It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Swedish minister criticized over 'genital mutilation cake'

page: 4
4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 09:56 PM
link   
Woot, now we all parody blacks and their freaky skin color again - with abandon.

Good job on bringing female circumcision into peoples minds, even if they are aghast at the minor things. Maybe some poor woman will get to enjoy their sex lives.




posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 09:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by ideasarebulletproof
I'm pretty male genital mutilation is a much more prevalent thing that occurs than female genital mutilation.

Just my two cents.


Comparison
1. Have your clitoris cut out
2. Have a flap of skin removed

Maybe you would offer your bell-end to support your argument.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by InfoKartel
reply to post by detachedindividual
 


First things first...but...I have to
at:


I've studied this practice and what it does for several years.


Okay but seriously for a second...lol...


I would suggest you look into your own anatomy, and what has been removed, a little more before you start to call out someone who clearly knows more about it than you do.


Not only are you telling us how knowledgeable you are but...you are telling me...that a clitoris, anatomically speaking, is comparable to foreskin???

You sir, are smoking something.

On Topic:

The minister already apologized. Obviously she knew she was doing something messed up. Now the rest of you lemmings need to follow.


I've studied this - and a lot of other subjects - for several years because I have written comprehensive papers on male sexuality. I'm sorry if this offends your prudish mind, but some of us are interested in gender, sexuality, biology and the Human mind. I know that might be strange to some, but a few of us actually spend time learning about things beyond our teenage years.

Secondly, I did not compare the foreskin to the clitoris. I think you need to rediscover the ability to read and comprehend the English language effectively, because clearly you're seeing words that are not in my original post.

Circumcision is actually on the decline in the USA, but not fast enough. While your government proclaims to be against the practice of female mutilation in African nations, nothing is said about the genital mutilation of boys, against their will, using flawed data gathered a century ago by a religious fanatic.

Of course, being so wise on the subject yourself, you'll know that a certain Mr. Kellogg was primarily responsible for the widespread use of male genital mutilation, and that he adopted the process with the specific intention to traumatize young men and try to end the act of masturbation; he was one of those religious fanatics who insisted that all evils came back to that.

So he did this without the permission of patients - of various ages - and without any pain relief, in an effort to also study the mental trauma it created in them.

His data is still used today to convince gullible and idiotic parents into mutilating their boys. However, many parents are so idiotic that they choose to have their child mutilated not because of medical advice, but because they want their son to "fit in".

Consider yourself schooled.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 10:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by squandered

Originally posted by ideasarebulletproof
I'm pretty male genital mutilation is a much more prevalent thing that occurs than female genital mutilation.

Just my two cents.


Comparison
1. Have your clitoris cut out
2. Have a flap of skin removed

Maybe you would offer your bell-end to support your argument.


They've made a correct statement. Circumcision is widespread throughout America, female genital mutilation occurs in closed social groups primarily in African nations.



the tip of the inner foreskin contains thousands of erogenous nerve endings which provide intact men with the majority of their sexual sensation, making the foreskin vital to the male sexual response


I think you're having trouble with the word "mutilation". This is the correct term for the act of causing physical harm to another persons body against their will (sometimes considered that even when consent is granted). Are you suggesting that babies somehow manage to give their consent to having a piece of their body removed?

edit on 18-4-2012 by detachedindividual because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 10:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by squandered

Originally posted by ideasarebulletproof
I'm pretty male genital mutilation is a much more prevalent thing that occurs than female genital mutilation.

Just my two cents.


Comparison
1. Have your clitoris cut out
2. Have a flap of skin removed

Maybe you would offer your bell-end to support your argument.


I'm not comparing the two in their severity, I'm comparing the two in the amount that they are performed.

I think they should all be stopped.

It's just kind of sad how in the US male genital mutilation happens thousands of times a day all over the country, yet we hear about female genital mutilation happening in a small amount in another country and it's banned the next day.



posted on Apr, 18 2012 @ 10:54 PM
link   
reply to post by blackreign2012
 


why would u eat that? all points aside if u order that cake u have some issues. but i suppose if u have the money to buy a custom cake u already have a list of issues.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by ideasarebulletproof

Originally posted by squandered

Originally posted by ideasarebulletproof
I'm pretty male genital mutilation is a much more prevalent thing that occurs than female genital mutilation.

Just my two cents.


