• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Up to 2000 British girls undergo horror of genital mutilation this summer

mikhail

blond bombshell
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 14, 2005
Messages
4,729
Reaction score
763
Location
uk
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
British girls undergo horror of genital mutilation despite tough laws | Society | The Observer

Female circumcision will be inflicted on up to 2,000 British schoolgirls during the summer holidays – leaving brutal physical and emotional scars. Yet there have been no prosecutions against the practice

"Some 500 to 2,000 British schoolgirls will be genitally mutilated over the summer holidays. Some will be taken abroad, others will be "cut" or circumcised and sewn closed here in the UK by women already living here or who are flown in and brought to "cutting parties" for a few girls at a time in a cost-saving exercise.

Then the girls will return to their schools and try to get on with their lives, scarred mentally and physically by female genital mutilation (FGM), a practice that serves as a social and cultural bonding exercise and, among those who are stitched up, to ensure that chastity can be proved to a future husband."

This is completly unacceptable something must be done.
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,659
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
*Shakin' head here* If this isn't child abuse, then I don't know what is. What kind of religion inflicts this torture on its women? Well, we all know what religion it is -- and it's an abhorrant practice. If these human beings expect to be respected....want tolerance from nonbelievers...want a place on the world stage...they've got to stop this crap. Awful. Just awful.
 

Orion

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
8,083
Reaction score
3,918
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Female circumcision and male circumcision are equally horrible. I don't see why it's okay to mutilate a baby boy's genitals by removing delicate, highly innervated foreskin, yet it's the end of the world when a woman's clitoris is attacked. Both practices originate with ensuring chastity and discouraging masturbation as well as sexual gratification.
 

mikhail

blond bombshell
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 14, 2005
Messages
4,729
Reaction score
763
Location
uk
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Female circumcision and male circumcision are equally horrible. I don't see why it's okay to mutilate a baby boy's genitals by removing delicate, highly innervated foreskin, yet it's the end of the world when a woman's clitoris is attacked. Both practices originate with ensuring chastity and discouraging masturbation as well as sexual gratification.
Well one is clearly much more painful than the other they are not the same at all really.Its the same difference as being stab in the gut rather than the toe.
 

Vader

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 24, 2005
Messages
8,260
Reaction score
1,064
Location
Whitewater, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
I believe the proper response to this nonesense is to execute the parties conducting these parties and the parents allowing it to occur.

Then ... the outright arrest and deportation of any religious screwballs advocating such things.
 

Vader

DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 24, 2005
Messages
8,260
Reaction score
1,064
Location
Whitewater, CO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Not true.

There are medical reasons for circumcision.

Some of the medical reasons parents choose circumcision are to protect against infections of the urinary tract and the foreskin, prevent cancer, lower the risk of getting sexually transmitted diseases, and prevent phimosis (a tightening of the foreskin that may close the opening of the penis).

Read more: What is the purpose of circumcision? | Answerbag What is the purpose of circumcision? | Answerbag
 

Orion

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
8,083
Reaction score
3,918
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Well one is clearly much more painful than the other they are not the same at all really.Its the same difference as being stab in the gut rather than the toe.
I'm sorry but are you equivocating the cutting off of foreskin without anesthesia to damaging the clitoris? Last time I checked both are excruciatingly painful and result in permanent damage to the genitalia.

Vader said:
Not true.

There are medical reasons for circumcision.

Some of the medical reasons parents choose circumcision are to protect against infections of the urinary tract and the foreskin, prevent cancer, lower the risk of getting sexually transmitted diseases, and prevent phimosis (a tightening of the foreskin that may close the opening of the penis).
You don't have to quote FAQ websites to me. I'm a doctor and fully aware of the medical reasons for circumcision, many of which are valid; however, aesthetic circumcision is wrong and so is religious circumcision. If we are fighting against the culture of female circumcision then we should be equally outraged that it is also happening to boys. The procedures may be different but the results are the same: permanent damage to the genitalia, loss of sensation, loss of natural function, and it is done against the will of the patient.

