Human rights, cultural diversity, and moral relativity

brennakimi responds to me:

quote:

---

you're just feeling threatened by the impending doom of the knife

---

When was it established that I wasn't circumcized?Is there a particular reason why you're obsessing over the status of my penis? I'm not going to have sex with you, brennakimi, so please stop asking.

quote:

---

it's not that men survive the procedure. that's not my claim. your claim is that this causes a fatal injury. it clearly does not.

---

(*blink!*)You did not just say that, did you?Nobody dies from MGM? Is that your final answer?

quote:

---

my complaint is that fgm always creates an unhealable wound.

---

Except that isn't true.No wonder we're having trouble. You're making shit up.

quote:

---

you keep making vague claims about mass genocide

---

Where did I say "genocide"? I simply said that boys die from MGM and that because so many males in the world have been mutilated, the number of males who die from MGM surpasses the number of women who undergo FGM.No wonder we're having trouble. You're making shit up.

quote:

---

using the same word to describe inequivalent things is unnecessarily confusing to the public.

---

Men and women both have their genitals mutilated and die from the procedure. The only way they can be considered "inequivalent" is if the life of a man is not equivalent to the life of a woman.

quote:

---

see this magical thing we have the capability to express? degree.

---

And since both men and women die from having their genitals mutilated, it must be that the death of a male doesn't have the same degree of barbarism as the death of a female.

quote:

---

e. the problem here is that you think i'm all warm and squishy about circumcision.

---

Not at all.I think you just don't care. After all, take a look at the language you've been using: "Tiny little bit of flesh." "It clearly does not [cause a fatal injury]."

quote:

---

i just take issue with the equivalency of the term.

---

Well, since men die from the procedure, the only way to complain about equivalizing must be because a dead man doesn't rise to the level of a dead woman.

quote:

---

it saves me a lot of work.

---

Yes, I'm sure pulling things out of your ass is pretty simple.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

molbiogirl responds to me:

quote:

---

I cited my stat.

​

Care to cite yours?

---

I did.In the very post you responded to.I even pointed out that your citations contradicted each other.You did read the post, did you not?

quote:

---

As for your other stat (5%), please provide the cite.

---

I did.In the very sentence that mentioned the 5%.You did read the post, did you not?

quote:

---

I most certainly am not implying that FGM is a "huge" problem here in the U.S.

---

Did you or did you not say: Which is it, molbiogirl? Are they bringing their traditions with them or aren't they?

quote:

---

You're projecting, Rrhain.

---

Right. You can't read a full sentence or remember your own words and I'm the one projecting....

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

brennakimi writes:

quote:

---

done properly, the flesh is cut, not torn.

---

Considering that in infants, the prepuce has not separated from the glans, exactly how do you think they retract it in order to cut it off?Be specific.

quote:

---

along with proper anesthesia.

---

Incorrect.In Western infant MGM, no anesthesia is used because of the risk of death. You have to strap him down.

quote:

---

this is why they can't possibly be properly done to infants... people won't anesthetize infants.

---

And yet, that's exactly what happens here in the West.So if there's no way it can possibly be done properly, why do you keep saying that it's just a "tiny little bit of flesh"?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

brennakimi responds to me:

quote:

---

typical refers to most common complications,not complications that are common.

---

Indeed...but how many men undergo MGM?Give us a number of men who need to die in order for you to care.

quote:

---

that's why people get their sons circumcised. cosmetic reasons.

---

Except for those cultures where it gets done because if you don't, you won't go to heaven...or those cultures where it gets done because if you don't, you won't be considered a man...or those cultures where it gets done as a cure for masturbation...or those cultures where it gets done because people have been told it stops penile cancer...or those cultures where it gets done because mommy doesn't like the look of an unmutilated penis...or those cultures where it gets done....

quote:

---

a procedure performed safely in large numbers

---

Flayed alive...exactly how is that done "safely"?

quote:

---

with a limited relative number of people suffering any kind of negative complications whatsoever,

---

...except for those ulcers from not having a mucosal covering for the glans.

quote:

---

which is intended, currently to reduce exposure to disease

---

Except the number of penile cancer cases is vanishingly small and has no real connection to circumcision.

quote:

---

or improve appearance

---

Don't you think he should have the right to determine what his penis looks like and not his mother?

quote:

---

and ease of cleaning

---

Huh? How hard do you think it is to clean a penis?

quote:

---

is very different in degree and idea from a practice which is relatively very dangerous

---

You mean like the deaths from MGM?

quote:

---

causes relatively high numbers of negative complications

---

Like MGM?

quote:

---

and is intended to control the sexuality of a whole half of humanity.