Comparison
1. Have your clitoris cut out
2. Have a flap of skin removed

Maybe you would offer your bell-end to support your argument.


I'm not comparing the two in their severity, I'm comparing the two in the amount that they are performed.

I think they should all be stopped.

It's just kind of sad how in the US male genital mutilation happens thousands of times a day all over the country, yet we hear about female genital mutilation happening in a small amount in another country and it's banned the next day.


I see a great difference, as pointed out. To the other poster, the science doesn't reveal a similarity. I have a foreskin and it feels like normal skin. It is not an erogenous zone. I can accept that the feelings at the tip are increased by it being covered all the time, but I would weigh this against the advantages of less cleaning.

Many men will have their foreskin removed later in life for cosmetic reasons. It's not such a big deal.

I understand that neither type of circumcision are done to consenting adults. (Foreskins cut later leave ugly scar's).

I can go on about the comparison but I think I have covered the basic points. The thing is, in Africa / Middle East where women are still circumcised it's because they are deemed untrustworthy; that they lead men to sin because of their sinful desires etc etc.

It's the most extreme method of control, used against completely innocent girls.

Nothing like that is being perpetrated against boys.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 12:49 AM
link   
P.S. For those people who find themselves playing Devils Advocate by constantly supporting anything arising from Muslim states, please note that the most barbaric ways fit neatly within a broader paradigm and you are not helping anyone with your blind support of anything from a paradigm you are not part of. You are different. You were the same. You learned a bit and moved on. They will move on too. That the spiral dynamics we are part of (AKA Dr. Don Beck). You probably are taking responsibility for a way of thinking that you can't even see. It's enough to not judge. If you want to help people from other paradigms understand your own paradigm and how it differs theirs, and you will be able to interact in a better way. I.e. be a little bit tribal if you want to interact (help) people from a tribal background. It's not like they are dumb. They are just not where you are right now. We all change. We slowly advance through the cycles of life. When you next change, you may well deny you ever thought these things. That is if you see yourself in the business of helping others.. up to you.

Peace out.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 02:11 AM
link   
reply to post by squandered
 

See this is where you have the facts wrong.

Have you ever wondered why circumcision is such a "normal" thing in the US for non-Jewish people?

Because it first started being promoted by some religious zealots that it would stop young boys from masturbating, and cut down their libido, ya know, cuz all men are rapists and degenerates.


So in fact, the only reason why you don't think the motives or justifications behind the two are similar, is because it has gone on so long in this country people have forgotten why they started doing it in the first place, thus it is no longer "taboo".

Indeed, circumcision was gaining popularity for the exact same reasons as female genital mutilation is promoted now.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 02:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by ideasarebulletproof
reply to post by squandered
 

See this is where you have the facts wrong.

Have you ever wondered why circumcision is such a "normal" thing in the US for non-Jewish people?

Because it first started being promoted by some religious zealots that it would stop young boys from masturbating, and cut down their libido, ya know, cuz all men are rapists and degenerates.


So in fact, the only reason why you don't think the motives or justifications behind the two are similar, is because it has gone on so long in this country people have forgotten why they started doing it in the first place, thus it is no longer "taboo".

Indeed, circumcision was gaining popularity for the exact same reasons as female genital mutilation is promoted now.


Granted, but that doesn't make the two similar. The foreskin doesn't do anything, while a clitoris is there for arousal.

If a religious nutter was vocal for the wrong reasons the affect is not the same as if what he said is true. We know that it isn't so..

To me, it is like not eating pork for some old Biblical inspired reasoning. NB: these are very old practices and not necessarily related to religious beliefs. Religious bodies might endorse them, but they may be wary of casting off ancient traditions.

As for male circumcision, I was one of the few kids at school who hadn't been cut. We were told it was for health reasons. Some nutter in the US didn't factor into the minds of people in my generation at all.

Male circumcision carries on for practical reasons. There are good reasons to do it, but it is archaic and unnatural. I fail to see how it differs from taking a bunch of teeth out so that the young child's teeth will fit his jaw. Okay, that's pushing things, but you cited a very poor reason to fear male circumcision.

Female circumcision is done to cut down woman's sexual desires. It is done in a society that fears sexuality.

The only similarity is the word circumcision!!

If you want a proper comparison, compare female circumcision to male castration.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 02:51 AM
link   
reply to post by squandered
 


Either way, I never compared the severity of the two procedures.

