Mothering Forum banner

1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,612 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
At work he is always talking about our AP/NFL ways. Everyone thinks we are crazy. Anyways, a co-worker's 13 month old son is having surgery to re-circumcise him. Dh was talking to someone else about it, and he was saying how we would never a circ if we had a boy. The girl said how horrible not-circing is, and how it would look weird...blah blah. DH said you know if your daughter was born in certain parts of the country her clitoris would be cut off. She said that's crazy! And he said...it's the same thing.<br><br>
I heart him. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/smile.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="smile"> My work is paying off. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/lol.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="lol">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,128 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Nanners</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/7233739"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">It's not the same thing, exactly, but good for your dh, all the same!</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
It is the same thing in that a part of a childs genitals are cut off without consent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,239 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>vermontgirl</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/7233895"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">It is the same thing in that a part of a childs genitals are cut off without consent.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Exactly. The amount of body part removed is irrelavent. Cutting any of the genitals off boy or girl is a violation of the childs right to have a whole and unaltered body.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,435 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Nanners</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/7233739"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">It's not the same thing, exactly, but good for your dh, all the same!</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Actually it is the same thing. Genital mutilation on an unconsenting person. Plus, the clitoris and foreskin are the most sensitive parts of the genitals so I consider them to be comparable. The only reason people in the US don't think they are "the same" is because we have a cultural horror of female mutilation and an cultural acceptance of male mutilation.<br><br>
Laura
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,757 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Sijae</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/7235528"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">Actually it is the same thing. Genital mutilation on an unconsenting person. Plus, the clitoris and foreskin are the most sensitive parts of the genitals so I consider them to be comparable. The only reason people in the US don't think they are "the same" is because we have a cultural horror of female mutilation and an cultural acceptance of male mutilation.<br><br>
Laura</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
<img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="/img/vbsmilies/smilies/yeahthat.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="yeah that">: And technically... FGM cuts off less than MGM does... especially the most common form of FGM. And the most common form doesn't even touch the actual clitoris, just the clitoral hood. Whereas the most common form of MGM cuts off the foreskin, the frenulum, AND the ridged band. Cultural conditioning indeed...<br><br>
I hate it when people devalue men's genitals... I'm glad my clitoral hood is still intact, but I shouldn't have had any more right to intact genitals than my brothers did and they both lost all three of those important parts of their genitals <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/greensad.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="greensad"> Maybe I'll discuss restoration with them when they're older (one's 18 and the other is 12).<br><br>
love and peace. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/love.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="love">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,612 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
I am just so proud of him for being so passionate about it. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/smile.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="smile">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
646 Posts
Good for your husband! That is so awesome that he's vocal about AP & keeping babies intact!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
309 Posts
I didn't say it was any less damaging. I just think that, as an intactivist, accuracy is important, if one doesn't want to be discounted by the mainstream. The prepuce of the female is the clitoral hood, the prepuce of the male is the foreskin. Most fgm removes the clitoris itself as well. Victims of fgm can never orgasm. Not so in cases of mgm, barring complications, of course.<br><br>
I'm as big an intactivist as anyone, so save your flaming. FGM and MGM just aren't the same, despite being equally reprehensible.<br><br>
The following is a quote from the fantastic article on FGM that appeared in Mothering mag's January/February issue...<br><br>
