I am 30 and in a STEM field. I had a baby last year and took 5 months off.

Some woman make a choice to prioritize childbearing over their careers. Like every choice that every human has ever made it has consequences. If you spend time out of the office raising children, you’re going to be passed over for raises and opportunities. Guess what? it’s 100% fair- as much as it doesn’t give you a…

So we’re all supposed to keep pretending that none of this has anything to do with Islam, on pain of being gray in Jezebel forever, right?

A.) I’m not sure if a tiny scar would cause pain for the rest of a person’s life
B.) a small nick on the clitoris, which may or may not scar, sounds a lot better than removing foreskin from the penis (which leaves a scar as it turns out!)

Still, it’s not 70 million women had their clitoris and their labia removed, and…

yes because a total removal of the clitoris and the labia is basically the same thing as a nick on the clitoris.

heh, and yet even if you try to talk about male genital mutilation on it’s own, feminists will come in and say you are derailing and talk about how female circumcision is just infinitely worse.

you’re comparing the absolute worst case scenario to the absolute least worst case scenario.

some female circumcision is a simple ritual nick on the clitoris.

And removing all of the skin from the entire penis and removing the glans isn’t healthy either.

But we’re not talking about the absolute worst case scenario are we? feminists always want to compare the worst female circumcision to the least invasive male genital mutilation.

Little harm? are you fucking kidding? I guess sending a baby boy into shock from such an overload of pain by mutilating his genitals has no effect on their developing brain.

Meanwhile, feminists look at things like ‘ritual nicking’, lump it into female circumcision and then present it as if all female circumcision is…

Whats interesting is that countries where there is female circumcision also have myths about upsides... like easier to clean, lowers risk of certain diseases etc.

what a weird coincidence. It’s almost as if people will invent reasons to defend barbaric cultural practices of the culture they are involved in... huh.

it’s less dangerous because it happens in a medical setting when preformed in the west (you know... because it’s legal AND common), not because the procedure is less dangerous inherently.

Also less painful? citation needed.

A lot of guys today don’t really know though. A documentary in the UK had showed that this FGM culture had kept the procedure hushed around boys and guys (especially when increasingly, most families just send their girls abroad to have it done). One guy was told nothing about girls getting cut, just his parents…

I don’t in consider myself an MRA so why would I go to an MRA board. And no need to get insulting.

I meant the 4th set in the definition that you posted were potentially about as damaging. And assumed that you would give reasons if they aren’t.

Yes, it’s worse, and this article clearly isn’t about circumcision, but why are people so eager to dismiss intactivists?

well lucky for you. SillyMe8 didn’t say that one or the other was worse. that was you who brought that to the table. SillyMe8 said that’s its Gross and unnecessary for both genders, completely true.

[He says in a thread where some are specifically trying to shut down the conversation of both]. Cute. Keep doing you.

The thing about the medical “benefits” is that of course if you remove part of your body, that part of your body isn’t going to cause problems for you, but doctors don’t usually endorse medically unnecessary procedures. Plenty of people have had their tonsils and appendixes removed, but only after encountering…

Why? Is there only so much “ban juice” left in the jar such that we can only ban one or the other, so we have to choose?

We definitely need more details about which parts of the genitalia are cut in order to find out how much indignation we should feel.