Although I could point you to the number of infant deaths brought on by complications of circumcisions, numbering in the hundreds each year, for a completely non-essential procedure.

I am circumcised. I had no choice in the matter. People bring up some studies that suggest uncircumcised males have more chance of catching STD's or HIV. But an infant does not need to worry about these things. I think if an adult male wants to be circumcised for these reasons, then that is his choice.

But to say that is the reason to have an infant circumcised is a ridiculous notion.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 03:27 AM
link   
the picture i saw of her smiling and cutting a peace of cake was disgusting to look at; sadistic and ritual in perception. i people who have an interest in racism are stepping their game up a notch by openly conducting rituals much different than past expressions of terrorism in america. the image made me hate media, was that the intent? i can say in honesty i see swedens idea of culture, and if sweden was wiped off the planet i doubt id have a problem with that.
edit on 19-4-2012 by Ausar because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 04:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by ideasarebulletproof
reply to post by squandered
 


Either way, I never compared the severity of the two procedures.

Although I could point you to the number of infant deaths brought on by complications of circumcisions, numbering in the hundreds each year, for a completely non-essential procedure.

I am circumcised. I had no choice in the matter. People bring up some studies that suggest uncircumcised males have more chance of catching STD's or HIV. But an infant does not need to worry about these things. I think if an adult male wants to be circumcised for these reasons, then that is his choice.

But to say that is the reason to have an infant circumcised is a ridiculous notion.


100's is not huge if you are referencing, say 100 million.

If you were a teenager you would be deemed to young and too poor to make the choice and as you grow older you won't have the same choice because you will be facing an ugly scar.

Cosmetically it looks bigger, and unfortunately that might be the overwhelming reason why parents chose to cut.

You know...

Apologies if I'm putting words in your mouth. It doesn't seem that we are in disagreement about anything factual.

Talking about penis' puts us guys on the defensive, lol.

The medical science behind circumcision is not clear. I don't know if I fight diseases like AIDS and STD's better, not being circumcised. I might be a safer bet!

Cheese on the other hand. You want some, I got some.

Take care



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 04:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ausar
the picture i saw of her smiling and cutting a peace of cake was disgusting to look at; sadistic and ritual in perception. i people who have an interest in racism are stepping their game up a notch by openly conducting rituals much different than past expressions of terrorism in america. the image made me hate media, was that the intent? i can say in honesty i see swedens idea of culture, and if sweden was wiped off the planet i doubt id have a problem with that.
edit on 19-4-2012 by Ausar because: (no reason given)


I'm more concerned about the ease at which you hate a whole country based on racial grounds - racial being your notions of race v others.

If you willing accept all races as equal, you wouldn't do this.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 04:22 AM
link   
reply to post by squandered
 





Originally posted by Ausar the picture i saw of her smiling and cutting a peace of cake was disgusting to look at; sadistic and ritual in perception. i people who have an interest in racism are stepping their game up a notch by openly conducting rituals much different than past expressions of terrorism in america. the image made me hate media, was that the intent? i can say in honesty i see swedens idea of culture, and if sweden was wiped off the planet i doubt id have a problem with that. edit on 19-4-2012 by Ausar because: (no reason given) I'm more concerned about the ease at which you hate a whole country based on racial grounds - racial being your notions of race v others. If you willing accept all races as equal, you wouldn't do this.


your crazy; where in my post did i state what you proclaim for myself? last and only reply because i dont have the patience for your quiet racism.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 05:02 AM
link   
Funny how racists see racism everywhere hey???



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 10:24 AM
link   
reply to post by EvanB
 


if someone didn't cry racism over the picture i posted i would find them insensitive unethical and prone to abuse power if placed in position to do so.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 10:36 AM
link   
reply to post by detachedindividual
 



I'm sorry if this offends your prudish mind


It's not that...it's just, you actually believe it's the same! Maybe you should've paid more attention to the female body



I know that might be strange to some, but a few of us actually spend time learning about things beyond our teenage years.





While your government proclaims to be against the practice of female mutilation in African nations, nothing is said about the genital mutilation of boys, against their will, using flawed data gathered a century ago by a religious fanatic.


"MY" government?



Of course, being so wise on the subject yourself, you'll know that a certain Mr. Kellogg was primarily responsible for the widespread use of male genital mutilation, and that he adopted the process with the specific intention to traumatize young men and try to end the act of masturbation; he was one of those religious fanatics who insisted that all evils came back to that.




