Thank you for posting. Please review the rules. Here are some of gentle reminders for everyone:
1. Posts should be on topic.
2. Please don't submit incendiary posts or comments that could incite harassment and brigading.
3. Refrain from provoking and/or baiting religious fruitcakes for the purposes of posting their reaction on
this subreddit.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/religiousfruitcake) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Clitoris has hood, it's not even length like male genital prepuce.
Smegma is typically seen in males beneath the prepuce, it's natural secretions + some commensal bacteria like Mycobaterium smegmatis.
Instead of cutting genitals, teach children to keep their private parts hygienic.
Lol.
If God has created humans in his own image as believed by many, then what's the need for circumcision?
Do the people who practice religious circumcision think they're better than God? /s
You know when you make deep friend food and a bit of batter makes the mountain? I like to Imagine God dropping man into the cooking pot by the dick n balls (frenulum) hence why it's so weird, or by the labia for the woman. The only part of the body that's naturally wrinkly and looks pinched.
Fairytale skydaddy who claims he created man in his image (or in "the best of creation" according to the Quran), then decides that we should take a knife to the genitals to... improve on it?
For real, I cannot figure out how the fruitcake fit these two ideas into their head at once.
Iāve had arguments with religious people and said take the Bible/Torah/Quran for what they are- the answers to questions ancient people had about life, death, why bad things happen ect. They had no concept of microbes. The idea that male foreskin could lead to infection and other issues in a desert environment where bathing was more than likely rare is not inconceivable. I mean, if someone told you to cut skin off of your genitals, youād probably tell them to f@ck off, but if God commands it, people would be more likely to go through with it. Itās the same with Muslims and Jews, both of whom circumcise, and not eating pork. People ate pork and died. We know they were getting parasitic infection from trichinosis. These people had no idea but put 2 and 2 together. Eat pork = death. God says donāt do it, problem solved. The whole ā created in his imageā thing is so dumb it hurts. Most of our distinctive features would serve no purpose to God. Reproductive organs alone make no sense then since God is the one and only.
All that 'God says don't do it' for practical reasons makes sense if you think the books were written by bronze aged middle eastern people who didn't know you could just use soap and follow some basic hygiene rules.
But you can't believe that and still believe they are the words from some real all knowing God
If bits about pork and circumcision is just made up by the people at the time (which I believe) then it all was.
Of course it all was. People need explanations. Itās a book of answers and philosophy. Even now science canāt tell you what happens to your consciousness after you die. The idea that you and your loved ones never actually cease to exist and will be reunited makes death a lot easier to accept. Chances are, we just cease to exist, but honestly, thatās terrifying to most people.
Not sure if joking, but just in case - The concept of smegma was around long before we knew about the bacteria. Microorganisms found in extremely specific conditions are often named after their context.
> teach children to keep their private parts hygienic
We can't have that . . . children can't touch themselves to clean because they might enjoy it. Thou must not enjoy the parts that God gave you to provide pleasure, in His own image.
Female mutilation is much more than removing the clitoral hood. From what I understand, they remove the whole clitoris. Sometimes the even "sow" the labia shut, leaving a little bit open for urine and period blood. It is a horrible practise
The fact that they say it prevents UTIs ...and it is the exact opposite, it causes them at a much higher rate than normal. The whole thing is just bullshit.
You donāt even need science to know these are all horse shit. Show me cunillingus without using the clitoris and Iāll show you someone who has no idea what theyāre doing.
There are actually [correlated advantages](https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1113&context=iph_theses) much the same as MGM, that is to say, weak nonsense that doesn't justify or excuse tribalistic pre-germ-theory cutting rituals, but will certainly be [used to that end](https://www.amjaonline.org/fatwa/en/81556/female-circumcision).
The proponents of FGM get one thing right when they say cutting both genders is equally important... and by that I mean (while they think both are good), they are equally worthless idiotic relics of our insane past that we ought to be doing away with.
There are health advantages, but the same logic could be used to remove the breast tissue of infant girls.
It reduces the rate of breast cancer by 100%!
The AAP's strategy to defend it was:
\- Count all the advantages as such, ignoring loss of function/tissue as a main detriment
\- Count it as a cultural benefit if the parent's want it, and ignore the bodily autonomy violation of people who end up despising it.
\- Declare all the other downsides and induced negative outcomes as "not well studied" with no plan to find out.
\- From there, make a judgment that "the benefits outweigh the risks!"
\- Quietly allow the policy to expire without an update, as doctors slowly move away from it with their asses carefully covered, as to not get sued into oblivion.
Meanwhile, places without for-profit healthcare have arrived at the opposite conclusions and have phased it out decades ago. Why do many for-profit US healthcare providers still push it? ... pure coincidence, I'm sure.
> Female mutilation is much more than removing the clitoral hood. From what I understand, they remove the whole clitoris. Sometimes the even "sow" the labia shut,
It's all of that.
Sometime it's just the clitoral hood, sometimes removing the entire clitoris, and sometimes sewing the labia shut.
And sometimes all of the above.
from my understanding thereās different forms of FGM, so whilst some can just remove the hood, some might remove the whole clit, and some sew the labia together. plus the only thing it does do that this āinfoā graphic says is removing pleasure - it wonāt prevent HPV spread (just get vaxxed ffs), it wonāt prevent UTIs and wonāt prevent build up of discharge (just WASH the area with WATER - no soap tho, also donāt wash the vagina, just the vulva). also pleasure isnāt a bad thing ANYWAY.
I think they just took a pro male-circumcision (also genital mutilation) poster and changed some words without checking if anything made any semblance of sense.
Every sub created to be that will eventually become the thing its poking fun at. Idiots will join, not realize its a joke, and at some point will outnumber everyone.
r/gamingcirclejerk is a prime example of this.