"Circumcision of baby boys in this country is mutilation as well, but it is not the same thing as FGM- it does not destroy their ability to experience orgasm, it does not affect their ability to impregnate, and it does not compromise the survival rates of their children."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,143 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Nanners</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/7237877"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">I didn't say it was any less damaging. I just think that, as an intactivist, accuracy is important, if one doesn't want to be discounted by the mainstream. The prepuce of the female is the clitoral hood, the prepuce of the male is the foreskin. Most fgm removes the clitoris itself as well. Victims of fgm can never orgasm. Not so in cases of mgm, barring complications, of course.</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
Not trying to flame, but this isn't true. The most common form if FGM removes only the female prepuce. Also, the shaft of the clitoris extends into the body, so even if the external portion is removed, pleasure can be obtained from it. Additionally, pleasure can be obtained from penetration. Many victims of FGM report good sex lives and orgasms and think there's nothing wrong with their genitals. Of course, they will never know how much better their sex lives and their orgasms would be if they were left alone.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,770 Posts
<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>Nanners</strong> <a href="/community/forum/post/7237877"><img alt="View Post" class="inlineimg" src="/community/img/forum/go_quote.gif" style="border:0px solid;"></a></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">The following is a quote from the fantastic article on FGM that appeared in Mothering mag's January/February issue...<br><br>
"Circumcision of baby boys in this country is mutilation as well, but it is not the same thing as FGM- it does not destroy their ability to experience orgasm, it does not affect their ability to impregnate, and it does not compromise the survival rates of their children."</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
And what exactly is her source for this? I thought that this otherwise well-done article really fell down in minimizing the harms of male circ. There are many boys and men in this country who have, indeed, lost their ability to experience orgasm and have a normal sex life and who therefore can't impregnate women, and therefore have no children whose survival can be affected. Some boys die of circ every year.<br><br>
And that's not even discussing the numbers of boys in other countries who die every year because of circ, or are permanently sexually damaged. It's not just females who suffer from extreme forms of genital mutilation.<br><br>
There is just no need to maximize the horrors of FGM by minimizing the horrors of MGM, or vice versa. Both are sexual assault, both are disfiguring
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
929 Posts
<span style="color:#800080;">A collection of posts about FGM I've collected over the last year or so. As far as I'm concerned, genital cutting is genital cutting whether it's done to males or females, the way it is viewed is entirely cultural. From where I'm standing there is no difference.</span><br><br><br><a href="http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/30/150.html" target="_blank">http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/30/150.html</a><br><a href="http://www.irinnews.org/report.asp?ReportID=46151&SelectRegion=West_Africa&SelectCountry=SIERRA_LEONE" target="_blank">http://www.irinnews.org/report.asp?R...y=SIERRA_LEONE</a><br><br><a href="http://www.who.int/reproductive-health/publications/fgm/fgm_programmes_review.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.who.int/reproductive-heal...mes_review.pdf</a><br><i>"The three overlapping reasons for the practice at<br>
the center of figure 1 - spiritual and religious reasons, sociological reasons, and hygienic and<br>
aesthetic reasons - seem to indoctrinate society into the practice without explicitly addressing<br>
women’s sexuality. According to these reasons, the clitoris and external genitalia are<br>
believed to be ugly and dirty, and if not excised can grow to unsightly proportions. In<br>
addition, they are purported to make women spiritually unclean. Their removal is thus<br>
required by religion."<br>
"Like other social behaviours, the practice of FGM derives from varied and complex<br>
belief systems. It is tempting to simplify matters by isolating a piece of the behaviour and<br>
explaining it as a separate item, for example, “FGM has negative health consequences”. Yet<br>
it is crucial to see the big picture - the connections among all aspects of the behaviour. The<br>
challenge of taking the whole picture into consideration may seem daunting, but social<br>
behaviour involves a vast range of influences - defined by culture. Culture acts as a lens or<br>
filter through which people view, understand, and interpret the world. Each culture is<br>
selective in what is filtered out and what reaches the human consciousness. Some things may<br>
pass unchanged (basic human needs) while others may undergo subtle shifts in emphasis.<br>
The filter effect of culture has great importance for health communication programmes."</i><br><br>