Religion has made male circumcision acceptable. If it weren't for that, we would all be against the unnatural practice of it. Just because it is culturally in vogue does not mean I have to be okay with it.
 

Laila

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Messages
10,100
Reaction score
2,990
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Reading about FGM always makes me angry.
The law should be extended to those who knowingly take their children abroad to face the mutilation.
 

MaggieD

Supporting Member
Monthly Subscriber
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
43,244
Reaction score
44,659
Location
Chicago Area
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Moderate
I'm sorry but are you equivocating the cutting off of foreskin without anesthesia to damaging the clitoris? Last time I checked both are excruciatingly painful and result in permanent damage to the genitalia.
This thread isn't about male circumcision.


You don't have to quote FAQ websites to me. I'm a doctor and fully aware of the medical reasons for circumcision, many of which are valid; however, aesthetic circumcision is wrong and so is religious circumcision. If we are fighting against the culture of female circumcision then we should be equally outraged that it is also happening to boys. The procedures may be different but the results are the same: permanent damage to the genitalia, loss of sensation, loss of natural function, and it is done against the will of the patient.
I think sewing up a girl's vagina and removing her external genetilia at the age 12 to be able to prove to her future mate she's a virgin is a bit different from male circumcision.

Religion has made male circumcision acceptable. If it weren't for that, we would all be against the unnatural practice of it. Just because it is culturally in vogue does not mean I have to be okay with it.
One would have to ask, then, why doctors perform them.
 

Shayah

יותר מקו
Joined
Jul 16, 2006
Messages
865
Reaction score
388
Location
תל אביב
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Centrist
You don't have to quote FAQ websites to me. I'm a doctor and fully aware of the medical reasons for circumcision, many of which are valid; however, aesthetic circumcision is wrong and so is religious circumcision. If we are fighting against the culture of female circumcision then we should be equally outraged that it is also happening to boys. The procedures may be different but the results are the same: permanent damage to the genitalia, loss of sensation, loss of natural function, and it is done against the will of the patient.
I am also in the medical field in both the United States and Israel. Male circumcision is typically performed between birth and 2 months of age. Currently, around 75% of all American males undergo this minor surgical procedure. Almost 100% of all male Jewish Israelis are circumcised. There are numerous hygienic benefits to male circumcision. Although the possibility exists of elevated urinary tract infections, I have never encountered a circumcised male who complained of a loss of penile sensation/function due to circumcision.

Female Genital Cutting (FGC) was outlawed in the United States in 1996. Most FGC in the world occurs when the female "comes of age" (12-16). There are escalating degrees of FGC... 1) a simple ritual nick, 2) the removal of the entire clitoris, 3) the cutting away of the labia and 4) in extreme cases the entire genital area is carved away and the vulva is stitched shut. 2/3/4 are major invasive procedures that are extremely painful and potentially dangerous. Many young girls die from post-FGC complications such as infections or bleeding to death. The sole purpose here is to remove sexual sensation/pleasure and foster virginity.
 

Gardener

free market communist
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
26,661
Reaction score
15,927
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I am also in the medical field in both the United States and Israel. Male circumcision is typically performed between birth and 2 months of age. Currently, around 75% of all American males undergo this minor surgical procedure. Almost 100% of all male Jewish Israelis are circumcised. There are numerous hygienic benefits to male circumcision. Although the possibility exists of elevated urinary tract infections, I have never encountered a circumcised male who complained of a loss of penile sensation/function due to circumcision.

Female Genital Cutting (FGC) was outlawed in the United States in 1996. Most FGC in the world occurs when the female "comes of age" (12-16). There are escalating degrees of FGC... 1) a simple ritual nick, 2) the removal of the entire clitoris, 3) the cutting away of the labia and 4) in extreme cases the entire genital area is carved away and the vulva is stitched shut. 2/3/4 are major invasive procedures that are extremely painful and potentially dangerous. Many young girls die from post-FGC complications such as infections or bleeding to death. The sole purpose here is to remove sexual sensation/pleasure and foster virginity.
and yet, people indulge in these bizarre attempts at moral equivalence for reasons that sure remain a complete mystery to me.
 