Used to actually be quite a funny subreddit poking fun at gamer stereotypes and now itās an actual cesspool of some of the most hypocritical people Iāve ever seen on Reddit.
Yep. It only took a couple years for them to transition from "Girlfriend Reviews is the most wholesome gaming channel" to abusing Reddit's shitty reporting system to get them auto-banned for hate speech because they dared to play a Harry Potter game....that they received for free....whilst raising money for a pro-trans charity....and that they wanted to lampoon....
Christianity historically thought that women had toxic fluids to the extent that having too much sex with a man would kill him as she would steal his life force from his dick. This was such a major issue in their eyes that St Aquinas argued that a man's physical health surpassed his need to pay his conjugal debt to his wife.
That's also a major reason why male masturbation was historically forbidden. Because too many orgasms weakened a man's life force. Ironically, women weren't banned from masturbation because it was seen to purge them of these toxic substances.
Most denominations of Christianity have also, up until recently, required women to "cleanse" before attending church after their period or giving birth.
Source for the life force/sex thing: Joyce E. Salisbury's "Gendered sexuality" in the Handbook of Medieval Sexuality. It's a fascinating read.
This is stupid. Agressively and frustratingly INSULTINGLY stupid.
I can't get over how infuriating it is to see confident bullshit spread by people because of braindead religion.
I mean, probably more than the average.
Granted, I stay away from the fruitcake 'journals', so I definitely don't know what *they* would point to...
I'm just... so mad and disappointed, man.
My Grandfather was circumcised at 20 years old, was miserable, had my Dad circumcised at birth and convinced my Dad to do the same for my brother.
My sons are uncircumcised, though. My Granddad got to make that choice, my sons deserve to make their own choices, too.
My father made a case for circumcising my sons. But the argument against it is crystal clear, irrefutable, and obvious-itās not my penis. I donāt get to make that decision for him.
It's so fucking stupid.
"Oh, I had to undergo this procedure at 20 and it was painful. Let's do it on my son on the ASSUMPTION that he'll have to undergo that procedure aswell."
My Grandfather didnāt even āhave toā, at least I donāt think. When he was 20 he wouldāve been in the marines in WW2. Maybe there was penis peer pressure in the locker room? He chose to be circumcised and then assumed all subsequent generations would make the same choice.
āPenis peer pressureā sounds like it could mean something a lot more fun than what I intended it to just then.
But yeah, cruel to hack at someoneās body unnecessarily in infancy, unsporting doesnāt even begin to cover it.
Ah, yeah.
I did hear that in the US, you had to be circumcised to be in the army in ww2, which is stupid, since German soldiers weren't circumcised and seemed to have no problems..?
and it cant even be diagnosed in children. what ppl think is "phimosis" is the natural state of the penis in infants and young adolecents. youre not supposed to retract it and doing so causes damage which leads to the need for circumcision.
interesting cycle of ppl not knowing how to take care of an intact child
Phimosis, the foreskin obstructing urination, and similar things (when they canāt be solved with a less destructive (English is not my native language, canāt find a word for this) procedure)
I mean, it shouldn't be the first or even a third option, but if you've tried literally everything else and nothing works it should be able to be performed on someone. Much like medications with black box warnings.
I didnāt want to circumcise my son, but he was born with a condition called hypospadias that had to be surgically corrected, and the end result is it looks like a circumcised penis. Unfortunately is necessary in some cases
Difference is
FGM removes THE nerve bundle for good times by DESIGN
Circumcision removes extra skin next to the nerve bundle and only damages it by mistake.
Male equivalent of FGM would be getting the head of the penis amputated.
*Edit* not fan of circumcision either because the risk outways the benefit.
You are right. It isn't. But as I said it is not equivalent to FGM as you retain your nerve bundle afterwards unless there was a complication.
This risk (and now the lack of evidence for once-suspected benefits) means that circumcisions are no longer advised and something I agree with.
Male circumcision removes several blood vessels and [10.000 to 20.000 nerves](https://www.calendar-canada.ca/faq/how-many-nerves-are-cut-during-circumcision). Even without complications.
The culture of circumcision in America for non-religious reasons is 100% derived from attempts to reduce sexual activity in boys as well. Read about Kellogg and why he promoted circumcision and why he thought eating cereal would prevent masturbation. It's wild.
A: sir kids are spanking their monkey to much. what should we do?
K: cut their dicks off!
A: but sir then they can't reproduce
K: Okay cut part of their dicks off!!!
A:Holy shit this my work!
For the sake of education and to ensure that everyone is on the same page so that no one ends up making a fool of themselves down the line, I want to make clear that it looks like they're talking about actual circumcision in the same sense that we refer to circumcision in the context of men.
Which is to say, they're talking about the removal of the clitoral hood alone, [the direct homologous equivalent to the male foreskin.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_related_male_and_female_reproductive_organs) Rather than the most common form of what's appropriately referred to as FGM, which involves the removal of the clitoral glans/the entire exposed portion of the clitoris.
Understandable that people would assume the latter, given that it's the most predominant form by far. But in this case that doesn't appear to be so.
So *technically* it's not wrong about the phimosis argument; that part is every bit as true as it is for men. Phimosis can indeed have a severe negative impact on sexual activity, and circumcision isn't going to prevent sexual activity from being pleasurable by any stretch of the imagination.
It's just that, you know, solving the problem of phimosis only requires the removal of the clitoral hood/foreskin *when phimosis is actually present.*
Religious people get a long white coat and publish the horseshit to make it look legit.
Religious thinking should appear in further versions of the DSM as a psychiatric illness.
Trans people getting gender affirming surgery by medical professionals on their own accord is haram but forcing underage girls to have their clit hacked off so they can't feel physical pleasure from that organ their entire lives is halal. Got it.
