• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's 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

A bit of devils advocate here.....:2wave:


It is a religious thing and hence it is horrible how we non religious types dare question their religious values and crack down on religious freedoms!

and now back to reality.
 
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.

throwing them in jail achieves three things: it protects the young girls from further abuse (want to bet there is a serious overlap between the "let's cut up our little girls" community and the "let's have an honor killing" one?), it punishes the guilty, and it provides a powerful incentive for others not to engage in the behavior.

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?

ignorance of the law is not an excuse; and i would bet that once enforcement started, the community under discussion here would pretty rapidly become aware, at the very least as part of a protest movement. "My Daughter is My Property and You Can't Tell Me not to Cut Her Up / Marry Her Against Her Will To Her Cousin / Kill Her For Dating A Non-Believer" etc.


this conversation reminds me of one of the last viceroys' of India, who was informed that his efforts to stop wife-burning were doomed because "it was part of the culture." He responded that that was fine.... but that hanging people who murdered women was part of his culture...
 
throwing them in jail achieves three things: it protects the young girls from further abuse (want to bet there is a serious overlap between the "let's cut up our little girls" community and the "let's have an honor killing" one?), it punishes the guilty, and it provides a powerful incentive for others not to engage in the behavior.



ignorance of the law is not an excuse; and i would bet that once enforcement started, the community under discussion here would pretty rapidly become aware, at the very least as part of a protest movement. "My Daughter is My Property and You Can't Tell Me not to Cut Her Up / Marry Her Against Her Will To Her Cousin / Kill Her For Dating A Non-Believer" etc.


this conversation reminds me of one of the last viceroys' of India, who was informed that his efforts to stop wife-burning were doomed because "it was part of the culture." He responded that that was fine.... but that hanging people who murdered women was part of his culture...

You make perfect sense here, but the problem in Great Britain is all the nattering, doctrinaire multiculturalists who are so absolutely petrified lest they be considered prejudiced that they make excuses or just look away rather than confront the actual practice.

Overcomming THAT particularly stupid dogmatism is necessary before overcoming the other.
 
You make perfect sense here, but the problem in Great Britain is all the nattering, doctrinaire multiculturalists who are so absolutely petrified lest they be considered prejudiced that they make excuses or just look away rather than confront the actual practice.

Overcomming THAT particularly stupid dogmatism is necessary before overcoming the other.

You might have a point were it the case that Britain hadn't made female circumcision illegal and punishable with gaol sentences. The issue is not about multiculturalism and its tolerance of barbaric practices, no matter how much you would like it to be, it's about the problems of enforcement. The same goes for forced marriages in certain communities. The will is there, but the means of policing good laws are restricted.
 
*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.

You'e right, it is child abuse. The practice should be banned in all civilized nations. I don't care what adults do to their own bodies, they can set themselves on fire for cultural reasons for all I'm going to care. One less retard in the world. But when it comes to children, their right to not be physically tortured should trump all parental rights. I'm not talking about minor cultural practices like male circumcision on baby boys, or ear piercing on baby girls, I'm talking about the horrendous torture that goes hand in hand with the more extreme version of FGM.

Also, I'd be cautious about your assumption that only one religion practices FGM. If you think that Christians in sub-saharan Africa don't practice it anymore, you're quite mistaken. It's a cultural thing, not a religious one. Its origins predate both Islam and Christianity.
 
Last edited:
You might have a point were it the case that Britain hadn't made female circumcision illegal and punishable with gaol sentences. The issue is not about multiculturalism and its tolerance of barbaric practices, no matter how much you would like it to be, it's about the problems of enforcement. The same goes for forced marriages in certain communities. The will is there, but the means of policing good laws are restricted.


Passing a law to give the appearance of something is quite a different matter than having the backbone to enforce it. It is the enforcement of the laws that actually show the will, not the window dressing of passing them, and as long as appeasement remains such a national obsession, there is no reason whatsoever for those Muslims in Britain who adhere to barbaric mind sets to stop doing so.

It is only when Britain, as a nation, requires some semblance of assimilation that anything will change. Until then, the status quo will continue, with isolated communities allowed to remain seperate from British society as enclaves that will continue to grow in both numbers and influence. As long as the trend in Britain is towards surrendering more and more autonomy to these separate societies, any notion that there is a "will" to put an end to these practices is laughable. There is certainly much lip service, but no actual determination.
 
Furthermore, while this is horrible, I absolutely positively refuse to take seriously anybody getting angry about the stuff in the PO or advocate some kind of legal action against it until we as a species figure out that chopping parts off of babies without so much as a drop of anesthetic for what amount to aesthetic reasons is just as wrong -- if not more so.


TED,
Not that big on hypocrisy, kthx.
 