If you look at the opinions from people actually IN the culture, the reasons for doing it are astoundingly similar to those for male circumcision:<br><a href="http://www.h-net.org/~africa/sources/clitorodectomy.html" target="_blank">http://www.h-net.org/~africa/sources...rodectomy.html</a><br><br>
If someone has not been brought up in a cutting culture and has not been culturally conditioned to accept it, like 85% of the world, there is no difference in principle between MGM and FGM, just a question of scale of damage.<br><br>
People of the US defend their cultural practice to their last breath, so do Africans.<br><br>
People who value genity integrity will be fighting BOTH practices.<br><br>
---------------------------------------------<br>
This is an excellent paper, comparing FGM,and MGM and comparing Western and African attitudes to it.<br><br>
Global Jurist Frontiers<br>
Volume 4, Issue 2 2004 Article 3<br>
Hegemonic Human Rights and African Resistance: Female Circumcision in a Broader Comparative Perspective<br>
Elisabetta Grande<br><br>
Abstract The issue of Female Circumcision is usually discussed in the framework of extreme human rights violations victimizing non western women. This paper questions this approach by broadly comparing Female Circumcision with similar “cutting” practices routinely performed in Western societies. An integrative approach to comparative law is suggested in order to understand phenomena in context and to avoid ethnocentrism.<br>
KEYWORDS: Human Rights, Hegemony, Female Circumcision, Breast Augmentation, Male Circumcision, Comparative Law<br><br>
"Only a serious and comprehensive approach towards all modifications of sexual organs, African and Western, “theirs” as well as “ours”, using a single, not a double, standard to evaluate all body modifications related to human sexual apparatus, will make the human rights discourse on sexual organs’ modifications or mutilations (whatever we want to call them) less imperialistic, more effective and less assimilating. A more inclusive notion of human rights, a notion that includes “us”- the Westerners- as well as “them” -the “Others” -, serves, indeed, to reduce hypocrisy and gives credibility to the “human rights spirit”9<br><br>
"1) In Italy and the U.S., M.C. is routinely performed, for no therapeutic reason, in public hospitals right after the baby is born (in the second mentioned country to the extent of at least 60 % of the newborn male population 10) and it is a practice that the law fully accepts. M.C., as everyone knows, consists of removing the foreskin or prepuce, the natural sheath of skin that covers the penis. In the same two countries, however, F.C., even the less extreme of its forms, the so called Sunnah circumcision, is outlawed and criminally sanctioned11. Sunnah circumcision, as very few would know, in its mildest expression is a largely symbolic circumcision that entails a small cut in the prepuce (the hood above a girl’s clitoris). It removes no tissue and leaves only a small scar. It is far less invasive than M.C.. Nevertheless, proposals by doctors at medical centers in the two countries that sought to perform this light form of F.C. at parents’ request (or even with the girl’s informed consent) have produced a major uproar of the anti- F.C. movements and have been deemed unacceptable by the law itself."<br><br>
"According to the WHO’s classification, F.C. ranges from the very mild form of Sunnah, to the most radical practice of infibulation (also known as Pharaonic circumcision). According to the same source, however, the latter practice --which involves the complete removal of the clitoris, labia minora, and part or all of the labia majora, then suturing to narrow the vaginal introitus-- accounts for only 15% of all F.C.. Sunnah F.C. in its various forms (total or partial removal of the prepuce), excision (that involves excision of the prepuce with excision of part or all of the clitoris) – and clitoridectomy (excision of the prepuce and clitoris together with partial or total excision of the labia minora) account for the rest"<br><br>
"Acknowledging that it is with a great approximation that we can address F.C. as a unitary category, it seems that many forms of F.C., with the sure exception of infibulation, if performed in the same non-septic, safe and hygienic setting of a good hospital, would not entail greater health risks in terms of shortterm and long-term complications than M.C. or B.A. 14. Surgery routinely performed in our countries in case of congenital adrenal hyperplasia, i.e. cliteridectomy for those newborns who have been labelled “intersex babies” -- while incidentally raising the question regarding why we can blamelessly satisfy our social sexual taxonomy by a genital organ removal--, can prove at least the medical point15."<br><br><a href="http://www.bepress.com/gj/frontiers/vol4/iss2/art3/" target="_blank">http://www.bepress.com/gj/frontiers/vol4/iss2/art3/</a><br>
The article is available for viewing if you log on as Guest.<br>
It is very powerful, and explains why the West has picked on female circumcision for eradication and yet has a double standard with regards to male.<br><br>
--------------------------------------------------------<br>
I don't think anyone would argue about the damage that infibulation causes, BUT only 15% of female circs are of that kind. The rest are much less invasive, and cause less damage than a male circ. Why the double standard?<br><br>
