genital mutilation

[Kragen Sitaker]

Brad writes:
> I think this is utterly ethically wrong.  I think as a culture, it is
> inherently wrong that we brutalize infants without there consent.  The
> medical needs for circumcision are basically gone in modern society, and
> circumcision can always be performed when medically necessary at a later
> date (I know a number of men who had circumcisions in their 30s and 40s).

Well, I agree somewhat.  But given the current supply of neonatal skin
cells from these operations, it would be a crime to have people die
because skin grafts aren't available.

> Non-consent genital mutilation is a crime.  I actually find it very odd
> (considering how sexist our world is) that female genital mutilation has
> gained international attention and condemned, yet male genital mutilation
> has been ignored.  Is this because the religions (most notable Judaism) that
> require male genital mutilation are more accepted to the west than the
> religions and cultures (various African ones, for example) that require
> female genital mutilation?

Clitoridectomy and infibulation are really much worse than foreskin
removal.  Much, much worse.  Go investigate the effects each of these
practices has on its victims.

-- 
<kragen@pobox.com>       Kragen Sitaker     <http://www.pobox.com/~kragen/>
Fri Jul 30 1999
99 days until the Internet stock bubble bursts on Monday, 1999-11-08.
<URL:http://www.pobox.com/~kragen/bubble.html>