1069

Banned
Joined
Oct 21, 2006
Messages
24,978
Reaction score
5,126
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I am also in the medical field in both the United States and Israel. Male circumcision is typically performed between birth and 2 months of age. Currently, around 75% of all American males undergo this minor surgical procedure. Almost 100% of all male Jewish Israelis are circumcised. There are numerous hygienic benefits to male circumcision. Although the possibility exists of elevated urinary tract infections, I have never encountered a circumcised male who complained of a loss of penile sensation/function due to circumcision.

Female Genital Cutting (FGC) was outlawed in the United States in 1996. Most FGC in the world occurs when the female "comes of age" (12-16). There are escalating degrees of FGC... 1) a simple ritual nick, 2) the removal of the entire clitoris, 3) the cutting away of the labia and 4) in extreme cases the entire genital area is carved away and the vulva is stitched shut. 2/3/4 are major invasive procedures that are extremely painful and potentially dangerous. Many young girls die from post-FGC complications such as infections or bleeding to death. The sole purpose here is to remove sexual sensation/pleasure and foster virginity.
The most common type of FGM, widely practiced in subsaharan Africa, is not one you listed; I guess it would be between types 1 and 2: the removal of the clitoral hood.
This type of FGM directly correlates to the removal of the foreskin of males.
Whatever alleged health and hygiene "benefits" male circumcision would have, this type of female circumcision would also have.
If this type of FGM is a cruel mutilation, then so is male circumcision as practiced in the US and Israel.

However, the less common but more extreme types of FGM which involve removal of the clitoris and labia and in some cases stitching shut of the vagina are undeniably cruel, destructive, and dangerous; the only correlation would be castrating of males (at one time widely practiced in Asia and parts of Europe), although that is not a perfect correlation because although extreme FGM removes all of a female's external genitalia, it does not render her infertile in most cases, as castration does to a male.

Certainly this extreme practice should be stopped; as a compromise, perhaps we should encourage them to practice the less extreme form of FGM as an alternative.
It seems a little hypocritical of us to criminalize minor FGM procedures, when our culture condones and abets the circumcision of males via a procedure that is a near-exact correlation.
 
Last edited:

Shayah

יותר מקו
Joined
Jul 16, 2006
Messages
865
Reaction score
388
Location
תל אביב
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Centrist
Certainly this extreme practice should be stopped; as a compromise, perhaps we should encourage them to practice the less extreme form of FGM as an alternative. It seems a little hypocritical of us to criminalize minor FGM procedures, when our culture condones and abets the circumcision of males via a procedure that is a near-exact correlation.
The AMA has suggested a test pilot program to allow ritual "nicking". Critics point out that certain ethnicities will continue to send their daughters abroad for more invasive FGC proceedures. A New York politician has suggested making this a criminal offense, but detection/enforcement would be virtually impossible.
 

alexa

DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
4,684
Reaction score
1,340
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
The AMA has suggested a test pilot program to allow ritual "nicking". Critics point out that certain ethnicities will continue to send their daughters abroad for more invasive FGC proceedures. A New York politician has suggested making this a criminal offense, but detection/enforcement would be virtually impossible.
I wouldn't want any kind of ritual mutulation to be allowed in the UK.

I am sad that it would appear most people, not atimed at you Shayah!, have not taken the time to read the article. It shows how this practice is a cultural one, how women themselves believe in it, how it is not only illegal in the UK but is illegal to do it on any UK residents anywhere in the world.

It also tells how women wrongly believe they are helping their girls and how men do not like it. They like other men do not like their women not enjoying sex.

It shows how people are coming to understand, how moves are there educating which appears to be the most important thing.

Contrary to the comments of some this is not done by people who do not care for their children but by Mother's who wrongly believe they are helping them.