---

Like MGM?Why on earth do you think it became so common in the US? It was considered a cure for masturbation.

quote:

---

my only complaint is that the two should not have synonymous designations. they are not, in any way, congruent.

---

Hmmm...dead boy...dead girl.If they're not congruent, it must because his life wasn't as valuable as hers.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

brennakimi responds to me:

quote:

---

it's not common if less than 1% of people suffer from it.

---

Why does it matter? Since so many men go through it, it is common enough.

quote:

---

death is very rare.

---

Did you or did you not say: Well, which is it? Are you basing your argument on the fact that men survive the procedure or are you not?If we medicalize FGM the way we medicalize other gential surgeries, would that make it OK?And if not, why does that make MGM OK? And if not, then how does MGM differ?And by the way...it isn't as rare as you make it out to be.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

brennakimi responds to me:

quote:

---

i said done properly. why aren't you reading?

---

And as I said directly to that statement the last three times you tried to make it: How does one "properly" flay someone alive?

quote:

---

i've said fifty times that even most cosmetic procedures cannot properly be done on a person unable to consent.

---

And what makes you think most men consent to this? When you won't get into heaven, when you won't become a man, when your an infant and your mother decides she doesn't like "icky foreskin," how is anybody able to make a free choice?

quote:

---

you cannot properly circumcise and infant.

---

So since up to 90% of US males have their genitals mutilated as infants and we can't find a single case of someone who has undergone FGM here in the US, why did we pass a law banning FGM but not MGM?Y'see, brennakimi, the only men who undergo anesthesia while having their genitals mutilated are those adult men in the West who do it for reasons such as religious conversion or medical necessity. They make up a tiny percentage of the total number of men who have had their genitals mutilated. The rest have it done when their an infant and can't fight back or without anesthesia when they're older because that's what proves that their men: Being able to gut the pain.

quote:

---

it can be done properly

---

But it isn't. Yes, it is theoretically possible to wait until a man is an adult and have him undergo surgery, but that hardly ever happens. And then, it becomes a much more complicated surgery since the skin is now much larger, has more blood vessels, and is more highly ennervated.

quote:

---

in much of the rest of the world, it's at least done to adolescents

---

Without anesthesia and the risk of major complications becomes much larger because the genitals are much more developed.

quote:

---

and, when done properly

---

How does one cut off the prepuce with a piece of glass "properly"?You don't really know anything about circumcision practices, do you? The only men who get to have an actual scalpel taken to them are infants who must be flayed alive.

quote:

---

it is just a tiny piece of flesh.

---

And the clitoris is even smaller. What does the size have to do with anything?

quote:

---

the problems then are associated with reduced standards of medical care.

---

So if it were medicalized, it'd be OK?

quote:

---

if they changed fgm to a consentual procedure done on adults in a clean environment and banned infibulation, which is inherently harmful, only allowing fgm1 (which i don't really consider qualifying as fgm) then i would have no problems with it.

---

Really?Yet another place where we differ. We don't allow people to cut their arms off. Why would we let them cut their genitals off?No, "religious freedom" doesn't cut it. We wouldn't let people to cut their arms off for religious reasons. Why would we let them cut their genitals off?

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

brennakimi responds to me:

quote:

---

11.4% of heart surgery patients died from their surgery in an nyu study of death rates due to complications.

---

Logical error: Strawman, false analogy.People who undergo heart surgery are doing so because they will die if they don't. Men who undergo MGM have no life-threatening disease or disorder.

quote:

---

quote:

---

or those cultures where it gets done because mommy doesn't like the look of an unmutilated penis

---

​

that sounds like a cosmetic reason.

---

So if daddy thinks his little girl would look better without her breasts (and since she stands a good chance of dying from breast cancer), we should allow infant girls to have radical mastectomies.Since when do I get to force you to undergo surgery?

quote:

---

these are used to defend the procedure along with claims it reduces exposure to aids. they are generally not used as reasons to get it done.

---

Oh, no? They're debating right now whether or not to start a campaign of MGM in Africa to help stop the spread of HIV.

quote:

---

in these cultures, it's generally done when the men are old enough to consent.