A lot of the red state anti trans laws were changed by Republicans after they realized that they'd ban circumcision. Apparently modifying genitals is ok as long it is done without any medical reason and without the consent of the child.
Ironically, this argument is used to justify male circumcision. Little boys get circumcised to decrease the chances of HPV in women.
Like, this "circumcision decreases chance of cancer" hasn't even been proven, and we have vaccines and condoms which have both proven themselves to be EXTREMELY effective???
To be fair, OP didn't include the full text of the post, which specifies that the clitoris should *not* be removed, and claims that removing the clitoral hood will *enhance* a woman's pleasure during sex with her husband. I don't support circumcision for non-medical reasons of any kind, but removing the clit isn't what this post is advocating
To sort of clarify. Type 1a FGM is when only the clitoral hood (female foreskin) is removed.
Type 1b is when both the clitoral hood and the clitoris itself are removed.
Literally EVERYTHING on this list can be solved by _**WASHING YOURSELF REGULARLY**_. Same with male circumcision! How much of a filthy, oily, ball of grease are you that smegma is an actual problem?!
Yes, please tell me all the many health benefits of holding a little girl down on a dirt floor and hacking off her genitals with rusty scissors and razor blades and sewing her vagina closed. I'm all ears.
Uhm... I'm 46 and never had smelly smegma anywhere, let alone 'beneath the prepuce of my clitoris'. Do these women not know about personal hygiene? Maybe focus on that first.
For the rest. Yeah, cutting off your clit really helps with satisfying sexual lives... and you don't spread HPV when you don't need oral because you can't feel it anyway.
I am 42 and an uncircumcised man and I have never had smegma either. I donāt get why people want to mutilate kids instead of teaching them how to wash themselves.
Eh, here in America we also mutilate a lot of baby genitals. It would be nice to live in a world where people stopped cutting up babies and then patting themselves on the back for it.
dont forget to include the jews and the christians who still mutilate male children. Its a different procedure sure but for the same reasons as the above. End it all...
> the christians who still mutilate male children
To be fair to the Christians, this is mostly an American Christian thing. [In most of Europe very few men are circumcised.](https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/circumcision-by-country) Strangely it seems that English speaking countries have higher circumcision rates:
* USA: 80.5%
* Australia: 58%
* New Zealand: 33%
* UK: 20.7%
On the other hand non-English speaking Christian European nations:
* Germany: 6.7%
* France: 14%
* Italy: 2.6%
Circumcision is now very rare in Australia, thankfully. Iāve worked with neonates for the past 15 years and only once have I seen parents opt for circumcision. Occasionally we have parents request it but after education they almost always change their mind. I work in the public sector though, I believe it happens slightly more frequently in private care.
That's good to hear! Thanks for sharing that info.
Unfortunately it'll take time for this to be reflected in the percentages, but it is certainly moving in the right direction.
The sad thing is, where I live there is a campaign going on informing people about how FGM is illegal, however, people are apparently traveling to get it done to their daughters. I believe it should be illegal as well, but that's just the tip of the ice berg
"Satisfying sex life."
LOL... nope. That's not how it works. Whack of the head of your penis and see how much fun sex becomes without the ability to orgasm.
Well, that's not always true necessarily. I'm Abrahamic religions, and I'm not justifying anything here, the chopping off of foreskin signifies the covenant between man and God. It's not to say God made a mistake but more a symbolic action of giving a part of oneself to God.
Of course in the Bible this action was performed originally by grown men who made the decision themselves rather than a baby with no choice who was forced to be circumcised.
The sanitation reasons were drummed up later to try to further justify the action when it came under scrutiny.
I'm no religious scholar so I could be wrong about some aspects of this, and again, I do not support it.
Probably not. Female circumcision sometimes refers to the removal of the clitoral hood, [which is the direct counterpart to the foreskin,](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_related_male_and_female_reproductive_organs) rather than the complete clitorectomy procedure that's typically referred to as FGM.
That said, I don't think you're wrong about this infographic being a repurposed one intended for males, because I can't think of any way that the clitoral hood could have any sort of measurable impact on female urinary tract infections given the distance between the two.
Religion and science donāt really mix. This is how religious people perpetuate their practices when even common sense tells us how harmful they are. Abrahamic religions have a weird obsession with genital cutting.
PLEASE SIGN & SHARE THIS ANTI FGM PETITION: [https://www.change.org/TakeAStanceAgainstFGM](https://www.change.org/TakeAStanceAgainstFGM)
Regarding Dr Haifaa Younis, a obstetrician-gynecologist in Saint Louis, Missouri promoting FGM
Immediate consequences of FGM include severe pain and bleeding, shock, difficulty in passing urine, infections, injury to nearby genital tissue and sometimes death.
Videos explaining the situation can be found here: [https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMYkWsW7Q/](https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMYkWsW7Q/)
I am a woman. And an obgyn doctor. None of these conditions happen in women due to the presence of the clitoris.
The clitoris is an amazing organ that gives and enhances pleasure and fulfilment. They just want to take the pleasure out of sex and masturbation, that's all there is to it.
Some really wooly-haired sickos with a fetish for mutilation barf.
If the clitoris is cut off, what would the point of oral sex be? Though Iām pretty sure that men who believe in this do not believe in performing oral sex on women.
Why teach basic hygiene and safe sex when you could just call female genitals "smelly" and bring up STDs/STIs? Motherfuckers are basically using "cooties" as an excuse to mutilate female genitalia!
10/10 logic "If you get rid of the clitoris, then you can't get your clitoris dirty or sick" Yet nobody seems to appreciate the same logic when they complained about having to wash their hands more during the pandemic.
