Multiculturalism

Run!

One thing I will point out is while there are some women that are trying to continue the practice, there are other women, in the same culture, that is trying to abolish the practice.In any specific culture, do you know the ratio of those who want to continue it verses those who want to abolish it?

Modulous posted this graph, which shows that there are several nations where a majority of women support FGM and several more where it's about evenly split. The majority of nations do have a majority who are opposed.As I've said before, nobody is more surprised than I am that so many women support FGM. What I find disturbing is that so many people over here want to disregard what the women say they feel and tell them how they really, really, really feel. It's a paternalistic attitude.

I've no idea why you should be surprised that some countries have a majority of women who support FGM. Until relatively recently all those countries would have done so - it's their tradition and culture; lousy though it is. No doubt had the Aztecs been polled they would have agreed with child sacrifice.None of that has any relevance.The issue is that some of these cultures have decided to make a home in countries that eschew these primitive practices and have laws to prevent them continuing with them. Which is beyond doubt, the correct position to take.

Because the propaganda, such as yours, suggests that there's only one side to the question. If it was beyond doubt, you wouldn'y keep coming back to repeat it.

Of course there is always more than one side to any question - in this case, the other sides are obviously wrong which is why there are no modern countries which support FGM and all are trying to eradicate it. I suppose I should have said beyond doubt of humane and reasonable people.Of course there are also those who find themselves stuck defending indefensible positions because they have a pigheaded, argumentative nature and can't be seen to back down on even the most obvious lost argument.No more comments from me on this for a while.

It isn't a question of countries supporting female circumcision. It's a question of respecting the opinions of the people who practice female circumcision. If those people choose to come over here, their cultural practices should not be automatically equivocated with "crimes". I don't think it's either reasonable or humane to imprison mothers for passing on cultural traditions to their daughters. I suggest a less insane approach to the situation.

Unless they actually are crimes. In which case they most certainly should be equivocated with crimes. You suggest nothing.

Sure, you can make something a crime, like drinking alcohol or smoking marijuana or sitting at a lunch counter while being black. That doesn't make it "wrong" and it doesn't justify prosecuting the "offenders". So your best comeback is, "Nuh uh." Really? How long did it take you to think that one up?Let's try that again: Do you have an intelligent response?

You said: "If those people choose to come over here, their cultural practices should not be automatically equivocated with "crimes"."And I said that if they are crimes then they should definitely be considered crimes.If a culture that practices human sacrifice migrates to a nation that considers killing people a crime, then their cultural practice would most definitely - and automatically - be a crime when they 'come over here'.The case with FGM is not much different. The main distinction is that most host countries didn't have laws against it before migrants from cultures that practiced it started forming large communities in those host countries.But that only speaks to the rationality of law in those countries: it is sensible only to legislate against practices that actually take place or threaten to take place. It's why we don't have speed limits for people riding magical bicycles through outer space or laws dictating acceptable use of the credit chip information implanted in nobody's wrist.But if (or when) we develop magical bicycles or technology that makes implanted financial information wide-spread, then we will probably see laws regulating those behaviors just like we see laws regarding FGM popping up in areas where the practice is occurring or threatening to occur. What do you suggest? So far, I haven't seen you suggest anything reasonable.

I've suggested not throwing the mothers in prison.

Suggesting not doing something to solve a problem is the same as suggesting nothing.As others have pointed out, your argument is an argument of nothing, and as such is worthless at addressing the very real problem of little girls having their genitalia mutilated and the lifelong medical problems this practice produces.

Don't be silly. Suggesting not owning slaves is suggesting nothing? Suggesting not having capital punishment is suggesting nothing? Suggesting that you stop hitting yourself in the head with a hammer is suggesting nothing? Come on. Say something intelligent. And those others have continually failed and/or neglected to explain how throwing the mothers in prison is a solution to that problem.I think that not digging the hole any deeper is part of the solution.

Your 'solution' solves no problems.It is disingenuous to compare it to ending slavery, capital punishment, or self-inflicted injury. Then you suggest a solution to the problem.

Your "solution" just adds more problems. I propose not adding more problems. I'm not comparing FGM to slavery, capital punishment, etc. I'm addressing your complaint that I've said "nothing". Speaking out against slavery is not nothing. Speaking out against capital punishment is not nothing. Speaking out against imprisoning mothers for passing on cultural traditions is not nothing.Are you in favour of imprisoning mothers who practice FGM? I am not.