---

Right: Don't get it done and you'll never be a man. That's not coerced in any way.

quote:

---

i hope you aren't referring to jews, because they don't exactly believe in heaven.

---

(*chuckle*)As if that makes a difference.

quote:

---

and muslims? their view of circumcision is mixed.

---

So why do they do it?

quote:

---

christians mostly do it for cosmetic reasons.

---

No, Christians mostly do it because the doctor tells the parents they should get it done...sometimes to the point of doing it without the consent of the parents.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Flayed alive

---

​

appeal to emotion.

---

You mean the prepuce has separated from the glans?What other term would you use for the forcible stripping of skin from the body? For someone who has been going on and on about not using confusing terms, what is the English word for peeling the skin off of a body?

quote:

---

quote:

---

except for those ulcers from not having a mucosal covering for the glans.

---

​

which, again, are unbelievably rare.

---

Incorrect. Pretty much every man has one at some time or another. Quite common at puberty. I'm pretty sure you can imagine why.

quote:

---

which is why they treat penile cancer with circumcision?

---

Yes. When you have had your baby, the doctor comes in and pressures the parents to have their son circumcized claiming that by doing so, they'll reduce the risk of penile cancer. By this logic, infant girls should have radical mastectomies to reduce the risk of breast cancer. It's much more likely a woman will come down with breast cancer than a man will come down with penile cancer. In fact, a man is more likely to come down with breast cancer than penile cancer, so we should have all infant boys undergo a radical mastectomy, too.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Huh? How hard do you think it is to clean a penis

---

​

it's not. but some people cite this as a concern

---

And just because people cite it as a concern, that makes it a legitimate reason? Some people claim that evolution is a crock...do we listen to them? Since it is obvious by simple inspection that the idea that it is "harder to clean an uncircumcised penis" is untrue, why do the doctors continue to tell parents this as a reason to mutilate their sons?

quote:

---

it might be very difficult to clean the penis of another person, especially one who tends to get poop smeared under his junk.

---

What part of "the prepuce hasn't separated from the glans" are you having trouble remembering? You can't clean "under" something when there is no "under."And let's not play dumb: If it can be retracted, it isn't difficult to clean. By your logic, it is "difficult" to clean between a baby's fingers.

quote:

---

should we ban heart surgery because 6-11% of people die from it?

---

Logical error: Strawman, false analogy.People who undergo heart surgery are doing so because they will die if they don't. Men who undergo MGM have no life-threatening disease or disorder.

quote:

---

it's because the procedures are not equivalent. period.

---

Dead male. Dead female.If they're not equivalent, it must be because his life isn't as valuable as hers.

quote:

---

and we're not just talking about the risks to women. there is an added risk to any children a woman who has been infibrulated may have.

---

I have never denied any such. You seem to be stuck in the attitude that if something that happens to a man is considered bad, that somehow reduces the horrendousness of it when it happens to a woman.

quote:

---

do you see that we're not talking about equivalent procedures yet?

---

Dead male. Dead female.If they're not equivalent, it must be because his life isn't as valuable as hers.

quote:

---

it doesn't really matter whether more men die of circumcision than women.

---

Indeed.It only matters that they're dead.Dead male. Dead female.If they're not equivalent, it must be because his life isn't as valuable as hers.

quote:

---

i'm talk talking about defending women at the expense of men.

---

See, and I don't see why the sex of the people has anything to do with it. Dead male. Dead female. Neither one needed to die.

quote:

---

i'm talking about the fact that it's dishonest to use terminology that suggests equivalence when the procedures are CLEARLY NOT EQUIVALENT.

---

Dead male. Dead female.If they're not equivalent, it must be because his life isn't as valuable as hers.

quote:

---

i'm concerned with the truthfulness of terminology

---

And yet you seem to be incapable of using the term "flaying" to describe the forcible removal of skin from the body.Somehow, I don't think "truthfulness of terminology" is really what's driving you.

quote:

---

and you think i like bathing in the blood of sacrificed baby boys.

---

Incorrect.As I directly stated to you the last time you tried to say this, I simply think you don't care.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Silent H writes:

quote:

---

Thus a guy who played football all high school, and so knows the game, can grow up to be the 45 yo Armchair Quarterback saying how easy it would have been for him to have made the right play.