The one question in the UK seems to be why have there been no prosecutions. This seems to be the police taking a more education is better and we do not want the community to feel victimised to the other point of view that if their are no prosecutions, people will see they can carry on.

In the UK as it is against the law and as it appears those who do this to their children love them I would go for education in the main. Clearly if someone is found to have done this then as it is against the law a criminal prosecution would be necessary...but it seems to be most of all about the need for education. We have had our first march against it, all be it a very small one.

No point though in my opinion to give the ok for any genital mutilation at all. I would definitely oppose a change in our laws to allows this.
 
Last edited:

spud_meister

Veni, vidi, dormivi!
Dungeon Master
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 6, 2009
Messages
36,107
Reaction score
21,519
Location
Didjabringabeeralong
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
FGM is more horrific than male circumcision, male circumcision is done for aesthetic and religious reasons, often FGM is designed to enforce chastity and fidelity, it's sole purpose is to make sure women remain chaste, in the removal of the clitoris and/or vaginal lips, it removes the seat of sexual pleasure in a woman. it is the remnants of a misogynistic societal view on the inferiority and untrustworthiness of women.
 

Orion

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
8,083
Reaction score
3,918
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I am also in the medical field in both the United States and Israel. Male circumcision is typically performed between birth and 2 months of age. Currently, around 75% of all American males undergo this minor surgical procedure. Almost 100% of all male Jewish Israelis are circumcised. There are numerous hygienic benefits to male circumcision. Although the possibility exists of elevated urinary tract infections, I have never encountered a circumcised male who complained of a loss of penile sensation/function due to circumcision.

Female Genital Cutting (FGC) was outlawed in the United States in 1996. Most FGC in the world occurs when the female "comes of age" (12-16). There are escalating degrees of FGC... 1) a simple ritual nick, 2) the removal of the entire clitoris, 3) the cutting away of the labia and 4) in extreme cases the entire genital area is carved away and the vulva is stitched shut. 2/3/4 are major invasive procedures that are extremely painful and potentially dangerous. Many young girls die from post-FGC complications such as infections or bleeding to death. The sole purpose here is to remove sexual sensation/pleasure and foster virginity.
Nice to meet you. Always good to see another medically minded person around :) Having said that...

I am aware of the distinctions between the two procedures and the obvious differences in severity, but the historical reasons for male circumcision have never been hygiene. Rather they have been for religious reasons, such as demonstrating one's convenant with God. Catholics, Jews, and Muslims all practice circumcision and that makes up a huge portion of the world's population; naturally circumcision will make its way into acceptable policy, but I don't feel that it is necessary in cases where there are no abnormalities in the foreskin. Saying that it's cleaner is a cop out from teaching proper hygiene. If a baby is born with a natural body part, that part should remain. I am aware of all the rationales for doing it but I don't agree with them. Even the reasons of HIV/AIDS prevention is hard to believe, given that the risk reduction is not that great.

As for FGC, I can think of no real reason to allow it other than to control a woman's sexuality. But then, that is what male circumcision was intended for too... to prevent masturbation.
 

Laila

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Messages
10,100
Reaction score
2,990
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
It shows how people are coming to understand, how moves are there educating which appears to be the most important thing.

Contrary to the comments of some this is not done by people who do not care for their children but by Mother's who wrongly believe they are helping them.

The one question in the UK seems to be why have there been no prosecutions. This seems to be the police taking a more education is better and we do not want the community to feel victimised to the other point of view that if their are no prosecutions, people will see they can carry on
I agree, education is the only way to prevent this.
People must understand that this is practice that has been in their culture for centuries, generations - I'm not excusing it but it is done with misunderstanding. They do not see something wrong with it because they had it done themselves, as did their Mothers and so on. No daughter would be willing to actively help the police prosecute their own family making convictions unlikely, there is a wall of silence that is raised when it comes to this issue in some communities.
 