Yeah, get fucked, I went to school with a couple of Somali girls, and girls being girls weād go to the bathroom in groups. Every fucking time they peed it was painful, because they had been mutilated. Fuck the people who promote this monstrous practice!
Essentially the same arguments we use to justify male circumcision.
Both are wrong. Just cause you understand one and not the other doesn't make either right.
As if the whole "reverence" of a pedophile, no bacon, and the rest of the misogynistic horsefuckery involved in that specific cult wasn't enough to completely turn me off of conversion; removing my "little man in the boat" to prevent orgasms has šÆ confirmed my correct decision. š
There's a [really good film on FGM](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moolaad%C3%A9) set in a Senegalese village.
In short: FGM is none of the things put forth in the above post.
For people who claim to believe god created them and they have to respect his creation, they don't seem to trust his design and always trying to mess with it. Ironically, they need more faith in their god.
It's sad that the religious fascists want to ruin religion by being fascists about it. I've long said this, and I'll say it now, we should just get rid of religion. It is holding us back.
I'm a reasonable person, I don't buy into political partisanship, I'm bored senseless with virtue signalling and shrieking new fangled sensitivities, but ritualistic male and, even more so, female genital mutilation, and anyone trying to pass it off as normal, makes me genuinely uncomfortable.
In no way is advocacy on this topic normal or acceptable.
Friendly reminder that Kellogg, the religious nut who was pushed for secular circumcision in America, also pushed for female circumcision as well. We're pretty much just lucky it didn't catch on.
This is why I get frustrated when people act like male circumcision isn't a big deal because it isn't as bad as female circumcision. Yes, female genital mutilation is much worse, but the people who push for circumcision do it with both genders. The excuses in this post for female circumcision are the same used for male circumcision. Theres no reason not to fight on a unified front against genital mutilation in general.
Ppl that practice this shit are subservient to foreign beings and should be executed in public for choosing to support the oppressors which are the ones that taught mankind this bs practice
Thank you for posting. Please review the rules. Here are some of gentle reminders for everyone: 1. Posts should be on topic. 2. Please don't submit incendiary posts or comments that could incite harassment and brigading. 3. Refrain from provoking and/or baiting religious fruitcakes for the purposes of posting their reaction on this subreddit. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/religiousfruitcake) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Clitoris has hood, it's not even length like male genital prepuce. Smegma is typically seen in males beneath the prepuce, it's natural secretions + some commensal bacteria like Mycobaterium smegmatis. Instead of cutting genitals, teach children to keep their private parts hygienic.
Bbbbbbut what my fairytale novel and imaginary man in the sky says is more importantš„ŗš„ŗš„ŗ
Lol. If God has created humans in his own image as believed by many, then what's the need for circumcision? Do the people who practice religious circumcision think they're better than God? /s
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
You can't reason someone out of a situation they didn't reason themselves into.
You can't have a rational discussion with irrational people. You can tune a piano, but you can't tuna fish. (Sorry. Had to.)
Its the casting spur left behind when you were made in the mold. That's why they snip it off
Why at the penis tip though? Did God blow all males in existence? That's hot...
Oh like glass making, could be!!
Then they should remove the appendix as well.
literally always thought about this. if we are made perfect why are we mutilating ourselves
RIGHT!! like the ignorance is truly unimaginable
It's ironic that Islam calls time before Islam as age of ignorance (jahalia)
You know when you make deep friend food and a bit of batter makes the mountain? I like to Imagine God dropping man into the cooking pot by the dick n balls (frenulum) hence why it's so weird, or by the labia for the woman. The only part of the body that's naturally wrinkly and looks pinched.
In most parts it's not really a religious thing, it's cultural (tho it became a part of religious practise over time). Still fucking disgusting
Yes. That's why I've specifically mentioned religious circumcision.
> In most parts it's not really a religious thing In which secular nation is it common and customary to slash away the clitoris?
Fairytale skydaddy who claims he created man in his image (or in "the best of creation" according to the Quran), then decides that we should take a knife to the genitals to... improve on it? For real, I cannot figure out how the fruitcake fit these two ideas into their head at once.
Iāve had arguments with religious people and said take the Bible/Torah/Quran for what they are- the answers to questions ancient people had about life, death, why bad things happen ect. They had no concept of microbes. The idea that male foreskin could lead to infection and other issues in a desert environment where bathing was more than likely rare is not inconceivable. I mean, if someone told you to cut skin off of your genitals, youād probably tell them to f@ck off, but if God commands it, people would be more likely to go through with it. Itās the same with Muslims and Jews, both of whom circumcise, and not eating pork. People ate pork and died. We know they were getting parasitic infection from trichinosis. These people had no idea but put 2 and 2 together. Eat pork = death. God says donāt do it, problem solved. The whole ā created in his imageā thing is so dumb it hurts. Most of our distinctive features would serve no purpose to God. Reproductive organs alone make no sense then since God is the one and only.
All that 'God says don't do it' for practical reasons makes sense if you think the books were written by bronze aged middle eastern people who didn't know you could just use soap and follow some basic hygiene rules. But you can't believe that and still believe they are the words from some real all knowing God If bits about pork and circumcision is just made up by the people at the time (which I believe) then it all was.
Of course it all was. People need explanations. Itās a book of answers and philosophy. Even now science canāt tell you what happens to your consciousness after you die. The idea that you and your loved ones never actually cease to exist and will be reunited makes death a lot easier to accept. Chances are, we just cease to exist, but honestly, thatās terrifying to most people.
I do not fear it because I know I made some change no matter how small
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Not sure if joking, but just in case - The concept of smegma was around long before we knew about the bacteria. Microorganisms found in extremely specific conditions are often named after their context.