---

Hmmm...maybe it is a case of you just don't know the idiom.What you describe is called "Monday morning quarterbacking."The distinction is that an "armchair quarterback" doesn't know what he's talking about. The "armchair" being a designation of lack of practical experience: The procalamations come from sitting in one's armchair and thinking about it, not by actually doing the work to find out if those ruminations have any bearing on reality. This was a major flaw of Aristotelian physics: The denigration of physical experimental evidence in favor of thought experiments.A "Monday morning quarterback," regardless of whether or not he knows anything, is using hindsight (complaining about the Sunday game on Monday) and extra information. Since he watched the game on the TV, he had the benefit of the skyview and was able to see the onrushing defensive tackle coming up the quarterback's blind spot.Perhaps we should move away from the attempt to use a metaphor with the word "quarterback." Perhaps what you're trying to say is that someone is speaking outside his field of expertise or is trying to relive past glory.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

brennakimi responds to me:

quote:

---

except that you claimed that more men die of circumcision than women who suffer fgm and i demonstrated that that's not true.

---

Well, no, you didn't. You assumed the experience in the West can be generalized to the world at large. Your numbers are vast underestimates. And even the numbers from the West are underestimates as cause of death is usually given as something else. F'rinstance, JAMA reports a case of death from tuberculosis but the actual cause was the circumcision...the baby died from the tuberculosis but never would have contracted it if he had never been circumcised. The New York Academy of Medicine has similar findings.

quote:

---

if the procedure is limited from infibulation and is done in medicalized, safe environments to individuals capable of and who have given consent, i cannot argue with it beyond "i don't think it's the right thing to do".

---

See, I can. We don't allow people to mutilate other parts of people's bodies, so why should there be special pleading for the genitals? Body Identity Integrity Disorder is a psychiatric illness where people want to have their limbs amputated. If it's a psychiatric problem to want to cut your arm off, why the special pleading for the genitals?

quote:

---

what isn't? death by circumcision? then find me a better source.

---

That's part of the problem: We don't keep good records. And the rest of the world is even worse. You continually project Western outcomes upon the rest of the world.

quote:

---

but it has to be one that doesn't use your genocidal language

---

Since the word "genocide" has yet to be introduced except by you, one has to assume that the problem is that you won't accept any evidence that contradicts you.Gairdner shows your one in 500,000 is off by a factor of at least a thousand. And that was in the UK. It's what caused the UK to stop routine MGM. Too many boys were dying.Part of the problem with trying to come up with a death rate from circumcision is that nobody keeps records of it. The cause of death is from the hemorrhage and/or infection that follows.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

brennakimi responds to me:

quote:

---

just because something is done wrongly doesn't mean it can't be done correctly.

---

How does someone flay a person alive "correctly"?

quote:

---

quote:

---

And the clitoris is even smaller. What does the size have to do with anything?

---

​

you haven't been paying attention. we're not talking about just the clitoris. only 5% of women undergoing fgm have only their prepuce or clitoris removed.

---

And thus, we show that you haven't been paying attention. I asked you a direct question:What does the size have to do with anything?

quote:

---

with proper medical care, a ban on infibulation, and a consenting adult recipient, i can't condemn it any more than modern labioplasty or vaginoplasty.

---

You don't understand the difference between reconstructive surgery and excision?We don't let people cut their arms off simply because they want to. Why the special pleading for the genitals?And since the decision to remove the genitals is overwhelmingly made by someone other than the owner of the genitals, this entire part of the discussion is irrelevant. How many people do you know who would voluntarily remove their genitals compared to those who had theirs removed?

quote:

---

the last one is clearly an example of non-consent.

---

So how does one consent to this? Why would somebody cut off perfectly functioning, non-diseased genitalia?

quote:

---

we do let people do other cosmetic procedures to their genitals.

---

Do you truly not understand the difference between cosmetic surgery and excision? The people who want to have their limbs cut off see it as cosmetic, but we don't let them do it because it is much more than cosmetic.

quote:

---

just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean you get to ban it.

---

Then why aren't you fighting to repeal the laws against FGM? They don't criminalize unsanitary methods or the coercion. They criminalize the act in and of itself.18 USCA 116: Illinois, Minnesota, Rhode Island, and Tennessee have outright banned the practice on both girls and women. In Illinois, it's a class X felony punishable by a stint in jail of 6-30 years.In the other 12 states that have laws, it is illegal to carry out the procedure on minors for any reason other than medical necessity. Parental directive is not a defense and the parents who make such a directive are liable, too.So I'm sure you want to have those laws changed. So long as it is a medicalized procedure, parents should be allowed to have their daughter's clitoris removed.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

brennakimi responds to me:

quote:

---

no, remember my whole discussion of consent?

