Female circumcision?

type 1+2 are most common from the list when you consider the percentage done, female circumcision was occasionally done in the states for the victorian reasoning of reducing masturbation, and was actually covered by some insurance plans till the 70's and was outlawed in the 90's

women/girls are typically done when older, as in they have some chance to argue against it, U.S. males have no ability to argue back or remember what being intact was

you keep jumping to saying all female circ's are type 3, the fact is they aren't, most circumcised women are not sewn up

also remember in these cultures it is not men doing it to women, it is women doing it to women, similar to what males do to their male offspring

america has no right to criticise FGM when we commit MGM and act like it's normal

 

http://www.fgmnetwork.org/intro/mgmfgm.php

oh yeah from the webpage you linked to, they list no difference between the outcomes of the two. the most sensitive parts are removed in both and so on, check out the link

 

.

 

You can find this on Youtube. But be warned it will make you cry. Seriously.

 

-

 

To equate female genital mutilation and male circumcision is ridiculous. FGM excises the clitoris; the equivalent male operation would be to cut off the glans, not the foreskin.



quote=cloud7;4490772]http://www.fgmnetwork.org/intro/mgmfgm.php

oh yeah from the webpage you linked to, they list no difference between the outcomes of the two. the most sensitive parts are removed in both and so on, check out the link[/quote]

 

it's valid because removing the foreskin desensitizes the male glans to the point where it doesn't give much sexual pleasure, yes we can still feel with it, but from rubbing against underwear and such ALL THE TIME the feeling means nothing and that is the point, in a women in female circumcisions where they do remove it, it is removed because a females anatomy will not desensitize if uncovered to the same severity as a male as it will not rub against clothing and the remaining skin will give the clitoris some protection

a little more detail then you probably want:
from doing non-surgical foreskin restoration I have lost a lot of keratinized skin that was covering a moist, healthy, sensitive glans I can now feel exactly when the glans touches underwear and can feel the texture, before it was just "it's resting against something I think", the sensation difference is great, there is NO doubt in my mind that the results of both are the same and that is to reduce sexual pleasure

 

I don' t feel that the glans of my penis has become desensitized "to the point that it doesn't give much sexual pleasure". Maybe that just was your personal experience. I have thoroughly enjoyed the sexual pleasure I have experienced in the thousands of times I have been fortunate enough to be allowed to insert my penis into a welcoming vagina. And I would judge that many of the other 120 million circumcised American men would agree.

 

I seriously wonder if your really a sex therapist. ALL of my male friends that have been cut wish they weren't. I'd really love to see where you get half your statistics. :toetap05: I'm just going to stop reading the threads you post in, cause I call BS.

 

only because that's all they know, if you all you know is a rough non sensitive glans then you won't think of it that way, once you experience it it's natural moist, healthy non karetinized state there is no comparison which way is better