It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


"Female Genital Mutilation - UK" video

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 10:30 AM
This is evidently produced by the parent company of The Guardian it does seem fairly legit, to me, with that credential...
I would also say "WARNING" - this could be upsetting to many persons, if you imagine that this might distress you, it probably will, so...

Oh, heck, it won't embed...I wish I knew how to tell that ahead of time...

[edit on 2-9-2010 by nine-eyed-eel]

posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 10:43 AM
I've known about this for a long time. I read about it in National Geographic, I think, about 20 years ago. Why they would allow such a barbaric practice in England, is beyond imagining.
Religion or no, People should have a choice when it comes to their bodies, and children cannot make a rational choice in that situation.

We could also consider the common hospital practice of male circumcision as well. I had no choice in the matter, only hours after birth I was mutilated.
I don't even know if my parents gave permission.

Well, I want my foreskin back!

posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 10:46 AM
Its the equivalent of getting your shaft cut off, you will feel it.

posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 10:46 AM
Whats with the double posts lately?
Is ATS glitching up?
Its been happening often.

[edit on 2-9-2010 by Segador]

posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 11:08 AM
I find it a little telling that we get so "up in arms" about female genital mutilation, but we seem to ignore the same for males. In fact, not only do we ignore the grisly implications of male genital mutilation, but we condone it and practice it on the vast majority of our young, innocent little boys. Why is it so horrible to mutilate the genitals of young girls but it is perfectly okay to do it to boys?

As you can probably tell by now, I'm completely against circumcision for both boys and girls. If it's not okay to do to girls, it should not be okay to do to boys. We need to stop lopping off the foreskin of our young boys, unless of course the boy is of an age to give proper consent. I want my foreskin back, as nobody asked me before taking it from me. It was mine and it should have stayed right where god put it.


[edit on 2-9-2010 by airspoon]

posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 11:20 AM
Trauma in order to terrify into cult-ural submission.

If you go to a therapist and they asked were you abused as a child.. well does having my genitals cut apart count?

posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 11:31 AM
I don't consider myself mutilated. I find that language melodramatic! Males still experience sexual pleasure after circumcision. Females often do not. It robs a woman of sexual equality and turns her into a mere incubator. Lets not conveniently forget the cultural aspects here.

iRM 2.0

posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 11:34 AM
reply to post by airspoon

Cervical cancer in women by ethnic groups.

Do you know why Jewish women have almost no incidence of cervical cancer?

Because all Jewish men are circumscised.

posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 11:37 AM
reply to post by airspoon

Some people who are born without eyelids, and this happens more that you would ever believe, have their foreskin transplanted as eyelids.

Gives a new meaning to eyeballs doesn't it?

posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 11:43 AM
reply to post by airspoon

hey airspoon I agree if you were born with it it shouldn't be cut off.There's a very good reason we're born with them.I didn't do it to my sons.,and any religon that condones circumcision or mutilation of any kind is wrong and should be held accountable.

posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 11:49 AM
I can tell you it was a hard decision for me to have my son circumsized. My sons doctor told me there was a slightly less chance of infections for the child and it would be easier to keep clean this is the only medical advantage of having it done. he ask me if i were circumsized and said the child from what he has seen would be more comfortable with himself if it looks the same as the fathers In his opinion. but he did not try to push me either way. i think he was honest and straight forward with all the questions i had, Which made me a little more comfortable. To this day i still doubt my decision a little and probably will for life.

For a girl this is totally different its cutting off a major sex organ completely and ruining a girls chance for an enjoyable normal sex life in the future this would be like cutting of a little boys penis at the base IMO this is sick and has no medical reason to be done. the people doing this should have there hands cut off.

posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 11:53 AM
reply to post by slugger9787

Regardless of whether that connection can be made or not, a male shouldn't be mutilated because there may be an indirect connection to *possible cervical cancer in women. With that being said, we aren't even sure that this is true, though a few (very small number of) studies have suggested that women are more susceptible to HPV with men who have not been circumcised. This doesn't make it true, only that some studies may suggest such a notion.

However, even if this is accurate, it is still not a valid excuse to mutilate the genitals of boys... or girls for that matter. A female should watch and know who she is sleeping with or at the very least, she should use protection if she doesn't want to contract HPV. Males should not be mutilated because girls may not be responsible. Should we also lop off the hands of children so they can't steal anything? What about cutting off the breasts of women so they don't get cancer in the later stages? No, that notion is absurd.

Furthermore, it matters not the consequences of mutilation of boys versus girls. Mutilation is mutilation and taking a body part from a non-consenting human being is all the same when it boils down. The mutilation of boys is not any better because that mutilation may effect them differently than that of women.

With that being said, I have personally seen studies that suggest the circumcision of males does indeed effect their sexual performance, as the foreskin does have nerve endings. I have also read that males who aren't circumcised can have more pleasurable sex, though that is besides the point.

As far as the poster who talks about Jewish circumcision. It's not only Jews. Most American males, whether they be atheist, Christian, Muslim, Jewish or any other religion, usually get mutilated. I believe this goes for Canada as well. While in the rest of the world, it is only Jews in Muslims who are mutilated, in America and Canada, it is almost ever boy. This problem is not only confined to Jews and Muslims.


posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 11:55 AM
reply to post by airspoon

For the male it is an issue, that many have been educating themselves on, however, for the female it is not equivalent to removing foreskin, its dismemberment, removing the whole organ. They're not equivalent.

[edit on 2-9-2010 by Unity_99]

posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 03:39 PM
I think we all agree that it is wrong to cut body parts off children.
Just another blessing that religion has bestowed on us.

posted on Sep, 2 2010 @ 05:17 PM
i am not a person who does things just because tredichion .
when my first son was consived i thought long and hard .
Check all the Facts and came to understand cutting off the for skin reduces the chance of urinary infection to nearly zero.
now as a infection can easly become a life or death thing I concluded that there is a good health reason for boys.
and i will encurage my sons to have it done on there sons as well .
if it improves a males chance at a healther life then its worth a small price.
ps I enjoy sex just fine thank you lol

new topics

top topics


log in