---

Do you remember my response? How does one consent to this?

quote:

---

but it's really not why people do it. it may become why people do it, but generally it isn't currently.

---

And cosmetic isn't really why people do it now. You don't know the history of circumcision in the West, do you? It was considered a cure for everything under the sun from masturbation to insanity to epilepsy to prostate cancer. That last was in 1965(!)

quote:

---

it does because i'm unaware of anyone who believes they won't go to heaven if they aren't circumcised.

---

Just because you don't know of them doesn't mean they don't exist.

quote:

---

quote:

---

So why do they do it?

---

​

not all of them do.

---

That doesn't answer the question. Let's try again:Why do they do it?Hint: Does the word "sunna" mean anything to you?

quote:

---

ok, so that's a non-consenting medical procedure. great. i've already discussed that.

---

So if we've established that it practically never happens by consent, I'm at a loss as to why you keep talking about "tiny little bit of flesh." Why, when the US outlawed FGM of any sort carried out on any female minor despite the fact that we have never found a case of it happening here in the US, didn't they decide to follow the Fourteenth Amendment and grant equal protection under the law for males?

quote:

---

then why are complications listed as less than 1%?

---

Because your stats are wrong. Did it not occur to you that perhaps your information is wrong? The complication rate is much higher than that. Part of the problem is that circumcision is considered so routine that when complications do arise, they aren't connected to the circumcision. When your baby comes down with encephalitis, tuberculosis, staph, etc., the cause of death is listed as the infection. But the only reason the baby was infected in the first place is because of the circumcision.With more than 10% of males who are circumcised needing to have a second operation to correct the mistakes of the first one, what does that tell you? Oh, but those aren't considered "complications" because they're considered part of the first mutilation.

quote:

---

and, i know you don't want to hear this, but i've never been circumcised (and i don't have a penis) and i often get ulcers on my genitals. well. they're actually cystic acne. and guess when it started? bingo, puberty. guess what causes it. sebum. ewwwww. same crap that causes it on my fucking face. so. prove to me that circumcision causes these horrifying, debilitating sores.

---

(*sigh*)That's what I get for trying to be discreet.When a man gets an ulcer on his penis, it isn't because of a sebaceous cyst. It has to do with the fact that he's been masturbating a little bit too roughly. You see, the foreskin covers the glans, providing cover. Too, with the mucosal membrane under the foreskin acting as lubricant, there is much less tearing friction.If you don't know how a man masturbates, perhaps you should refrain from making comments about a man's body.

quote:

---

no. they treat adult males with foreskins and penile cancer by removing the foreskin.

---

No, they tell parents who have just had a baby that they need to have their sons circumcised in order to prevent penile cancer. This despite the fact that penile cancer is so rare that their sons are more likely to come down with breast cancer. This despite the fact that there isn't really much connection between circumcision and penile cancer.And the reason for circumcision in the treatment of penile cancer is because of cancerous lesions. It isn't like circumcision will do anything for a tumor in the corpus spongiosum.

quote:

---

any reason a person gives for modifying their own body is acceptable and legitimate.

---

And this is where we differ. Sometimes, people aren't behaving rationally in their desire to "modify their own body." That's why we call it "self-mutilation."

quote:

---

i've already discussed non-consensual circumcision and you should stop bringing it up. it's no longer an issue.

---

But that hardly ever happens. Therefore, it is still the issue. You want to focus on trivial corner cases rather than the reality for the overwhelming majority.

quote:

---

it can be difficult to clean between a babies fingers.

---

I know...that's the point: We don't cut off a baby's fingers just because it's "difficult" to clean them.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Men who undergo MGM have no life-threatening disease or disorder.

---

​

depends on whether you consider penile cancer life-threatening.

---

Since an infant doesn't have penile cancer, why do we cut off their foreskins? That's the reason doctors say to do it: To prevent penile cancer. And yet, penile cancer is so rare that he's more likely to contract breast cancer. So if the rationale is "to prevent disease," why aren't we handing out radical mastectomies in the process?

quote:

---

and since penile cancer is treated with circumcision (i'm not talking prevention, try reading), then you're wrong, and you've been wrong.

