Stop Cutting the Kids! Leave the Kids ALONE!

Stop Cutting the Kids! Leave the Kids ALONE!
Exploring the issues of adults taking knives to children’s genitals…

In recent days the Democrat Congresswoman Ilhan Omar has been much in the news. Along with Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib, there can be no doubt Omar has become the media face of Muslims in US progressive politics.
There are many controversies brewing about these congresswomen, and others recruited to run for congress by the pressure group “Justice Democrats”, who are collectively now known as “the squad”: these may well be the focus of a further article in the near future.

But one issue that is a matter of concern to Americans, and to those with concerns with the integration of Muslims into societies across the western world, is FGM: Female Genital Mutilation.
In this practise, the front section of the vagina, a girl’s clitoris, is cut off.

Feelings about this practise are understandably strong. It is illegal in the United Kingdom and other western nations, but despite this, it has taken a long time to get any legal action mounted in the UK against those suspected of carrying out the practise, and the first instance of this only occurred in early 2019. Child safeguarding professionals, social workers, nursery workers, doctors, teachers, receive training in the issue of FGM and what to look out for that might suggest a child has been subject to this abuse. An estimated 137,000 women living in the UK are thought to have been impactred by FGM, and almost 300 FGM protection orders to safeguard children have been made since 2015 https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/feb/01/fgm-mother-of-three-year-old-first-person-convicted-in-uk
FGM is a practise that only has religious perspectives to attempt its justification. It is considered to have originated in ancient Egypt, which is why it is also sometimes known as “pharaonic circumcision” amongst the people of Sudan.
http://www.fgm.co.nz/background-to-fgm

Those who practise FGM are adults who almost inevitably are women who have had the procedure done to them. Some carry it out on infants, while others wait for a girl to reach puberty and do the cutting up to age 16.

Its defenders state “its our culture” and make claims FGM prevents “hyper sexuality” but to modern western eyes this is of course offensively barbaric. By removing a woman#s ability to experience full sexual pleasure, the benefit for male patriarchal culture is the full please of sexuality is reserved for men: and women unable to fully experience their own sexuality therefore are considered to be lest tempted to stray into adultery. No-one on the planet who calls themselves a feminist has any business supporting this practise, given it is a direct assault and restriction on equality, and based on a desire to limit and control.

That the practise is carried out by women only shows that those women benefit from a kind of “slave foreman” mentality: they get a perverse reflected glory for “upholding tradition”: but in reality it is the perpetuation of a cycle of abuse by the abused, in a kind of Stockholm syndrome gaslighting. It is a mentality that suggests women are the property of men, in an equivalent way to a Camel in the originating cultures.

So, to return to the current debate in the USA, Ilhan Omar was recently asked what she thought about FGM:

She turned the question back on the questioner and expressed offense about being asked about it “because she is a Muslim” and that Muslim representatives should be expected to be subjected to that line of questioning instead of more normal political questions. Omar did state “its disgusting” but not in a consistent commentary that would allow her to be directly quoted with one or two consecutive sentences, or short unedited 10-15 second video clip. Some see this as a dodge.

And that is interesting, because a person Omar is known to associate with is the Muslim activist Linda Sarsour. Sarsour was nominated Glamour Magazines “woman of the year” in 2017, and has shared platforms with US progressive feminists: yet Sarsour has a history of defending FGM.

Muslim reform activist and strong opponent of FGM, Ayaan Hirshi Ali, has directly called Sarsour out about this: not to a satisfactory reply: https://womenintheworld.com/2017/02/02/ayaan-hirsi-ali-says-controversial-womens-march-organizer-is-a-fake-feminist/

OK, FGM IS HORRIBLE AND OFFENSIVE: IT’S A PROBLEM WITH MUSLIMS, RIGHT?

In the current context of society, FGM and practitioners of certain sects of Islam are inextricably linked. But we should not be overtly smug and culturally superior about this. “Pharonic Circumcision” by default indicates the practise far predates the origin of Islam, and in fact, it was carried out by some Christian sects, provably in America right up to the 1980’s, as well as a minor tribe of Ethiopian Jews, and it is an issue in Christian communities in Africa today. There are probably many more women who have suffered religious motivated NON-Islamic FGM to come forwards.


