There is a touch of outrage in Dearborn today...

[Major Kong]

Female genital mutilation now a 15-year felony in Michigan

[cwtcr hokie]

Female genital mutilation now a 15-year felony in Michigan

they may want to start building more prisons now

[Major Kong]

Female genital mutilation now a 15-year felony in Michigan

they may want to start building more prisons now

It's been a Federal Law since '97 but the max penalty was 5 years...the State of Michigan has upped the prison time to 15 years.

[HokieJoe]

It should be 25 years.

[Bay_area_Hokie]

15 sounds light


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[HokieFanDC]

15 sounds light


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agreed. Barbaric.

[Major Kong]

Agreed. Barbaric.

The big argument I've heard is well why is it alright to mutilate boys (circumcision) but not girls

[USN_Hokie]

Agreed. Barbaric.

The big argument I've heard is well why is it alright to mutilate boys (circumcision) but not girls

You beat me to it. There's no reason in first world countries to circumcise boys. It really is mutilation IMO, though the consequences are admittedly far less.

[Bay_area_Hokie]

Agreed. Barbaric.

The big argument I've heard is well why is it alright to mutilate boys (circumcision) but not girls

Don't they do it girls though so that sex is painful; hence they won't sleep around?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[HokieJoe]

Agreed. Barbaric.

The big argument I've heard is well why is it alright to mutilate boys (circumcision) but not girls

Don't they do it girls though so that sex is painful; hence they won't sleep around?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Clitoridectomy is the most common form of genital mutilation.

[USN_Hokie]

Agreed. Barbaric.

The big argument I've heard is well why is it alright to mutilate boys (circumcision) but not girls

Don't they do it girls though so that sex is painful; hence they won't sleep around?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It varies greatly, anywhere from a "prick" (excuse the pun) to the clitoris (don't think that's common though) to removal of the clitoris, to actually stitching up part of the inner labia (idea obviously being that this would make sex incredibly painful).

The whole thing is disgusting, but according to multiculturalists like Visor this is what we need and can't judge.

Also, H2 thinks that some FGM will solve all of Japan's problems.

[awesome guy]

Agreed. Barbaric.

The big argument I've heard is well why is it alright to mutilate boys (circumcision) but not girls

Don't they do it girls though so that sex is painful; hence they won't sleep around?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

It varies greatly, anywhere from a "prick" (excuse the pun) to the clitoris (don't think that's common though) to removal of the clitoris, to actually stitching up part of the inner labia (idea obviously being that this would make sex incredibly painful).

The whole thing is disgusting, but according to multiculturalists like Visor this is what we need and can't judge.

Also, H2 thinks that some FGM will solve all of Japan's problems.

Arabs must have little junk to need a stitch before childbirth.

[CFB Apologist]

Agreed. Barbaric.

The big argument I've heard is well why is it alright to mutilate boys (circumcision) but not girls

LOL- cmon guys, please do better, you are VT grads allegedly... One is harmless and has documented cleanliness benefits and does not affect sexual activity/fertility AT ALL.. the other essentially removes the pleasure organ of a female, and affects sexual pleasure and function for life. Please do better college grads... if you MUST compare, cutting off a females clitoris is the same as cutting of a boys testicles.. THAT is the comparison... not harmless, unnecessary foreskin.. jesus.

[USN_Hokie]

LOL- cmon guys, please do better, you are VT grads allegedly... One is harmless and has documented cleanliness benefits and does not affect sexual activity/fertility AT ALL..

That is absolutely false.

The "cleanliness" talking point is only applicable to AIDS / STD infected populations in Sub-Saharan Africa, and even there it's disputed.

[USN_Hokie]

. if you MUST compare, cutting off a females clitoris is the same as cutting of a boys testicles.. THAT is the comparison... not harmless, unnecessary foreskin.. jesus.

By the way, the clitoris is complimentary to the penis, not the testes. A hysterectomy would be analogous to a removal of the testes.

The two procedures are more similar than you think.

[CFB Apologist]

. if you MUST compare, cutting off a females clitoris is the same as cutting of a boys testicles.. THAT is the comparison... not harmless, unnecessary foreskin.. jesus.