Yes, it was mr. Kellogg the cornflake...
Dude, I'm from the Middle-East, mister Kellogg ain't got crap on the Middle-East. In fact, it is a cultural tradition in the Middle-East, that stems from tens of thousands of years ago. "Traumatize young men"??? I think I'm getting a pretty accurate picture of how you think, it's really retarded. How can a real MAN be traumatized by a circumcision? Real MEN are fearless. It's the pansies who are so insecure about themselves that make a big deal about circumcision.


His data is still used today to convince gullible and idiotic parents into mutilating their boys. However, many parents are so idiotic that they choose to have their child mutilated not because of medical advice, but because they want their son to "fit in".


Yeah sure...it's HIS data that is used ALL over the place, including where I'm from, to "mutilate"(sounds like you aren't too happy that it happened to you) young boys.

Do us a favor okay...look up "mutilate" in the dictionary. Then look up what female circumcision is. Then go hit your head against a wall as many times as needed to smack some sense in there.


Consider yourself schooled.




You'll need about 100 more IQ points and a ton more common sense, a working understanding of psychology and sociology to "school" me. Un-FREAKING-believable. Why you'd even bring up what you brought up is a mystery...to you. Not to me though. Psychology for the win!



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 01:48 PM
link   
fgm is not the same as circumcision in the mind of this man; the spiritual implications of my own adult circumcision cannot be fully compared to that of a female circumcision since i am not a woman. if both sides of the fgm and now coined mgm(male genital mutilation) disregard the spiritual aspects of why circumcision is necessary for the growth of a human in spiritual contexts then all the evidence and medical reports for or against will still not matter.

i lived 31 years before i had an adult circumcision and if i could do it over i would; the 31 years prior and the circumcision. the process of spiritual development that is associated with clarity of intent regarding a mans penile area is always disregarded by anti circ. proponents; and there are not enough testimonies to corroborate how a female circumcision is effected upon the individual besides the perceptions a "white mans world" places on it.

either way both practices relate to the way the individual upon which the procedure was performed perceives the world. irregardless of what this report says or what that culture presses upon you, the perceptual differences after such an operation are singular in nature and even though a persons choice may be swayed by the nature of medical information; it is a choice (that some didnt get) that is elective. thus the problem; some people dont like all the necessary modifications needed to stay in the kingdom; and trampling a temple underfoot is never as fun as being on the right or left hand of god.



posted on Apr, 19 2012 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Ausar
 


Please stop with the philosophical BS


We are talking physical differences here which you cannot compare simply because when someone cut off a little bit of skin from your penis, you were still able to function, make love, feel arousal and orgasm.

If someone did that to my clitoris I wouldn't be able to do/feel all of those things anymore. Case closed, no philosophy involved. Personally i am against both male and female circumcision, but one is most definitely considered body mutilation and the other one is not.

..
In addition, there are four different classifications of female circumcision.
Read and learn MEN!! Deny ignorance.


The main three are Type I, removal of the clitoral hood, almost invariably accompanied by removal of the clitoris itself (clitoridectomy); Type II, removal of the clitoris and inner labia; and Type III (infibulation), removal of all or part of the inner and outer labia, and usually the clitoris, and the fusion of the wound, leaving a small hole for the passage of urine and menstrual blood—the fused wound is opened for intercourse and childbirth.[4] Around 85 percent of women who undergo FGM experience Types I and II, and 15 percent Type III, though Type III is the most common procedure in several countries, including Sudan, Somalia, and Djibouti.[5] Several miscellaneous acts are categorized as Type IV. These range from a symbolic pricking or piercing of the clitoris or labia, to cauterization of the clitoris, cutting into the vagina to widen it (gishiri cutting), and introducing corrosive substances to tighten it


Even though official stated areas where practiced are Western, eastern, and north-eastern Africa, Middle East, Near East, Southeast Asia >> there are huge numbers of girls being mutilated in Europe and USA amongst the immigrants and also Portugal is a country with it's own female circumcision culture. It is a cultural, tribal issue and not so much religious but the vast majority of people practicing is Muslim.

I just want to add, the most severe type III mutilation involves leaving a small hole and opening it up every time the woman has sexual intercourse and/or gives birth but also stitching it up over and over again, and this is not done in a hospital. Can you imagine the pain ???

edit on 19-4-2012 by Exitt because: edit



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join