Forum:Circumcision Article

< Index | RW Article discussion

The circumcision page is loaded with outright nonsense. FGM and circumcision remove body parts with different anatomic equivalence. The clitoral hood is the female equivalent of the foreskin, and it's removed to increase sexual function and reduce infection. The male equivalent to FGM is the penectomy, which is performed on patients with penile cancer. To suggest that MRA activists have a valid point with this issue is downright disrespectful to the women who go through FGM.

I made pretty substantial changes to the article, but it was changed back two minutes later with no reason given. Intactivists shouldn't be the kind of people this site promotes. They're conspiracy theorists who pretend to be skeptics, like the Infowars crew, the Amazing Atheist, Joe Rogan, Aaron McGruder, or Bill Maher whenever he talks about medicine.

That said, I won't change the article back until I see some people who want to support this. I don't want to start an edit war.*Asterisk* (talk) 16:43, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

In my opinion your edit was terrible & introduced lots of red herrings & false comparisons into the text. Trying to line up direct "equivalents" between various male & female forms of mutilation seems like a pointless endeavour that does nothing to improve understanding or strengthen whatever argument you're trying to make. Weaseloid^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 00:18, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

& BTW, this discussion should really be on the article's talk page, not somewhere else. ₩€₳$€£ΘĪÐ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 00:20, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

It's as simple as a basic understanding of homology in males and females. We're not different atomic structures, we're not even different species, we're very similar, and it's not that hard to see them by an actual analysis of anatomical structures. Lining comparisons up is one of the most basic elements of critical thinking, and you're acting like it's impossible. If you had any ability for critical thinking on every issue rather than picking and choosing, you'd be able to see that.

You do have a fair point, though. I'll head to the talk page, and from now on, automatically delete any comments made in this thread.*Asterisk* (talk) 02:52, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

The clitoral hood is the female equivalent of the foreskin, and it's removed to increase sexual function and reduce infection.

Citation needed. Father Vivian O'Blivion talk 17:14, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

They're already in my article, but okay. Here's one. Here's another. If you want even more detail, take an elementary sexual anatomy course sometime. Males and females start out the same in the womb before the Y chromosome activates or doesn't activate, so it isn't that hard to find the equivalent parts.*Asterisk* (talk) 17:36, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

If you want to argue that the prevailing "reason" for the God-knows-how-many FGM's are inflicted on girls every year is to "increase sexual function," you'll have to do better than a random website (with a headline ending in a question mark) and a Wikipedia article. Father Vivian O'Blivion talk 17:40, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

FGM's an entirely different proceedure from clitoral hood removal, which you would already know had you actually read my edits rather than take one look at the word circumcision and post the Wiki equivalent of "pics or it didn't happen."

Try to actually read my post this time. FGM, as defined by the NHO, is divided into four general types. The full or partial removal of the clitoris, the full or partial removal of the clitoris and inner labia, the removal of all external genitalia and the fusing of the wound, and a fourth miscellaneous category. All are horrible procedures, but the difference between them and the removal of the male foreskin is what these body parts are homologous to.

It's not like men and women are substantially different at the genetic level. Up until the SRY gene starts its activation in the womb, men and women are anatomically indistinguishable, so all our sex organs have very close equivalents. For instance, both males and females have gonads, but on the male, the gonads are the testicles, and on females, the gonads are the ovaries. So when it comes to the matter of the various types of FGM, it's very easy to pick out the female equivalents, and likewise with circumcision. FGM Type I on a male would be the removal of the male's genital tubercle, the penis. FGM Type II on a male would be the removal of a male's genital tubercle and labialscrotal folds, the penis and the scrotum. FGM Type III on a male would be infibulation, a horrible procedure that used to be performed by the Greeks, plus a scrotal removal. That said, these are still not exact equivalents, since the male gonads are external, while the female gonads are internal. With the exception of FGM Type I, there is no way to perform these procedures that still allows the male to reproduce.

"So what," you might ask, "is the female equivalent of the foreskin?" The clitoral hood. Which, like the male foreskin, serves no purpose to the body other than to get infected. The same can be said about tonsils, wisdom teeth, and appendixes.

So please, if you have any respect for sexual health, stop condoning the retarded comparison of foreskin removal to FGM. They're nothing alike, and the circumcision article on this site is downright misinformation. *Asterisk* (talk) 19:29, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

None of this has anything to do with the reasons actual FGM is performed on actual women. Father Vivian O'Blivion talk 19:47, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

I never said anything about FGM being okay. It's a barbaric relic of witchcraft performed for no reason other than paranoid tribalism. It should never be performed on any woman. It also has nothing in common with foreskin removal or hood removal. Now could you actually read my posts for once, my friend? *Asterisk* (talk) 19:58, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

I did. You said that FGM is performed "to increase sexual function and reduce infection." Now you're saying something else? Father Vivian O'Blivion talk 23:21, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

I said nothing of the sort. What I said was that the true equivalent to male circumcision for females is the removal of the clitoral hood. FGM is an entirely different procedure, and it's downright offensive to suggest otherwise.*Asterisk* (talk) 02:52, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

I haven't read a word one this page, but, I just want to say the bible doesn't require Circumcision anymore. But it did, in the OT. Anyway, its proven it's healthy... Pitzy 19:16, 15 January 2015 (UTC)