Last edited:

cpwill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
63,891
Reaction score
32,551
Location
USofA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I agree, education is the only way to prevent this.
People must understand that this is practice that has been in their culture for centuries, generations - I'm not excusing it but it is done with misunderstanding. They do not see something wrong with it because they had it done themselves, as did their Mothers and so on. No daughter would be willing to actively help the police prosecute their own family making convictions unlikely, there is a wall of silence that is raised when it comes to this issue in some communities.
education is important, agreeably; but that is no reason to throw civilization overboard until such time as these people deign to stop mutilating their young girls. that's like trying to stop child rape by explaining to the rapists that it's not nice.
 

Laila

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Messages
10,100
Reaction score
2,990
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
education is important, agreeably; but that is no reason to throw civilization overboard until such time as these people deign to stop mutilating their young girls. that's like trying to stop child rape by explaining to the rapists that it's not nice.
Throwing people in jail will not stop this, explaining to the parents that what they are doing is damaging and is not necessary will.

I don't understand how people expect those who do it to know it is wrong without explaining why it is wrong.
 

cpwill

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2009
Messages
63,891
Reaction score
32,551
Location
USofA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Throwing people in jail will not stop this, explaining to the parents that what they are doing is damaging and is not necessary will.
wrong. these people believe in this; and they certainly don't accept you or the british state as an authority capable of correcting their culture or belief system, any more than you would accept them explaining to you how you are a whore for not being cut up.

I don't understand how people expect those who do it to know it is wrong without explaining why it is wrong.
simple enough; we have a thing called law. you break it, you pay the price. you don't have to think it is right or wrong, you simply have to obey.
 

Laila

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Messages
10,100
Reaction score
2,990
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
wrong. these people believe in this; and they certainly don't accept you or the british state as an authority capable of correcting their culture or belief system, any more than you would accept them explaining to you how you are a whore for not being cut up.
But they can change it.
By throwing them in jail. It does nothing. It achieves nothing. No one ever understands these communities and how they operate.

I didn't know FGM was against the law until this thread. If I didn't know and I speak/read/write English and is genuinely well versed and integrated. How does one expect someone who is not all of those to know that there is a law?
And seriously, what daughter would help the authorities throw their family in jail? They won't.
 

Shayah

יותר מקו
Joined
Jul 16, 2006
Messages
865
Reaction score
388
Location
תל אביב
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Centrist
Jeez. I thought I was still logged in and posted under my sisters name :3oops:

But anyways....

Orion said:
I am aware of the distinctions between the two procedures and the obvious differences in severity, but the historical reasons for male circumcision have never been hygiene. Rather they have been for religious reasons, such as demonstrating one's convenant with God.
Male circumcision is definitely an ancient rite. In Judaism, it's overarching purpose was to mark the covenant between God and the Israelites. Judaic male circumcision and the female ritual bath were also considered to be components of Jewish theology regarding what is pure and what is impure.

Orion said:
Catholics, Jews, and Muslims all practice circumcision and that makes up a huge portion of the world's population; naturally circumcision will make its way into acceptable policy, but I don't feel that it is necessary in cases where there are no abnormalities in the foreskin. Saying that it's cleaner is a cop out from teaching proper hygiene. If a baby is born with a natural body part, that part should remain. I am aware of all the rationales for doing it but I don't agree with them. Even the reasons of HIV/AIDS prevention is hard to believe, given that the risk reduction is not that great.
Using this rationale, you should also oppose earrings, naval studs, etc.

Orion said:
As for FGC, I can think of no real reason to allow it other than to control a woman's sexuality.
Agreed.

Orion said:
But then, that is what male circumcision was intended for too... to prevent masturbation.
This quackish intention was true 200 years ago...

Non-religious circumcision in English-speaking countries arose in a climate of negative attitudes towards sex, especially concerning masturbation. In her 1978 article The Ritual of Circumcision,[8] Karen Erickson Paige writes: "In the United States, the current medical rationale for circumcision developed after the operation was in wide practice. The original reason for the surgical removal of the foreskin, or prepuce, was to control 'masturbatory insanity' - the range of mental disorders that people believed were caused by the 'polluting' practice of 'self-abuse.'"