By the way, the clitoris is complimentary to the penis, not the testes. A hysterectomy would be analogous to a removal of the testes.

The two procedures are more similar than you think.

Sorry USN.. cutting off the clitoris - the pleasure organ for a female and key to sexual desire and function is in no way comparable to cutting off unnecessary foreskin that has nothing to do with sexual function or pleasure.. not remotely comparable. An accurate comparison is cosmetic exterior labia trimming.. harmless and does not affect sexual function... the clitoris?? cmon man.. you are better than this.

[awesome guy]

. if you MUST compare, cutting off a females clitoris is the same as cutting of a boys testicles.. THAT is the comparison... not harmless, unnecessary foreskin.. jesus.

By the way, the clitoris is complimentary to the penis, not the testes. A hysterectomy would be analogous to a removal of the testes.

The two procedures are more similar than you think.

one removes the skin, the other the appendage. They're not the same.

[CFB Apologist]

. if you MUST compare, cutting off a females clitoris is the same as cutting of a boys testicles.. THAT is the comparison... not harmless, unnecessary foreskin.. jesus.

By the way, the clitoris is complimentary to the penis, not the testes. A hysterectomy would be analogous to a removal of the testes.

The two procedures are more similar than you think.

one removes the skin, the other the appendage. They're not the same.

Yep- whatever procedure you could do to render a male impotent and unable to enjoy sex is the comparison here.. NOT removing foreskin 24 hours after birth where you cant feel it or remember it.

[USN_Hokie]

. if you MUST compare, cutting off a females clitoris is the same as cutting of a boys testicles.. THAT is the comparison... not harmless, unnecessary foreskin.. jesus.

By the way, the clitoris is complimentary to the penis, not the testes. A hysterectomy would be analogous to a removal of the testes.

The two procedures are more similar than you think.

Sorry USN.. cutting off the clitoris - the pleasure organ for a female and key to sexual desire and function is in no way comparable to cutting off unnecessary foreskin that has nothing to do with sexual function or pleasure.. not remotely comparable. An accurate comparison is cosmetic exterior labia trimming.. harmless and does not affect sexual function... the clitoris?? cmon man.. you are better than this.

That makes no sense. The penis is the pleasure organ for men, and the foreskin contains something like 1/3 of the sensory tissue for the organ. Just because it still works does not mean it's not impacted. Calling the foreskin "unnecessary" is just laughable.

Mutilation of the clitoris is directly correlative to mutilation of the penis. As I said before, the penis is never mutilated to the extent that the clitoris is.

[USN_Hokie]

. if you MUST compare, cutting off a females clitoris is the same as cutting of a boys testicles.. THAT is the comparison... not harmless, unnecessary foreskin.. jesus.

By the way, the clitoris is complimentary to the penis, not the testes. A hysterectomy would be analogous to a removal of the testes.

The two procedures are more similar than you think.

one removes the skin, the other the appendage. They're not the same.

I said in my first response that FGM was usually far more extensive with greater implications. That doesn't take away from the fact that they are both mutilations of the organ.

[awesome guy]

. if you MUST compare, cutting off a females clitoris is the same as cutting of a boys testicles.. THAT is the comparison... not harmless, unnecessary foreskin.. jesus.

By the way, the clitoris is complimentary to the penis, not the testes. A hysterectomy would be analogous to a removal of the testes.

The two procedures are more similar than you think.

Sorry USN.. cutting off the clitoris - the pleasure organ for a female and key to sexual desire and function is in no way comparable to cutting off unnecessary foreskin that has nothing to do with sexual function or pleasure.. not remotely comparable. An accurate comparison is cosmetic exterior labia trimming.. harmless and does not affect sexual function... the clitoris?? cmon man.. you are better than this.

That makes no sense. The penis is the pleasure organ for men, and the foreskin contains something like 1/3 of the sensory tissue for the organ. Just because it still works does not mean it's not impacted. Calling the foreskin "unnecessary" is just laughable.

Mutilation of the clitoris is directly correlative to mutilation of the penis. As I said before, the penis is never mutilated to the extent that the clitoris is.