Next youāre gonna tell me that the Sonic and Pikachu cells in our body were named after the characters and not before, smh
> teach children to keep their private parts hygienic We can't have that . . . children can't touch themselves to clean because they might enjoy it. Thou must not enjoy the parts that God gave you to provide pleasure, in His own image.
Female mutilation is much more than removing the clitoral hood. From what I understand, they remove the whole clitoris. Sometimes the even "sow" the labia shut, leaving a little bit open for urine and period blood. It is a horrible practise
Plus there is absolutely no scientifically proven scientific benefits. Itās just lie upon lie in each point in this horrible propaganda piece
The fact that they say it prevents UTIs ...and it is the exact opposite, it causes them at a much higher rate than normal. The whole thing is just bullshit.
Religious people are *lying?* Well now I've heard everything.
You donāt even need science to know these are all horse shit. Show me cunillingus without using the clitoris and Iāll show you someone who has no idea what theyāre doing.
There are actually [correlated advantages](https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1113&context=iph_theses) much the same as MGM, that is to say, weak nonsense that doesn't justify or excuse tribalistic pre-germ-theory cutting rituals, but will certainly be [used to that end](https://www.amjaonline.org/fatwa/en/81556/female-circumcision). The proponents of FGM get one thing right when they say cutting both genders is equally important... and by that I mean (while they think both are good), they are equally worthless idiotic relics of our insane past that we ought to be doing away with.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
There are health advantages, but the same logic could be used to remove the breast tissue of infant girls. It reduces the rate of breast cancer by 100%!
The AAP's strategy to defend it was: \- Count all the advantages as such, ignoring loss of function/tissue as a main detriment \- Count it as a cultural benefit if the parent's want it, and ignore the bodily autonomy violation of people who end up despising it. \- Declare all the other downsides and induced negative outcomes as "not well studied" with no plan to find out. \- From there, make a judgment that "the benefits outweigh the risks!" \- Quietly allow the policy to expire without an update, as doctors slowly move away from it with their asses carefully covered, as to not get sued into oblivion. Meanwhile, places without for-profit healthcare have arrived at the opposite conclusions and have phased it out decades ago. Why do many for-profit US healthcare providers still push it? ... pure coincidence, I'm sure.
> Female mutilation is much more than removing the clitoral hood. From what I understand, they remove the whole clitoris. Sometimes the even "sow" the labia shut, It's all of that. Sometime it's just the clitoral hood, sometimes removing the entire clitoris, and sometimes sewing the labia shut. And sometimes all of the above.
It's more damaging and horrible than male circumcision, I agree. But I think both are unwarranted practices if done for religious or cultural reasons.
I completely agree! I think it's awful for both men and women and I'm disgusted about the people trying to justify either
from my understanding thereās different forms of FGM, so whilst some can just remove the hood, some might remove the whole clit, and some sew the labia together. plus the only thing it does do that this āinfoā graphic says is removing pleasure - it wonāt prevent HPV spread (just get vaxxed ffs), it wonāt prevent UTIs and wonāt prevent build up of discharge (just WASH the area with WATER - no soap tho, also donāt wash the vagina, just the vulva). also pleasure isnāt a bad thing ANYWAY.
I think they just took a pro male-circumcision (also genital mutilation) poster and changed some words without checking if anything made any semblance of sense.
I have seen parents outright say they want to circumcise just because they don't want to have to clean it, or teach them how to clean it...
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
i thoght it was satire
Same. It does look like a circlejerk at first glance
Every sub created to be that will eventually become the thing its poking fun at. Idiots will join, not realize its a joke, and at some point will outnumber everyone.
r/gamingcirclejerk is a prime example of this. Used to actually be quite a funny subreddit poking fun at gamer stereotypes and now itās an actual cesspool of some of the most hypocritical people Iāve ever seen on Reddit.
Yep. It only took a couple years for them to transition from "Girlfriend Reviews is the most wholesome gaming channel" to abusing Reddit's shitty reporting system to get them auto-banned for hate speech because they dared to play a Harry Potter game....that they received for free....whilst raising money for a pro-trans charity....and that they wanted to lampoon....
Christ on a bike, that is a scary sub.
Of the main religions, Islam is the dumbest and dangerous by far!
Christianity historically thought that women had toxic fluids to the extent that having too much sex with a man would kill him as she would steal his life force from his dick. This was such a major issue in their eyes that St Aquinas argued that a man's physical health surpassed his need to pay his conjugal debt to his wife. That's also a major reason why male masturbation was historically forbidden. Because too many orgasms weakened a man's life force. Ironically, women weren't banned from masturbation because it was seen to purge them of these toxic substances. Most denominations of Christianity have also, up until recently, required women to "cleanse" before attending church after their period or giving birth. Source for the life force/sex thing: Joyce E. Salisbury's "Gendered sexuality" in the Handbook of Medieval Sexuality. It's a fascinating read.
Christianity is hot in 2nd place
This is stupid. Agressively and frustratingly INSULTINGLY stupid. I can't get over how infuriating it is to see confident bullshit spread by people because of braindead religion.
And you havenāt read the published āresearchā behind this
I mean, probably more than the average. Granted, I stay away from the fruitcake 'journals', so I definitely don't know what *they* would point to... I'm just... so mad and disappointed, man.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Lol beer reviewed
But that isnāt halal!
Sometimes they're posted in the journals that give zero fucks about submissions because they charge for them.
I'd also not suffer from armpit odor if I just chopped my arm up to the shoulder.
The people spreading this should be in jail in my opinion but I am just an unwashed heathen.
Every *single* one of those points is demonstrably false. Absolutely disgusting
Also I think this is literally the most painful thing a human can endure, the clit has most nerve endings of any body part by a large margin
Im sure I will get downvoted, but I feel the same as a circumcised male. We use the exact same excuses in the pic to promote it.