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-religion-fgm/u-s-woman-says-strict-christian-parents-subjected-her-to-fgm-idUSKCN1RD2LI
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1110570413000258
https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2016/02/female-genital-mutilation-not-uniquely-muslim-problem/

It seems that when the “Man in the Sky” is forceful enough communicating “HIS” will, the notion to slice at little girls parts can occur in any religious culture…

AND WHAT ABOUT THE LITTLE BOYS?

One of the issues Western Society has in tackling the perceived contra factors to Islamic integration, is balancing that against the rule of law.

It is certainly possible that some girls suffering risk or occurrence of FGM in the West may not be Muslims: so this is not a question of stamping out the practice only in terms of restrictions on Islam.
And if we then consider such a law: what is the most significant problem with the practise?
Is it primarily the restriction of sexuality as a tool of social control?
Or is it adults carrying out totally unjustified surgical procedures on children’s genitalia when a child cannot give informed consent?

Because there is another religious culture that chops away at children’s genitals without any social criticism at all: The Jewish community.
Little boys being circumcised is synonymous with the very notion of Jewish Identity.
But this doesn’t do any harm... does it?

---

Firstly the ethical problem of “rules of the Sky God fine to impose on male children but not female children” on the basis that removing a foreskin does not impact on male sexual pleasure is a hard line to truly justify,![]![] if our modern social consciousness says children should be protected from any medically unjustified procedure EQUALLY.
Secondly, there is a non-zero risk of serious infection for boys post circumcision that causes serious illness and deaths.

It is estimated there are around 230 preventable infant deaths as a result of male circumcision in the United States annually http://www.cirp.org/library/death/

Of course, not all these children will be Jewish, as pretty uniquely in the western world, the USA has very high levels of male circumcision: in fact, there are more cut cocks than not, with about 80% of US men getting through life without a foreskin. Worldwide, it is estimated 30% of men are circumcised https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prevalence_of_circumcision

Historically, non religious medical circumcision of children was justified on the basis of “health and hygiene” benefits.

However, this is entirely mythological, and has no scientific basis what-so-ever. The medical dogma circumcised penises protect children from urinary tract infections are about as convincing as those claiming putting rat poison (fluoride) in the water supply is good for teeth, as incidence of infant UTI are so small, and occur in both circumcised and uncircumcised children, any claim it is a “protective” procedure evaporate into statistical irrelevance
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/nz5kmm/is-a-circumcised-penis-really-any-healthier

Instead the only real justification for cutting off a child’s foreskin is when there is a problem with the penis’s development and the skin has formed too type, trapping and distorting the foreskin preventing the organs normal development: of course this a very small number of instances, in the same small order of children who have problems with cleft palates or other medically correctable developmental abnormalities: which certainly cant justify such a procedure for 80% of the US male population.

OK SO 1/3rd OF THE WORLDS MEN HAVE THEIR COCK SLICED, AND ITS ALL BASED ON BELIEF NOT HARD SCIENCE? WHAT A MESS!

It is indeed.

The practise of circumcising children is so bound up in cultural norms being taken as reason enough to override a child’s inability to consent to unwanted needed and actually or potentially harmful procedures, it is a landmine of sensitivities.

In part the double standard between Jewish/Medical circumcision of boys, and justified anger at religious circumcision of girls, is about cultural integration.

Objectively most reasonable people, including the majority of Muslims, should be able to see that the Jewish community has been able to maintain its own religion based practices, even when they cause harm to a child, because that community has historically sought to keep its ways private and to itself and not seek to advocate for them to be more widespread in society.

Jews may have their own schools, traditions, even police forces, but they have only sought to have those things FOR Jews: while the more radical Islamists who agitate for Sharia Law want it imposed across society worldwide: even if that aspiration is an absurd impossibility. Thus the first group (and as a result of the terrible time Jews had in the 20th Century) been mostly unconsidered, certainly in terms of circumcision, while the second generates 100,000's of webpages posts and videos of concern..

If we imagine ourselves looking at this from the perspective of Ilhan Omar or Linda Sarsour: is it not understandable that they see a double standard? Why can Jews or other Americans have their tradition to “protect” their children while they can not? After all, FGM advocates directly state “hyper sexuality” due to the presence of a clitoris is a HARM to their child’s life chances and future wellbeing: however irrational and ethically suspect such a position might really be.