"Self-abuse" was a term commonly used to describe masturbation in the 19th century. According to Paige, "treatments ranged from diet, moral exhortations, hydrotherapy, and marriage, to such drastic measures as surgery, physical restraints, frights, and punishment. Some doctors recommended covering the penis with plaster of Paris, leather, or rubber; cauterization; making boys wear chastity belts or spiked rings; and in extreme cases, castration." Paige details how circumcision became popular as a masturbation remedy: "In the 1890s, it became a popular technique to prevent, or cure, masturbatory insanity. In 1891 the president of the Royal College of Surgeons of England published On Circumcision as Preventive of Masturbation, and two years later another British doctor wrote Circumcision: Its Advantages and How to Perform It, which listed the reasons for removing the 'vestigial' prepuce. Evidently the foreskin could cause 'nocturnal incontinence,' hysteria, epilepsy, and irritation that might 'give rise to erotic stimulation and, consequently, masturbation.' Another physician, P.C. Remondino, added that 'circumcision is like a substantial and well-secured life annuity...it insures better health, greater capacity for labor, longer life, less nervousness, sickness, loss of time, and less doctor bills.' No wonder it became a popular remedy."[24]
History of male circumcision - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

However, I have yet to encounter a healthy male who cannot masturbate due to circumcision.
 

Gardener

free market communist
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 5, 2005
Messages
26,661
Reaction score
15,927
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I am aware of the distinctions between the two procedures and the obvious differences in severity,

Yet you indulged in your tu toque style false equivalencies anyway. If you were aware at the time of your statement, then you must have been trying to deceive, the claims that you are a doctor compounding the issue by trying to establish greater legitimacy for your arguments.

If you know of the obvious differences in severity, I'd say the time to have said so should have been when you made your first statement, and not just because you were pressed on the subject by others.
 

alexa

DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
4,684
Reaction score
1,340
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I agree, education is the only way to prevent this.
People must understand that this is practice that has been in their culture for centuries, generations - I'm not excusing it but it is done with misunderstanding. They do not see something wrong with it because they had it done themselves, as did their Mothers and so on. No daughter would be willing to actively help the police prosecute their own family making convictions unlikely, there is a wall of silence that is raised when it comes to this issue in some communities.
I can see where they will have a problem convicting people. As you say few daughters are going to get their Mother's arrested. We have been concerned about this problem since the 80's when the first law came out so we should really be getting somewhere.

I have listened to the video now. It would appear from the girl talking that parents probably know it is certainly not accepted because the girls are apparently told they must keep it secret. However the girl said that the Mum's believe it is part of their religion and not that it is just some awful old custom which must be stopped.

I guess you need to approach it on as many levels as possible.

Not everyone knows the legal situation so that is certainly one way it can be approached

"Sometimes it might be as simple as delivering the message of what the legal position is; sometimes we even give them an official letter, a document that they can show to the extended family that states quite firmly what will happen if the procedure goes ahead. The focus has to be on prevention."
well worth making sure all areas where it is believed there are people doing this becoming aware. Then we need to make sure that they are aware that this is just a dreadful old custom which provides nothing today but pain. I have heard women from these cultures believing their daughters will not have a chance of marriage if it is not done and I have heard men saying 'no, no, no. they do not want this to be done'.

I also think things like the tiny march (I think it was 16 women) are good but possibly very difficult depending on the reaction they get. Ideally they, being their own people, might get people thinking a bit. It needs to come out in the open. I bet some of them feel if they do not do this people will look down on them so the attitude must be changed.

and then definitely if they are now, as they say in the film bringing in foreign 'cutters' to beat the 'credit crunch', get some intelligence going and arrest these women.

It is a hard one to crack. As I say we have been trying to stop it since the 80's
 
Top Bottom