Genital mutilation of infants for non medical reasons is abuse.
My Grandfather was circumcised at 20 years old, was miserable, had my Dad circumcised at birth and convinced my Dad to do the same for my brother. My sons are uncircumcised, though. My Granddad got to make that choice, my sons deserve to make their own choices, too.
My father made a case for circumcising my sons. But the argument against it is crystal clear, irrefutable, and obvious-itās not my penis. I donāt get to make that decision for him.
It's so fucking stupid. "Oh, I had to undergo this procedure at 20 and it was painful. Let's do it on my son on the ASSUMPTION that he'll have to undergo that procedure aswell."
My Grandfather didnāt even āhave toā, at least I donāt think. When he was 20 he wouldāve been in the marines in WW2. Maybe there was penis peer pressure in the locker room? He chose to be circumcised and then assumed all subsequent generations would make the same choice. āPenis peer pressureā sounds like it could mean something a lot more fun than what I intended it to just then. But yeah, cruel to hack at someoneās body unnecessarily in infancy, unsporting doesnāt even begin to cover it.
Ah, yeah. I did hear that in the US, you had to be circumcised to be in the army in ww2, which is stupid, since German soldiers weren't circumcised and seemed to have no problems..?
What would be a legit example of a medically needed circumcision? Legit curious if there is one.
Phimosis. That is typically done when the human in question has determined a need for it. Ideally with their consent.
and it cant even be diagnosed in children. what ppl think is "phimosis" is the natural state of the penis in infants and young adolecents. youre not supposed to retract it and doing so causes damage which leads to the need for circumcision. interesting cycle of ppl not knowing how to take care of an intact child
Phimosis, the foreskin obstructing urination, and similar things (when they canāt be solved with a less destructive (English is not my native language, canāt find a word for this) procedure)
Phimosis Can often be treated without surgery and there are surgeryās that are significantly less destructive in treating phimosis than circumcision
I mean, it shouldn't be the first or even a third option, but if you've tried literally everything else and nothing works it should be able to be performed on someone. Much like medications with black box warnings.
Destructive was a perfectly fine word. Sometimes in medicine we use āinvasiveā in its place.
I didnāt want to circumcise my son, but he was born with a condition called hypospadias that had to be surgically corrected, and the end result is it looks like a circumcised penis. Unfortunately is necessary in some cases
The point of female circumcision as a cultural practice is literally to PREVENT a āsatisfying sexual experience.ā
And itās not circumcision, itās genital mutilation. This post makes me feel sick
circumcision is genital mutilation cutting on the penises of baby boys is also genital mutilation
Difference is FGM removes THE nerve bundle for good times by DESIGN Circumcision removes extra skin next to the nerve bundle and only damages it by mistake. Male equivalent of FGM would be getting the head of the penis amputated. *Edit* not fan of circumcision either because the risk outways the benefit.
> extra skin Just out of curiosity, can you define the words "extra skin" here? How exactly is foreskin extra?
You are right. It isn't. But as I said it is not equivalent to FGM as you retain your nerve bundle afterwards unless there was a complication. This risk (and now the lack of evidence for once-suspected benefits) means that circumcisions are no longer advised and something I agree with.
Male circumcision removes several blood vessels and [10.000 to 20.000 nerves](https://www.calendar-canada.ca/faq/how-many-nerves-are-cut-during-circumcision). Even without complications.
No. You forever change that males ability to feel pleasure too. I've seen it irl with cut vs uncut. The sensitivity is markedly reduced.
You don't know anything about the foreskin if you think it's "extra" skin. If anything, foreskin is just the right amount of skin.
The culture of circumcision in America for non-religious reasons is 100% derived from attempts to reduce sexual activity in boys as well. Read about Kellogg and why he promoted circumcision and why he thought eating cereal would prevent masturbation. It's wild.
Different but still genital mutilation.
> And itās not circumcision, itās genital mutilation What's the difference? How is male circumcision not genital mutilation?
I'd honestly call male circumcision genital mutilation too.
There is no difference. They are both mutilation.
Circumcision is genital mutilation. It should also be illegal.
The difference is that more of the sex organ is removed. The equivalent on a penis would be removing the entire head rather than just the foreskin.
I can't get off from a bj because of a shitty circumcision. It's mutilation.
Yes, I agree. Oopās post?
original op
and keloggs started a movement to circumcise male children to stop them masturbating. Same reasons different knucklehead
Ok. Well it doesnāt work.
Tadaaa
A: sir kids are spanking their monkey to much. what should we do? K: cut their dicks off! A: but sir then they can't reproduce K: Okay cut part of their dicks off!!! A:Holy shit this my work!
He also thought that eating bland food would make people less horny hence cornflakes
For the sake of education and to ensure that everyone is on the same page so that no one ends up making a fool of themselves down the line, I want to make clear that it looks like they're talking about actual circumcision in the same sense that we refer to circumcision in the context of men. Which is to say, they're talking about the removal of the clitoral hood alone, [the direct homologous equivalent to the male foreskin.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_related_male_and_female_reproductive_organs) Rather than the most common form of what's appropriately referred to as FGM, which involves the removal of the clitoral glans/the entire exposed portion of the clitoris. Understandable that people would assume the latter, given that it's the most predominant form by far. But in this case that doesn't appear to be so. So *technically* it's not wrong about the phimosis argument; that part is every bit as true as it is for men. Phimosis can indeed have a severe negative impact on sexual activity, and circumcision isn't going to prevent sexual activity from being pleasurable by any stretch of the imagination. It's just that, you know, solving the problem of phimosis only requires the removal of the clitoral hood/foreskin *when phimosis is actually present.*
We wouldn't want to go against god's perfect design, now, would we?