---

But that isn't why 90% of the males in the US are circumcised. The reason why is because doctors tell parents that they have to do so to their sons in order to prevent cancer...a cancer they have hardly any chance of contracting...a cancer that occurs less often than breast cancer for which nobody suggests prophylactic mastectomy.And circumcision is only a treatement for penile cancer if the tumor is in the foreskin. If it's elsewhere, circumcision won't do anything. Therefore, you're wrong and you've been wrong.

quote:

---

the complications may be equivalent, but since they do not occur at equivalent rates, it is an illegitimate claim.

---

Since the complications are equivalent, any attempt to claim that they're not is illegitimate and nothing more than sexism.Dead male. Dead female.If they're not equivalent, then that can only be because his life isn't as valuable as hers.

quote:

---

you're trying to equate them by using the same term. it's dishonest.

---

And your attempts to disassociate them is dishonest and sexist.MGM is done for the same reasons as FGM from hygiene to ritual to religion to controlling of sexuality. So if it isn't legitimate to do it to a female, then it is just as illegitimate to do it to a male no matter how much more likely it is for him to survive.

quote:

---

but i'm not convinced the procedure is inherently damaging

---

Dead boys.How is that not "inherently damaging"?It isn't that you are dancing on their graves. You just don't care that they're dead.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

brennakimi responds to me:

quote:

---

quote:

---

the baby died from the tuberculosis but never would have contracted it if he had never been circumcised.

---

​

i highly doubt that considering tuberculosis can spread through the air and does not require an open wound.

---

Ah, so JAMA was lying?Hint: Tuberculosis is a bacterium, not a lung infection.

quote:

---

i can only work with the information available.

---

And did you bother to do any research at all or did you just armchair quarterback it?Since you refuse to do your own homework:Holt LE. Tuberculosis acquired through ritual circumcision. JAMA 1913;LXI(2):99-102. Reuben MS. Tuberculosis from ritual circumcision. Proceedings of the New York Academy of Medicine 1916; (December 15): 333-334. But tuberculosis isn't the only problem:Rosenstein JL. Wound diphtheria in the newborn infant following circumcision. J Pediatr 1941;18:657-8. Scurlock JM, Pemberton PJ. Neonatal meningitis and circumcision. Med J Aust 1977;1:332-334. Cleary TG, Kohl S. Overwhelming infection with group B beta-hemolytic streptococcus associated with circumcision. Pediatrics, Vol 64, no 3, (September 1979), pp. 301-303. [That last is pointing out that newborn males are much more likely to become septic than females. The sepsis is attributed to the umbilical wound but the fact that males are so much more likely to become septic is pretty strong evidence that something else is going on...say, the circumcision.]I guess they're all lying.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Nemesis Juggernaut writes:

quote:

---

If that's true, then nothing is actually immoral

---

Incorrect. Simply because morality is arbitrary and socially constructed doesn't mean it doesn't exist.We're back to the Monopoly example again. Monopoly is a completely arbitrary and created game. And yet, the rules exist. If you break them, you will suffer the consequences.

quote:

---

The problem is, there is no good reason why anyone would want to be moral in a totally atheistic world, devoid of God who supplies meaning.

---

But the mere existence of atheists proves that conclusion wrong.Or are you saying atheists don't have morals?Or are you saying there aren't any "real" atheists?Or are you saying that atheists are just deluding themselves, using the morality that was given by god and denying the source?

quote:

---

If female circumcision is wrong, then why is it so?

---

To quote from "The Life":It's my body
Not your body
And my body
Is my business
My business
Is my business
And nobody's business
But my own

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

brennakimi responds to me:

quote:

---

quote:

---

How does someone flay a person alive "correctly"?

---

​

by their own consent after the age of majority with proper anesthesia and sanitary precautions...

---

And since that isn't the case for MGM in the overwhelming majority of cases, how does that apply to the issue at hand?You're arguing trivia.

quote:

---

because it is in the state's specific interests to ensure integrity of the workforce.

---

Since when? I am not a cog for the machine.

quote:

---

quote:

---

You don't understand the difference between reconstructive surgery and excision?

---

​

i do, but to differentiate them legally is really beyond the scope of the specific national interest.