The people in those cultures defend their practices as being beneficial to themselves, as the WHO document admits - it's no good rampaging around talking about harm if you don't address the whole cultural issue, because they won't believe you, any more than you believe someone who does not come from your culture and tells you that cutting little boys penises is wrong.<br><br><a href="http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3876/is_199803/ai_n8794629" target="_blank">http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...03/ai_n8794629</a><br><a href="http://www.arches.uga.edu/~haneydaw/twwh/fgm.html#why" target="_blank">http://www.arches.uga.edu/~haneydaw/twwh/fgm.html#why</a><br><br>
The people who practice FGM do it because they feel it's beneficial, and it's overwhelmingly women who want it. Consent is irrelevant, yes the girls are of an age where they could give consent - but most of them have no idea what's going to happen to them, and if they did they have no choice anyway - like little boys in the USA.<br><br>
---------------------------------------<br><br><a href="http://www.state.gov/g/wi/rls/rep/crfgm/10102.htm" target="_blank">http://www.state.gov/g/wi/rls/rep/crfgm/10102.htm</a><br>
That's from the State Dept.<br><br>
----------------------------------------<br><a href="http://tinyurl.com/gb4ol" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/gb4ol</a><br><a href="http://www.law.duke.edu/journals/dlj/articles/dlj47p717.htm" target="_blank">http://www.law.duke.edu/journals/dlj.../dlj47p717.htm</a><br>
Interesting article. What happened when a Seattle clinic wanted to introduce a new income stream by doing mild FGM as a service to immigrants. It would have removed less tissue than MGM, American hypocrisy at it's finest.<br><br><a href="http://tinyurl.com/h7akm" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/h7akm</a><br><a href="http://law.case.edu/student_life/journals/health_matrix/11-2/59105.pdf" target="_blank">http://law.case.edu/student_life/jou...11-2/59105.pdf</a><br>
Another interesting paper.<br><br>
------------------------------------------<br><a href="http://tinyurl.com/hxxtu" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/hxxtu</a><br><a href="http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/01/12/1073877760147.html" target="_blank">http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/...877760147.html</a><br>
In the cut - FGM in Indonesia, hospital circs.<br><br>
----------------------------------------------<br><br>
Circumcised women also state that they are happy with their sex lives and find that they orgasm just as well as intact women.<br><br><br>
Female circumcision does not reduce sexual activity<br><br>
* 12:30 24 September 2002<br>
* NewScientist.com news service<br><a href="http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2837" target="_blank">http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn2837</a><br><a href="http://tinyurl.com/gpo65" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/gpo65</a><br><br><br>
Genital Cutting May Alter, Rather Than Eliminate, Women's Sexual Sensations<br><a href="http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/2905103.html" target="_blank">http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/2905103.html</a><br><a href="http://tinyurl.com/hn96l" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/hn96l</a><br><br><br>
The Sexual Experience and Marital Adjustment of Genitally Circumcised and Infibulated Females in The Sudan<br>
The Journal of Sex Research Vol.26. No.3, pp.375-392 August, 1989<br><a href="http://www.fgmnetwork.org/authors/Lightfoot-klein/sexualexperience.htm" target="_blank">http://www.fgmnetwork.org/authors/Li...experience.htm</a><br><a href="http://tinyurl.com/z4sl5" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/z4sl5</a><br><br>
----------------------------------------------------------<br><br>
BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology<br>
Volume 109 Page 1089 - October 2002<br>
doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2002.01550.x<br>
Volume 109 Issue 10<br><br><br>
The association between female genital cutting and correlates of sexual and gynaecological morbidity in Edo State, Nigeria<br>
F.E. Okonofuaa,b,*, U. Larsenc, F. Oronsayea, R.C. Snowd, T.E. Slangerd<br><br>
Objective To examine the association between female genital cutting and frequency of sexual and gynaecological symptoms among a cohort of cut versus uncut women in Edo State of Nigeria.<br><br>
Design Cross sectional study.<br><br>
Setting Women attending family planning and antenatal clinics at three hospitals in Edo State, South–south Nigeria.<br><br>
Population 1836 healthy premenopausal women.<br><br>
Methods The sample included 1836 women. Information about type of female genital cutting was based on medical exams while a structured questionnaire was used to elicit information on the women's socio-demographic characteristics, their ages of first menstruation (menarche), first intercourse, marriage and pregnancy, sexual history and experiences of symptoms of reproductive tract infections. Associations between female genital cutting and these correlates of sexual and gynaecologic morbidity were analysed using univariate and multivariate logistic regression and Cox models.<br><br>
Main outcome measures Frequency of self-reported orgasm achieved during sexual intercourse and symptoms of reproductive tract infections.<br><br>