Furthermore, while this is horrible, I absolutely positively refuse to take seriously anybody getting angry about the stuff in the PO or advocate some kind of legal action against it until we as a species figure out that chopping parts off of babies without so much as a drop of anesthetic for what amount to aesthetic reasons is just as wrong -- if not more so.


TED,
Not that big on hypocrisy, kthx.

Do baby boys not get an anaesthetic if they are circumcised? :shock:
 
Generally speaking, they do not.

The medical argument seems to be that they won't remember it later on, so why bother?
 
Do baby boys not get an anaesthetic if they are circumcised? :shock:

I believe they only get lidocaine or some sort of topical painkilling gel, applied locally.
 
Many times it is not.

The argument is that they won't remember it later on, so why bother?

You know what, some decades ago I was in Canada staying with Mennonites and one of them had a baby boy who was going to be circumcised. His Mum was concerned because he was not going to get an anaesthetic.

Doctors in the UK used to give baby's very little pain relief when giving them operations believing they felt no pain. That has certainly changed now so I am amazed if people are still giving their children circumcisions without anaesthetic. No wonder we have so many screwed up people in the world. This is indeed cruel. Thank you for pointing it out.
 
I believe they only get lidocaine or some sort of topical painkilling gel, applied locally.

and I am assuming from the way you put it that is not so good. At the same time anaesthetics do of course have their risks. The only sensible thing to do is to ban them too.
 
and I am assuming from the way you put it that is not so good. At the same time anaesthetics do of course have their risks. The only sensible thing to do is to ban them too.

Well, yes. Certainly putting newborns and infants under general anesthesia for an elective procedure is not advisable; the risks are too high.
 
Generally speaking, they do not.

The medical argument seems to be that they won't remember it later on, so why bother?

Actually, dental procedures often use anesthetics that work in that manner -- retrograde amnesia. You can receive a light dose, be awake, but the drug causes amnesia. Thus, the end result is a more comfortable procedure because you don't remember the pain. (One drug we can all relate to that does the same thing is Scopolamine, the infamous date rape drug.
 
throwing them in jail achieves three things: it protects the young girls from further abuse (want to bet there is a serious overlap between the "let's cut up our little girls" community and the "let's have an honor killing" one?), it punishes the guilty, and it provides a powerful incentive for others not to engage in the behavior.

ignorance of the law is not an excuse; and i would bet that once enforcement started, the community under discussion here would pretty rapidly become aware, at the very least as part of a protest movement. "My Daughter is My Property and You Can't Tell Me not to Cut Her Up / Marry Her Against Her Will To Her Cousin / Kill Her For Dating A Non-Believer" etc.

this conversation reminds me of one of the last viceroys' of India, who was informed that his efforts to stop wife-burning were doomed because "it was part of the culture." He responded that that was fine.... but that hanging people who murdered women was part of his culture...

It won't protect the girl.
If the Mother is arrested, the Father will get her and it will happen.
And for some girls, being completely removed from their community and support system alone will be traumatic enough for them.

All that will happen is that it will go underground even more.
I hate discussing things like this because you are all deluded if you think just because the law is against it, it "will stop". Its what those who are never in the communities always think.
You mentioned before that it would be difficult explaining to people that "I am a whore because I am not cut up". The only reason I am not "cut" is because of the culture change. I am the first within my entire family to ever have not gotten this and my Mum didn't stop it happening to me because of the law. The position of the British State had no influence on her decision to not get me circumcised and to expect it for others is foolish.
 
Last edited:
It won't protect the girl.
If the Mother is arrested, the Father will get her and it will happen.
And for some girls, being completely removed from their community and support system alone will be traumatic enough for them.

All that will happen is that it will go underground even more.
I hate discussing things like this because you are all deluded if you think just because the law is against it, it "will stop". Its what those who are never in the communities always think.
You mentioned before that it would be difficult explaining to people that "I am a whore because I am not cut up". The only reason I am not "cut" is because of the culture change. I am the first within my entire family to ever have not gotten this and my Mum didn't stop it happening to me because of the law. The position of the British State had no influence on her decision to not get me circumcised and to expect it for others is foolish.

Good on your Mum, Laila. Do you not think that people like yourself and your Mum and girls who have been circumcised and resent it could not be the kind of spark plug that changes things. I think usually things need to come out in the open before they change. For instance prior to 9/11 we were having British Muslim gays coming out and programs being made on tv about how things were for them. Of course after 9/11 all that sort of thing stopped but it seems that change happens when people become aware and in order to become aware people need to voice their opinions, so that change happens and what was socially thought of as the norm becomes seen as socially unacceptable. This usually needs a few brave people to get it started.
 