---

Why? The law does that all the time. In the states where the entire concept of FGM is illegal, there are exceptions for medical necessity. If you've been in a horrid car crash and your crotch has suffered massive injuries, it may be necessary to excise your genitals in order to save your life.

quote:

---

as long as the practice does not prevent the creation of new taxpayers

---

Huh? So procreation should be regulated? Only those authorized by the state are allowed to have children?

quote:

---

does not create direct and demonstrable harm

---

How does mutilation of the body not result in "direct and demonstrable harm"?

quote:

---

and is done consensually, it's not my business or that of the state.

---

But you just said that the state has the right to stop someone from cutting his arm off. Why the special pleading?

quote:

---

it clearly permits people who are of at least the age of majority to have their own labia or clitoris removed.

---

But MGM in the West is carried out on infants. So why do females get to have their genitals protected but not males?

quote:

---

you want to tell me why illinois, minnesota, rhode island, and tennessee feel the need to peek into women's doctors' offices?

---

Does the word "malpractice" mean anything to you?

quote:

---

quote:

---

So I'm sure you want to have those laws changed. So long as it is a medicalized procedure, parents should be allowed to have their daughter's clitoris removed.

---

​

no.

---

So why the double-standard? Why do females get their genitals protected by not men?Oh...that's right...it's just a "tiny little bit of flesh" where nobody ever dies from it.

quote:

---

you missed the other half of my statement.

---

Incorrect.I pointed out that your "other half" happens in a vanishingly small number of cases. Since it is nothing more than trivia, one wonders why you are so determined to focus upon it rather than the situation that affects the overwhelming majority of men.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

brennakimi responds to me:

quote:

---

but not all of them do it.

---

Since when does it matter how many of them do it? If just one does it because he thinks he is religiously required to do it, then it is done for religious reasons. Not exactly a free choice, now is it?

quote:

---

clearly it's because it's not a congruent procedure.

---

Dead male. Dead female.If they're not congruent, then it can only be because his life is as valuable as hers.Note: They couldn't find a single instance of FGM happening in the US and yet it got outlawed.

quote:

---

so you're going to tell me that because someone is irresponsible in the degree of force used on sensitive tissue that it's not their own damn fault they tore it?

---

Yes. You don't realize that you've gone too far until it's too late.Again, since you don't know how men masturbate, it would behoove you to stop pretending you understand what happens.

quote:

---

it doesn't take the kind of force necessary to tear the fucking skin.

---

And how would you know? A circumcised penis has tight skin inherently. That's part of the function of the foreskin: To allow the skin of the penile shaft to move easily up and down the corpora inside. This allows frictional sensation to be transmitted internally while preventing friction on the outside. By removing the foreskin, the skin can no longer move over the corpora and the friction necessarily must be on the outer surface of the skin.Since you don't know how men masturbate, it would behoove you to stop pretending you understand what happens.

quote:

---

but they also treat penile cancer with circumcision.

---

Only if the tumor is in the foreskin. Circumcision doesn't do anything for cancer localized in the corpora. So the treatment isn't "circumcision," per se, but rather excision of the tumor which happens to be on the foreskin.

quote:

---

just because someone makes a different choice than you would have doesn't mean they aren't behaving rationally.

---

Indeed. But just because you don't care doesn't mean they are.It's called "Body Integrity Identity Disorder." Why the special pleading for genitals?

quote:

---

no. you said it can't be done properly.

---

Indeed. Flaying someone alive (since in the West, circumcision is done on infants and in infants, the prepuce has not separated from the glans and thus the only way to remove it is to forcibly tear it off) cannot be done properly, no matter how medicalized the process.You're focusing on trivial corner cases as if that justifies the overwhelming majority of cases. That somehow because there is a man somewhere with a tumor on his foreskin that has his foreskin medically removed, that justifies all other instances.

quote:

---

but you're not going to accomplish it by pissing at me on the internet. write your fucking congressman.

---

But the lawmakers have the same problem you do: A man's life isn't as valuable as a woman's. It's just a "tiny little bit of flesh."Politics begins at home.

quote:

---

no one should cut off their baby's foreskin unless there is an urgent life or health threatening issue.

---

And yet, we do. And you defend it by claiming it's just a "tiny little bit of flesh," of no real concern...it isn't like anybody dies from it.

quote:

---

you're the only one talking about infants.

---

That's because in the West, that's who gets circumcized.You're focused on trivia since if you can get someone to agree to your trivia, that will allow you to ignore the actual case.

---

Rrhain

---

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.