BMJ defends FGM

fancythat I think most professionals would prefer to find ways to stop it happening in the first place than deal with the legal consequences after the event.

Rosie51

theworriedwell There was an infamous American case where twin boys were circumcised and one completely lost his penis. Why take that risk? I believe he committed suicide.

Yes he did, but probably more to do with the abuse he and his twin suffered under John Money, advocate of gender reassignment.

embryo.asu.edu/pages/david-reimer-and-john-money-gender-reassignment-controversy-johnjoan-case

Why did that abuse start? Yes because his penis was cut off. He found out what they'd done and tried to live as a man. He committed suicide and I think his twin did as well. What was the root cause? An unnecessary surgical procedure on an innocent baby.

Not the only deaths caused by male circumcision. Have a look at the study I linked, one of those babies died.

All circumcision for religious or cultural reasons should be illegal.

foxie48

The essay is opening discussion in a professional context. If something is illegal but continues covertly, then surely an open discussion between professionals looking at current practice and the language used is worthwhile. I can be as vehemently opposed to something as I like but if it's not getting the results I want then I think it would be sensible to think about the reasons why. No one is saying these practices are in any way acceptable but they are continuing in some communities so perhaps there are different/better ways of preventing them?

Doctors and other regulated healthcare professionals in the UK are trained to spot signs of female genital mutilation (FGM) and are legally required to report "known" cases involving girls under 18 to the police.

If this Country is serious about it being stopped, then more discussion is hardly the answer. When legislation is already in place to deal with it.

Yes foxie48, trying to find a way to stop it more effective than all this performative breast beating. I want it stopped and I want women and children safe.

The essay is opening discussion in a professional context. If something is illegal but continues covertly, then surely an open discussion between professionals looking at current practice and the language used is worthwhile. I can be as vehemently opposed to something as I like but if it's not getting the results I want then I think it would be sensible to think about the reasons why. No one is saying these practices are in any way acceptable but they are continuing in some communities so perhaps there are different/better ways of preventing them?

I have read that it still goes on in some flats in London.
Where a group supports it they will find a way to do it.

It has been called out, and there is legislation in place. In the UK, and perhaps other places too.

LBC Sheila Fogarty now discussing this

I agree. It's not OK. It's cruel violence and should be called out. If it means those cultures who pursue this feel singled out or bad about themselves then so be it.

Do communities that practise FGM see it as violence, though? Maybe they don’t, because it’s what’s always happened. Maybe it needs to have the word violence attached to it, for people to understand it’s significance. When smacking is framed as violence against a child it’s much more shocking than it simply being something that ‘happened to me and it didn’t do me any harm’

fancythat

It is illegal.

Which doesnt seem to count for much nowadays.

In this country, quite a few girls are “shipped” out when they reach puberty

Personally, I would not expect to move to a Country, and then act illegally there.

And if have been in that Country a while, still act illegally.

It is illegal.

Which doesnt seem to count for much nowadays.

I didn’t see anyone on this thread seeing FGM as anything other than violence to women and girls. It’s a criminal offence, it’s covered in every safeguarding guidance in all agencies.

The way agencies approach communities where it’s an established necessity is rightly being raised. As foxie recognises, the approach, the language used in engaging with these communities is key. I use the words horrific, barbaric here. Using these words to eg a mother open to discussing not subjecting her daughters to it, might result in her just closing down, her daughter might be on a plane rather than the subject of safeguarding

Perhaps FGM should be called what it is - violence against women and girls.

Wife-beating used to be something that a husband could mete out to his wife for perceived annoyances and smacking was a recognised form of discipline for children. Both were aspects of ‘our’ culture but we no longer tolerate those acts, we call them what they are - violence - and have legislated against them.

Nannee49

Surely we all do that notSpaghetti?Couldn't agree more Maremia

I don't think so,
Sadly!

theworriedwell There was an infamous American case where twin boys were circumcised and one completely lost his penis. Why take that risk? I believe he committed suicide.

Yes he did, but probably more to do with the abuse he and his twin suffered under John Money, advocate of gender reassignment.

embryo.asu.edu/pages/david-reimer-and-john-money-gender-reassignment-controversy-johnjoan-case

From start to finish foxie48

Thanks Galaxy

It's interesting that the issue of language has been raised because that is an issue that is discussed in the essay. It questions if the use of language like "mutilation" makes it more difficult to discuss these practices in an open way.
They don't use this example and it's purely mine and obviously doesn't explain the thinking that well but imagine a conversation between a vegan and a meat eater. Does it aid the conversation if the vegan tells the meat eater that what they are doing is barbaric, cruel or completely unnecessary? Or does the use of that language tend to make the meat eater defensive, angry, less open to a discussion?

If certain practices are an embedded practice in some countries and from what I've read, the practices around what we call FMG actually cover a very wide range of practices, some very similar to circumcision, does the use of judgmental language proscribed by Western cultures, help or hinder those, like me who would like to see these practices completely cease. That's actually quite an important issue raised in the essay (not that most people seem to have read it).

Against Maremia.

Re male circumcision: DDs friend married a Jewish chap and had a baby boy. A special chap (not a doctor) had to come up from London to do it. The concept of cutting this little baby was unbearable. I don't know how the mother allowed it or coped at all.

The communities, from wherever in the world, who choose to make their lives here - I'll say a very clear pre-emptive...I do not have a problem with that...know that there are practices and traditions with which they will not agree but they choose to emigrate anyway.

It's absolutely disingenuous to then take issue with so called Westernised thinking in a matter which causes lifelong suffering and which is not only a frowned upon practice but a crime.

The whole article in the BMJ labours to point out that some Western viewpoints are damaging, minimalising and derogatory of different cultures, stating adornment, tightening, trimming of female genitalia etc are cultural things in Western society without ever acknowledging these practices are the result of choice not coercion.

I wonder who funded the research?

Was that for or against the procedure?

Nimco ali has some interesting point in that the campaigning and language around fgm came predominantly from the women who experienced it as girls.