Good on your Mum, Laila. Do you not think that people like yourself and your Mum and girls who have been circumcised and resent it could not be the kind of spark plug that changes things. I think usually things need to come out in the open before they change. For instance prior to 9/11 we were having British Muslim gays coming out and programs being made on tv about how things were for them. Of course after 9/11 all that sort of thing stopped but it seems that change happens when people become aware and in order to become aware people need to voice their opinions, so that change happens and what was socially thought of as the norm becomes seen as socially unacceptable. This usually needs a few brave people to get it started.

It's slowly changing anyway, the generation that is born here know different.
The new generation, born and raised here in Britain, they are used to expressing their views and it will be a lot harder to shut them up.

My Mum and my Aunties main influence was education and one another, I was going to have it done to me along with my cousins at the same time before but around the age most Somalis get it done - around 7 for some there was a talk and none of them knew it was harmful to the girl but the health worker explained that it could lead to infertility and the local Elder said it had no basis in Islam and I think what he said went something like
"Do you have the right to cut someones hand off". No. "Then what makes you think you have the right to cut off their kintirs"
And I do my part, I help convince those within my community that it is not necessary despite what their Mother thinks. It's worst when I go back to E Africa and see it everywhere tho. But that tends to happen when one has no centralized authority, revert back to traditions.

After 9/11, the communities closed themselves up. It is what tends to happen when one feels under constant surveillance and attack
 
Last edited:
It's slowly changing anyway, the generation that is born here know different.


My Mum and my Aunties main influence was education and one another, I was going to have it done to me along with my cousins at the same time before but around the age most Somalis get it done - around 7 for some there was a talk and none of them knew it was harmful to the girl but the health worker explained that it could lead to infertility and the local Elder said it had no basis in Islam and I think what he said went something like
"Do you have the right to cut someones hand off". No. "Then what makes you think you have the right to cut off their kintirs"
And I do my part, I help convince those within my community that it is not necessary despite what their Mother thinks.

After 9/11, the communities closed themselves up. It is what tends to happen when one feels under constant surveillance and attack

I know. Thanks for filling in on how the other stuff is going. Sounds good.
 
It's slowly changing anyway, the generation that is born here know different.


My Mum and my Aunties main influence was education and one another, I was going to have it done to me along with my cousins at the same time before but around the age most Somalis get it done - around 7 for some there was a talk and none of them knew it was harmful to the girl but the health worker explained that it could lead to infertility and the local Elder said it had no basis in Islam and I think what he said went something like
"Do you have the right to cut someones hand off". No. "Then what makes you think you have the right to cut off their kintirs"
And I do my part, I help convince those within my community that it is not necessary despite what their Mother thinks. It's worst when I go back to E Africa and see it everywhere tho. But that tends to happen when one has no centralized authority, revert back to traditions.

After 9/11, the communities closed themselves up. It is what tends to happen when one feels under constant surveillance and attack

I'm afraid I'm very ignorant on the subject. You clearly are not. Thanks so much for your contributions on this thread. I know that it is a practice rooted in tradition, not religion but must be stamped out. I'm certainly not so stupid as to believe that the ending of the practice is going to happen simply by the external will of the British state, but through the efforts of the educated people of the relevant communties using the law and the force of reason as tools to convince an ever-growing, empowered, modern-thinking section of those communities. Good luck and more power to you!
 
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.

Yawn.

BOTH are forms of genital mutilation.

Should not be imposed on ANYONE.

Period.

End of story.

There's nothing to argue about here.
 
It won't protect the girl.
If the Mother is arrested, the Father will get her and it will happen.
And for some girls, being completely removed from their community and support system alone will be traumatic enough for them.

Wonderful argument that.

Murder can't be stopped, so it shouldn't be against the law. After all, making it illegal only means fewer people do it.

WHICH IS THE FREAKIN' IDEA!!!!

Duh.
 
Wonderful argument that.

Murder can't be stopped, so it shouldn't be against the law. After all, making it illegal only means fewer people do it.

WHICH IS THE FREAKIN' IDEA!!!!

Duh.

She's not arguing it shouldn't be illegal, just that outlawing it and gaoling those who practice it is not the whole solution. The fact that murder has always been illegal and heavily punished hasn't put a stop to it. It should still be illegal, duh! But efforts need to continue to tackle the causes of it, not just to deal with it when it occurs. She's questioning the idea that simply by outlawing the practice and enforcing punishments on those who practice it will not stop it.

Sorry Laila, if I'm putting words in your mouth, but I think most of us get where you're coming from.
 
Sorry Laila, if I'm putting words in your mouth, but I think most of us get where you're coming from.

Thank you Anda :)
I thought I made it clear what I meant but it certainly says something if it is only Scarecrow who didn't understand
 
It sounds then like the most effective means of ending this practice is to get the community elders onboard. They will surely be more persuasive to those of their own culture than any legal prohibition passed by the British government.
 
Back
Top Bottom