosis (trapped clitoris). Similar to phimosis in the male, if the prepuce in the female (the clitoral hood) is unable to retract, circumcision of the prepuce is a way to treat this condition. It's called a hoodectomy when it's done to a woman. Google it.

My clitoral hood is not retractable at all. But why in the world would I ever want to cut it off?? You don't need to retract it to have orgasms.

[mama24-7]

Originally Posted by Papai

Any actually, while there aren't many medically-necessary reasons for doing female circumcision on women, many women in the UNITED STATES are opting for it. Oh, they don't call it female circumcision though. They call it vaginal rejuvenation.

But it's the same thing as female circ: They trim the labia, trim the clitoral hood.

.................

sus

[Papai]

Originally Posted by Yulia_R

My clitoral hood is not retractable at all. But why in the world would I ever want to cut it off?? You don't need to retract it to have orgasms.

Some women say it's difficult to orgasm because of the irretractibility of the hood.

I'm sure it varies from person to person. Just like some males say they don't need to retract to have sex, while others don't get as much pleasure if they don't retract.

[phatchristy]

Originally Posted by Papai

Any actually, while there aren't many medically-necessary reasons for doing female circumcision on women, many women in the UNITED STATES are opting for it. Oh, they don't call it female circumcision though. They call it vaginal rejuvenation.

But it's the same thing as female circ: They trim the labia, trim the clitoral hood.

Actually, I think you're mixing it up with labioplasty--that is the trimming of the labia.

The vaginal rejuvenation is sort of the general term used for procedures associated with reducing the size of the vaginal walls/opening, etc.

[MCatLvrMom2A&X]

Originally Posted by Papai

Any actually, while there aren't many medically-necessary reasons for doing female circumcision on women, many women in the UNITED STATES are opting for it. Oh, they don't call it female circumcision though. They call it vaginal rejuvenation.

But it's the same thing as female circ: They trim the labia, trim the clitoral hood.

Not something I would choose to do but at least it is adult woman choosing to have body modifications done. I dont have a problem with that. Just like I dont have a problem with any other body mod that an adult wants to do.

Originally Posted by Yulia_R

My clitoral hood is not retractable at all. But why in the world would I ever want to cut it off?? You don't need to retract it to have orgasms.

I cannot stand to have mine moved back. : The nerve bundle under there is EXTREMELY sensitive my skin moving over it is all I can handle.

[Yulia_R]

Until a couple of months ago I had no idea that clitoral hood is normally retractable (I read it here, on MDC) . Mine is absolutely completely and totally sealed .

[Ron_Low]

"Is female circ ever medically necessary?"
- - - - -
Short answer: YES.

About 1 in 3000 adults can develop a condition called Balanitis Xerotica Obliterens (often coded as Lichen Schlerosis). This a scarring and hardening of the prepuce. The prepuce scratches uncomfortably at the glans. The first-line treatment is regular application of protopic ointment until symptoms go away.

In about a third of the cases, the condition does not respond to the ointment so a full or partial prepuce amputation is the only remaining remedy. That is, circumcision is a valid remedy for about 1 in 10,000 adults.
- - - - -
The above applies identically to males and females.

[MCatLvrMom2A&X]

I cant think of a single human body part that is infailable. Every part can have a condition of some sort requiring its removal or surgery to fix it. So yes there can be true medical reasons to do female circ. Just as there are true reasons to do male circ. But both are extremely rare. Some more so than others.

[Quirky]

Originally Posted by Sailor

I actually don't like the term female circumcision, although I know it's used, so maybe it's just my quirk. It just sounds so mild compared to what is actually being done to these women. I can't even think about the process before the anger takes over.

While I'm in complete and total agreement that a) the term circumcision should be done away with (for both males and females IMO) and that b) female genital cutting is totally wrong unless consented to by an adult, I just wanted to point out in case you're not aware that the vast majority of FGC victims are subjected to a cutting that's far less radical than the complete removal of the clitoris, labia, etc. and stitching together the remnant labia. Many if not most of them numerically speaking lose their clitoral hoods and perhaps part of their clitorises in a procedure that's far more analogous to infant male circ here.

Which is still not to excuse or condone it. Not at all.

But I do think that male circ gets a pass in this country because it's seen as "not as bad" as the worst types of FGC. And that objecting to the term circumcision as it applies to females (but not males) disguises the very real suffering of boys and men.

Even if you look at the coverage in otherwise very AP-oriented parenting magazines, columns, opinion pieces, etc., you can see that FGC is often treated as something that is always wrong, always harmful, and something to be eradicated by action by Americans (donations, etc. to anti-FGC groups). But male circ is still often viewed as something that is an individual parental choice that is legal and therefore not to be condemned in any blanket statements.

I just think a double standard like this is wrong. Either infant genital cutting is wrong, or it isn't. It doesn't matter about the degree of harm -- the mildest form of FGC takes less tissue than RIC as performed in this country. It doesn't matter if some children suffer more than others. It is a human rights violation, or it is a parental choice that's legit for whatever cultural reasons.

Anyway, I'm not accusing you of having a double standard -- just pointing out why I think that boys/men often lose out when FGC is seen as "more wrong" than MGC.

[Yulia_R]

Originally Posted by Quirky

I just think a double standard like this is wrong. Either infant genital cutting is wrong, or it isn't. It doesn't matter about the degree of harm -- the mildest form of FGC takes less tissue than RIC as performed in this country. It doesn't matter if some children suffer more than others. It is a human rights violation, or it is a parental choice that's legit for whatever cultural reasons.

:

[tutucrazy]

If one gets vulvaritis you could say that circ of the labia minor would remove the problem. Also true with removal of the hood for phimosis. Women's genitals encounter the same types of problems yet in our culture we find other ways to treat them without amputation. In cultures that circ girls, the answer to these "problems" is female circ. Exactly how we treat intact men int he US. Mind boggling!

[Belle]

My mom had something like this done. She wouldn't tell me any details about it.

[A&A]

I just wanted to point out that female circ was covered by Blue Shield (insurance company) until 1978.

[ColoradoMama]

Originally Posted by Quirky

I just think a double standard like this is wrong. Either infant genital cutting is wrong, or it isn't. It doesn't matter about the degree of harm -- the mildest form of FGC takes less tissue than RIC as performed in this country. It doesn't matter if some children suffer more than others. It is a human rights violation, or it is a parental choice that's legit for whatever cultural reasons.

I agree with this completely, but I would change the wording on one sentence - Either genital cutting on minors is wrong, or it isn't. Many "circumcisions" are performed on children who are not infants - it's routinely done on infants in the US, but on much older children in other parts of the world.

[tlh]

It's not necessary but girls are still having clitoral reductions to look "normal".And this is still going on after the FGM ban.


http://www.msmagazine.com/oct00/makingthecut.html