Results Forty-five percent were circumcised and 71% had type 1, while 24% had type 2 female genital cutting. No significant differences between cut and uncut women were observed in the frequency of reports of sexual intercourse in the preceding week or month, the frequency of reports of early arousal during intercourse and the proportions reporting experience of orgasm during intercourse. There was also no difference between cut and uncut women in their reported ages of menarche, first intercourse or first marriage in the multivariate models controlling for the effects of socio-economic factors. In contrast, cut women were 1.25 times more likely to get pregnant at a given age than uncut women. Uncut women were significantly more likely to report that the clitoris is the most sexually sensitive part of their body (OR = 0.35, 95% CI = 0.26–0.47), while cut women were more likely to report that their breasts are their most sexually sensitive body parts (OR = 1.91; 95% CI = 1.51–2.42). Cut women were significantly more likely than uncut women to report having lower abdominal pain (OR = 1.54, 95% CI = 1.11–2.14), yellow bad-smelling vaginal discharge (OR = 2.81, 95% CI = 1.54–5.09), white vaginal discharge (OR = 1.65, 95% CI = 1.09–2.49) and genital ulcers (OR = 4.38, 95% CI = 1.13–17.00).<br><br>
Conclusion Female genital cutting in this group of women did not attenuate sexual feelings. However, female genital cutting may predispose women to adverse sexuality outcomes including early pregnancy and reproductive tract infections. Therefore, female genital cutting cannot be justified by arguments that suggest that it reduces sexual activity in women and prevents adverse outcomes of sexuality.<br><br>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,232 Posts
I see no difference in MGM and FMG either. Genital Mutilation is genital mutilation regardless of gender.<br><br>
A lot of men also lose their frenulum too....wouldn't that be the same as the clitoris?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,239 Posts
From what I have read woman who have had even the most extreme form of FGM were able to orgasim. Whether the orgasim they experience is close to the same as a woman who hasnt had FGM I dont know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,658 Posts
Yes, a large portion of the clitoris is internal. Anyone who says the entire clitoris is removed in FGM is ignorant or lying (no offense, Nanners, we're all ignorant to start).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,757 Posts
A classic repost from Frankly Speaking (remember he's talking FUNCTIONAL equivalent) :<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">The equivalents of male circumcision in females:<br><br>
For a female circumcision to be the functional equivalent of male circumcision, the following would have to be removed:<br><br>
(1) The clitoris - The clitoris is the tactile sensory equivalent of the frenulum which is always disabled or removed during circumicison.<br><br>
(2) The labia minora, the inner surfaces of the labia major - These are the equivalent of the mucosal surfaces of the inner foreskin.<br><br>
(3) The clitoral hood - The equivalent of the foreskin<br><br>
(4) The vaginal sphincter - The equivalent male part is the preputial sphincter which is always removed. Both parts respond to stretching stimulus<br><br>
(5) Finally, the vulva would have to be laid open to dry out and receive abrasion from clothing as the circumcised glans does significantly desensitizing it.<br><br>
In either sex, they would be left with a single sensory receptor organ, the one that provides pressure sensory reception. In the male, that's the glans and in the female it is the G-Spot. In either sex, it provides sufficient sensory input to provide an orgasm but nothing more. In both sexes, this would remove significant pleasure without preventing reproduction and as shown in the Hanny Lightfoot Klein link above, both sexes who have had these organs removed report a satisfying sex life. Male circumcision is more like Female circumcision than any of us would like to know. We condemn them because that's their cultural custom while we support our own form of the same thing simply because it's our cultural custom.<br><br><br><br>
Frank</td>
</tr></table></div>
love and peace. <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/love.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="love">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
646 Posts
Can I just say that I find it rude to completely hijack a thread like this? The OP just wanted to state how proud she was of her husband, and now people are having debates on whether FGM and MGM are the same...could we get back to the OP and tell her how great her husband is for trying to further the anti-circumcision cause and move all of the FGM/MGM debate to another thread?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
550 Posts
I love that all of you here are so passionate about this issue <img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/smile.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="smile"><br><br>
To the OP, your dh did great!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,658 Posts
<img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/shrug.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="shrug"> Ask the OP if she minded, it's easy enough to just say "and now, back to topic". I never mind when my threads veer, it keeps life interesting.<br><br>
Are you cool, Dani? (And yes, your dh rocks!)
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top