You're right on the anatomy part. Just check out what happens to female body builders, athletes, and in general ones on steroids. The clit becomes a penis, as happens in the womb and we all start out as female and then us chosen individuals evolve into males when hormones enter the womb. But the foreskin being removed isn't a big impact.

[USN_Hokie]

Here's studies showing increased risk of narrow urethra, trauma (this one is really interesting), premature ejaculation, decreased sensitivity after circumcision.

Incidence of asymptomatic meatal stenosis (narrow urethra) in children following neonatal circumcision.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20851685



Incidence of meatal stenosis following neonatal circumcision in a primary care setting.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16429216


Alexithymia and Circumcision Trauma: A Preliminary Investigation
http://www.mensstudies.info/OJS/index.p ... e/view/614



Prevalence and correlates of premature ejaculation in a primary care setting: a preliminary cross-sectional study.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21492404



Male circumcision decreases penile sensitivity as measured in a large cohort.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2337 ... t=Abstract



Fine-touch pressure thresholds in the adult penis.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17378847



Comparison of ring block, dorsal penile nerve block, and topical anesthesia for neonatal circumcision: a randomized controlled trial.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9417009


......but I'm supposedly the one making anti-science arguments in this thread.

I get it - people who have been cut will defend that decision. Your junk still works, got it. That doesn't mean your current configuration is better than what you were born with and man evolved to over millions of years.

[RiverguyVT]

Does anyone here know the koran? What does the koran have to say about the practice (on women)?

I am presuming it to be a cultural phenomenon, but not a koranic one, but I'd be totally guessing.

[USN_Hokie]

Here's studies showing increased risk of narrow urethra, trauma (this one is really interesting), premature ejaculation, decreased sensitivity after circumcision.

Incidence of asymptomatic meatal stenosis (narrow urethra) in children following neonatal circumcision.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20851685



Incidence of meatal stenosis following neonatal circumcision in a primary care setting.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16429216


Alexithymia and Circumcision Trauma: A Preliminary Investigation
http://www.mensstudies.info/OJS/index.p ... e/view/614



Prevalence and correlates of premature ejaculation in a primary care setting: a preliminary cross-sectional study.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21492404



Male circumcision decreases penile sensitivity as measured in a large cohort.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2337 ... t=Abstract



Fine-touch pressure thresholds in the adult penis.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17378847



Comparison of ring block, dorsal penile nerve block, and topical anesthesia for neonatal circumcision: a randomized controlled trial.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9417009


......but I'm supposedly the one making anti-science arguments in this thread.

I get it - people who have been cut will defend that decision. Your junk still works, got it. That doesn't mean your current configuration is better than what you were born with and man evolved to over millions of years.

Forgot to add: Anyone know someone who was not circumcised and now wishes they were as an adult? Aside from the rare person who had a medical issue, there's none I'm aware of.

Aren't they the right people to ask about it being useless?

[RiverguyVT]

Here's studies showing increased risk of narrow urethra, trauma (this one is really interesting), premature ejaculation, decreased sensitivity after circumcision.

Incidence of asymptomatic meatal stenosis (narrow urethra) in children following neonatal circumcision.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20851685



Incidence of meatal stenosis following neonatal circumcision in a primary care setting.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16429216


Alexithymia and Circumcision Trauma: A Preliminary Investigation
http://www.mensstudies.info/OJS/index.p ... e/view/614



Prevalence and correlates of premature ejaculation in a primary care setting: a preliminary cross-sectional study.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21492404



Male circumcision decreases penile sensitivity as measured in a large cohort.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2337 ... t=Abstract



Fine-touch pressure thresholds in the adult penis.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17378847



Comparison of ring block, dorsal penile nerve block, and topical anesthesia for neonatal circumcision: a randomized controlled trial.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9417009


......but I'm supposedly the one making anti-science arguments in this thread.

I get it - people who have been cut will defend that decision. Your junk still works, got it. That doesn't mean your current configuration is better than what you were born with and man evolved to over millions of years.

Almost like it's a cause or something...