Such social difficulties are never going to be resolved quickly or easily: but there is ONE Nation in the World that has found the political will to point the way towards a solution…

COLD WEATHER MUST PRODUCE RATIONAL THINKING: HERE COMES ICELAND!

In the last couple of years Icelandic politicians have proposed a world first policy:

Ban ALL Circumcision of ALL Children!

When the world media became aware of this in spring 2018, it produced the most almighty international row:
Some said it would alienate Jewish or Muslim communities, or that the practise would go underground with parents doing it themselves at home, or just that… well… the idea is just not on somehow!

And for now, this was successful at preventing the proposed new Law making it to a vote in Iceland's Parliament.

But like all major significant and necessary social change, the seed of the idea has been planted, and started to germinate.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/18/iceland-ban-male-circumcision-first-european-country
https://grapevine.is/news/2018/04/26/ban-on-circumcision-to-be-dismissed-in-parliament/

“The Icelandic bill says the circumcision of young boys violates their rights and is incompatible with the United Nations convention on the rights of the child. It draws a parallel with female genital mutilation, already outlawed in most European countries.

It acknowledges that while parents have the right to give religious guidance to their children, “such a right can never exceed the rights of the child”. Boys who wish to be circumcised for religious or cultural reasons can do so when they reach an age at which they “understand what is involved in such an action”, it suggests.”

It’s obviously no surprise to the reader that I completely concur with the Icelandic analysis and proposed Law, and I am sure this debate will continue to grow and spread in the years ahead…

IT’S A TRANS WORLD NOW…

We live in times where a young adult can choose to undergo hormone therapy and undergo gender realignment surgery, where there sexual organs can be surgical altered to turn poles into holes and visa versa.

There is no reason circumcisions cannot be performed on adults:
So why are we even tolerating them being performed on children at all?
Is any religion above the greater majority of society and a common rule of law for all?

Yet in developing the medical science and legal framework that embraces transgenderism, the issue of INFORMED CONSENT has been placed absolutely at the front of social thought on the issue.

Is there any rational reason children cannot be left to be children, and voluntarily choose to undergo circumcision at their legal adulthood: if it is important to THEM to honour and maintain cultural traditions?

And ethically: if an adult woman presented herself at a plastic surgery clinic, that routinely offers nips and cuts of all kinds, including to improve sexual pleasure: is there any rational reason to refuse her the right to remove her clitoris: if that is her free will decision and she demonstrably has mental capacity and understands the decision and its consequences?

Could we truly find respecting that freedom of choice unconscionable because it has permanent life impacting consequences:
When ANYBODY and EVERYBODY undergoing full transgender realignment has to sacrifice their biological reproductivity to do so?
My view is: there is an argument there to be made!

CONCLUSION

My expectation is that this article will have provided some challenge and opportunity for reflection for the majority of its readers: after all, if you are a man reading this, the raw odds are 1 in 3 of you are doing so without a foreskin: and its possible some of the info here may be a new perspective that you hadn't considered before. I do empathise with my audience, and I thank you for continuing with it to its conclusion.

There are no simple answer to complex social questions:
But nothing gets better from a refusal to try to examine and understand it.

Emotionally, I react very strongly against what I consider the barbarity of Female Genital Mutilation, as I am sure most other readers also do:

But in seeking a social solution that is truly respective and inclusive while protecting children from the imposition of adults beliefs while they grow to adulthood themselves, we are required to do more than just point the finger reflexively at one social group and condemn.

Societies greatest injustices always occur in the blind spot of what we don’t want to examine and consider.

I also find no greater moral or spiritual compulsion than the determination to safeguard and protect children. This world has far too many people who seek to use children to evil purposes, and even when the harm is one an adult is not consciously aware of: the harm is still there.

I invite all readers to consider the requirement to derive at a rational and ethically consistent solution to social problems:

And therefore hope many of you will join me in summarising this article by concurring with its title after considering its arguments:

Stop Cutting the Kids! Leave the Kids ALONE!

#ForTheChildren
#ALWAYS

John The White

---

Follow me on Steemit: https://steemit.com/@john-the-white
Support me on SubsribeStar: https://www.subscribestar.com/john-the-white

Concerned a child, for any reason, may not be safe? ALWAYS ACT!
See something, say something:
Better to be wrong... than forever SORRY...