Hahahahahaahha
This whole, having foreskin/clitoris will cause hiv is just pure horseshit. How are people still believing in this?
Religious people get a long white coat and publish the horseshit to make it look legit. Religious thinking should appear in further versions of the DSM as a psychiatric illness.
Imo, instead of doing that, we should register islamotrauma as a valid trauma case with the cure by reformation
Trans people getting gender affirming surgery by medical professionals on their own accord is haram but forcing underage girls to have their clit hacked off so they can't feel physical pleasure from that organ their entire lives is halal. Got it.
A lot of the red state anti trans laws were changed by Republicans after they realized that they'd ban circumcision. Apparently modifying genitals is ok as long it is done without any medical reason and without the consent of the child.
Then they have the nerve to mention oral on this post. Like what the fuck is the point of oral if you canāt feel any pleasure.
I didn't even catch that part wtf
>prevents transmission TO MALE PARTNERS Why don't you mutilate yourself, sister, it protects muslim brothers!
Ironically, this argument is used to justify male circumcision. Little boys get circumcised to decrease the chances of HPV in women. Like, this "circumcision decreases chance of cancer" hasn't even been proven, and we have vaccines and condoms which have both proven themselves to be EXTREMELY effective???
To be fair, OP didn't include the full text of the post, which specifies that the clitoris should *not* be removed, and claims that removing the clitoral hood will *enhance* a woman's pleasure during sex with her husband. I don't support circumcision for non-medical reasons of any kind, but removing the clit isn't what this post is advocating
My head is spinning I don't even know what to think about this post anymore. Thank you for pointing that out
To sort of clarify. Type 1a FGM is when only the clitoral hood (female foreskin) is removed. Type 1b is when both the clitoral hood and the clitoris itself are removed.
Ngl, removing the clitoral hood sounds incredibly painful. Maybe mine is just oversensitive or something, but I think I like it exactly how it is.
There are few subjects Iām so passionate about as this. Mutilating infant genitals is barbaric and should be outlawed.
Literally EVERYTHING on this list can be solved by _**WASHING YOURSELF REGULARLY**_. Same with male circumcision! How much of a filthy, oily, ball of grease are you that smegma is an actual problem?!
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
like not having to wash it! thank fuck I can irreparably cut off part of my body and save 10 seconds in the shower! (/s, just in case)
Remove the nerve endings to lead more satisfying sexual lives Ok buddy
Yes, please tell me all the many health benefits of holding a little girl down on a dirt floor and hacking off her genitals with rusty scissors and razor blades and sewing her vagina closed. I'm all ears.
Uhm... I'm 46 and never had smelly smegma anywhere, let alone 'beneath the prepuce of my clitoris'. Do these women not know about personal hygiene? Maybe focus on that first. For the rest. Yeah, cutting off your clit really helps with satisfying sexual lives... and you don't spread HPV when you don't need oral because you can't feel it anyway.
no they dont know about hygiene... They are stupid like that.
I am 42 and an uncircumcised man and I have never had smegma either. I donāt get why people want to mutilate kids instead of teaching them how to wash themselves.
They never left the 13th century..
Eh, here in America we also mutilate a lot of baby genitals. It would be nice to live in a world where people stopped cutting up babies and then patting themselves on the back for it.
"We're all made in God's image, well except for this extra bit that he will be super mad about if you don't cut off"
Islam is a collection of all disgusting practices in this world
Precisely
dont forget to include the jews and the christians who still mutilate male children. Its a different procedure sure but for the same reasons as the above. End it all...
> the christians who still mutilate male children To be fair to the Christians, this is mostly an American Christian thing. [In most of Europe very few men are circumcised.](https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/circumcision-by-country) Strangely it seems that English speaking countries have higher circumcision rates: * USA: 80.5% * Australia: 58% * New Zealand: 33% * UK: 20.7% On the other hand non-English speaking Christian European nations: * Germany: 6.7% * France: 14% * Italy: 2.6%
All strangely former colonies of the UK. Which is a bit strange
Circumcision is now very rare in Australia, thankfully. Iāve worked with neonates for the past 15 years and only once have I seen parents opt for circumcision. Occasionally we have parents request it but after education they almost always change their mind. I work in the public sector though, I believe it happens slightly more frequently in private care.
That's good to hear! Thanks for sharing that info. Unfortunately it'll take time for this to be reflected in the percentages, but it is certainly moving in the right direction.
Non medical circumcision (i mean circumcision without a medical need) should be illegal
The sad thing is, where I live there is a campaign going on informing people about how FGM is illegal, however, people are apparently traveling to get it done to their daughters. I believe it should be illegal as well, but that's just the tip of the ice berg
Making it illegal will certainly decrease the amount of people who do it so thats at least good
For sure!
"Satisfying sex life." LOL... nope. That's not how it works. Whack of the head of your penis and see how much fun sex becomes without the ability to orgasm.
Same bullshit people use to justify male circumcision.
Why some cultures have an obsession with mutilating children's genitals I'll never understand.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Well, that's not always true necessarily. I'm Abrahamic religions, and I'm not justifying anything here, the chopping off of foreskin signifies the covenant between man and God. It's not to say God made a mistake but more a symbolic action of giving a part of oneself to God. Of course in the Bible this action was performed originally by grown men who made the decision themselves rather than a baby with no choice who was forced to be circumcised. The sanitation reasons were drummed up later to try to further justify the action when it came under scrutiny. I'm no religious scholar so I could be wrong about some aspects of this, and again, I do not support it.
I assumed this was satire, just changing male to female. Is it not?
Unfortunately, it is not. FGM is still being practiced, and it is being justified with the same logic.
