or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Understanding Circumcision › Which do you think is more likely?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Which do you think is more likely?

post #1 of 8
Thread Starter 

Given that our Constitution calls for equal protection under the law,


And given the federal law against ALL forms of female genital cutting,


Which do you think is more likely:

    1) minor boys will get legal protection against all forms of male genital cutting


    2) some forms of genital cutting will be permited for minor girls?



My recent experience has been that more people seem willing to allow SOME forms of FGC, in order to keep their cultural beliefs regarding MGC, rather than examine our culture's penchant toward MGC objectively and conclude that all minors (both boys and girls) deserve genital integrity.



post #2 of 8

Well the AAP did try to change the FGM law last year to suggest that minor cutting be permitted in some cases for girls-- and it kinda blew up on them-- but they DID actually outline a new policy with the suggestion- to the point that it was final, approved, and published.  Thankfully, quickly retracted, but it is seriously scary and disappointing that it went that far to begin with.  (You can google AAP retracts female genital mutilation  or somethign similar to bring up more articles:  http://www.icgi.org/2010/06/aap-retracts-proposal-to-circumcise-girls/    http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/722840   )


I think 1 makes the most sense, of course.  No cutting for minors. Period.



post #3 of 8
Thread Starter 

Thanks for the reply, Jessica.


Yes, I agree that no genital cutting for minors seems like the most logical position.  But I am sometimes amazed by the mental hoops Americans are able to jump through in order to keep believing that genital cutting of girls is Bad, but genital cutting of boys is not big deal and a parental decision.

post #4 of 8

I hope all is made illegal. But that would have to include, eventually, the stopping of female ear piercing of infants too? (yes, I mutialted my baby girl too and now regret it dearly)

post #5 of 8
Moving this to TCAC since the Intactivism forum is for actionable posts, not just discusions. Thanks!
post #6 of 8
Thread Starter 

Oh, thank you!  You know, I was unsure of  which forum to put this in.  I guess I chose incorrectly.  That might explain why I got so few responses.


Anyone want to join the discussion now?

post #7 of 8
Thread Starter 

Polly Intactly, I did not pierce my daughter's ears.  But more out of a tradition of ear piercing being a "coming of age" thing for us, than awareness of body integrity issues.  Don't beat yourself up.  We do what we think is good, and when we know better, we do better.



post #8 of 8

Tis a difficult question to answer.  I do not think our culture is ready and willing to look at this issue honestly and understand and agree that gentital cutting is inappropriate for children - of all genders (male, female and intersexed).  I also do not think that our culture is ready to legalize female genital cutting.


The proposed San Francisco ballot initiative that would make circumcision of minor males was just rejected by a judge because the state cannot regulate medical procedures through a ballot initiative.  I do not know if there are plans to appeal that decision.  I think the San Francisco initiative has brought and will continue to bring necessary attention to the fact of our cultural hypocrisy.  I see the judges move as opening the door to testing the medical validity of circumcision.  The AAP does not recommend it and as far as I am aware, no medical organization in the world officially recommends it.  It is known as a cosmetic procedure.  Perhaps the way to turn the thinking of Americans on this issue is to teach them that this is a cosmetic procedure and that a child does not need cosmetic alteration.


I want to make a small correction to Jessica's comment above.  The AAP did not seek to change the federal law in regards to FGM, they sought to suggest that doctors offer a "ritual nick" to the clitoris in an effort to meet the cultural/religious requirement of FGM, thus sparing the child a more drastic cutting experience.  It was a position paper if I recall correctly.   It got a huge firestorm of protest.  Google it!  The reactions of people were quite strong against it.....yet the blinders remain firmly in place in regards to cutting boys.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Understanding Circumcision
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Understanding Circumcision › Which do you think is more likely?