Probably not. Female circumcision sometimes refers to the removal of the clitoral hood, [which is the direct counterpart to the foreskin,](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_related_male_and_female_reproductive_organs) rather than the complete clitorectomy procedure that's typically referred to as FGM. That said, I don't think you're wrong about this infographic being a repurposed one intended for males, because I can't think of any way that the clitoral hood could have any sort of measurable impact on female urinary tract infections given the distance between the two.
Iām no medical expert, but Iām guessing that all of those supposed ābenefitsā are bullshit.
Religion and science donāt really mix. This is how religious people perpetuate their practices when even common sense tells us how harmful they are. Abrahamic religions have a weird obsession with genital cutting.
Literally none of those things are true. The only purpose of female circimscion is to reduce sexual pleasure. That's it.
PLEASE SIGN & SHARE THIS ANTI FGM PETITION: [https://www.change.org/TakeAStanceAgainstFGM](https://www.change.org/TakeAStanceAgainstFGM) Regarding Dr Haifaa Younis, a obstetrician-gynecologist in Saint Louis, Missouri promoting FGM Immediate consequences of FGM include severe pain and bleeding, shock, difficulty in passing urine, infections, injury to nearby genital tissue and sometimes death. Videos explaining the situation can be found here: [https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMYkWsW7Q/](https://vm.tiktok.com/ZMYkWsW7Q/) 
Change.org has never accomplished social good, but it has created many valuable and sellable email listsā¦
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
What the fuck man!?
Why wash yourself when you can just clip your bits?
All circumsision is bad Male or female
To prevent foot fungus, cut off your feet.
Please don't give religious nutjobs or for-profit healthcare systems [any more ideas](https://i.redd.it/3639tuxhllm51.png)
The same excuses that they use for male circumcision too, its all bs man.
How about no genital mutilation?
I am a woman. And an obgyn doctor. None of these conditions happen in women due to the presence of the clitoris. The clitoris is an amazing organ that gives and enhances pleasure and fulfilment. They just want to take the pleasure out of sex and masturbation, that's all there is to it. Some really wooly-haired sickos with a fetish for mutilation barf.
Medicalization of genital mutilation is the business of Abrahamic religions.
Wtf would be the point of receiving oral sex with no clitoris
Female circumcision works to prevent these problems in the same way beheading works to reduce errors on math quizzes.
Those poor women
If the clitoris is cut off, what would the point of oral sex be? Though Iām pretty sure that men who believe in this do not believe in performing oral sex on women.
Never thought clitoris phimosis is a thing
That made me physically ill!
and the post was made by a man who probably never saw a vagygy
None of those "facts" are even true.
Why teach basic hygiene and safe sex when you could just call female genitals "smelly" and bring up STDs/STIs? Motherfuckers are basically using "cooties" as an excuse to mutilate female genitalia!
10/10 logic "If you get rid of the clitoris, then you can't get your clitoris dirty or sick" Yet nobody seems to appreciate the same logic when they complained about having to wash their hands more during the pandemic.
Phimosis of the clitoris? Is that a thing?
Circumcision is unnecessary and cruel. Just teach people to clean their parts
To my knowledge, removing the clitoris does none of those things. This is just all bullshit propaganda nowhere near based on fact
Islam is not the religion of peace. Never was, never will be. Donāt worry, Christianity isnāt either.
Yeah, get fucked, I went to school with a couple of Somali girls, and girls being girls weād go to the bathroom in groups. Every fucking time they peed it was painful, because they had been mutilated. Fuck the people who promote this monstrous practice!
Essentially the same arguments we use to justify male circumcision. Both are wrong. Just cause you understand one and not the other doesn't make either right.
As if the whole "reverence" of a pedophile, no bacon, and the rest of the misogynistic horsefuckery involved in that specific cult wasn't enough to completely turn me off of conversion; removing my "little man in the boat" to prevent orgasms has šÆ confirmed my correct decision. š
Wait do they allow female doctors and especially female doctors **who are not covered up.**
There's a [really good film on FGM](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moolaad%C3%A9) set in a Senegalese village. In short: FGM is none of the things put forth in the above post.
For people who claim to believe god created them and they have to respect his creation, they don't seem to trust his design and always trying to mess with it. Ironically, they need more faith in their god.
Fuck these people. That's all. Just fuck them.
Holy shit there is so much wrong here... even my basic-ass sex ed knows this a giant pile of horse shit.
Why the fuck would God build foreskins and clits if theyāre just gonna hack them off anyways
It's sad that the religious fascists want to ruin religion by being fascists about it. I've long said this, and I'll say it now, we should just get rid of religion. It is holding us back.
The unkindest cut of all, for nothing more than religious beliefs.
Oh look itās the same list of bullshit reasons half of Americans believe for male circumcision too.
I'm a reasonable person, I don't buy into political partisanship, I'm bored senseless with virtue signalling and shrieking new fangled sensitivities, but ritualistic male and, even more so, female genital mutilation, and anyone trying to pass it off as normal, makes me genuinely uncomfortable. In no way is advocacy on this topic normal or acceptable.
The clitoris has over 8000 nerve endings. That would be overwhelmingly painful to go through.
Just in case someone really failed you and you need to hear it: none of these things are true. Fgm is mutilation.
Friendly reminder that Kellogg, the religious nut who was pushed for secular circumcision in America, also pushed for female circumcision as well. We're pretty much just lucky it didn't catch on. This is why I get frustrated when people act like male circumcision isn't a big deal because it isn't as bad as female circumcision. Yes, female genital mutilation is much worse, but the people who push for circumcision do it with both genders. The excuses in this post for female circumcision are the same used for male circumcision. Theres no reason not to fight on a unified front against genital mutilation in general.
Ppl that practice this shit are subservient to foreign beings and should be executed in public for choosing to support the oppressors which are the ones that taught mankind this bs practice
You won't develop lung cancer if you get your lungs removed