Female Genital... Whatever

[electrainverted]

What to call it? That seems to be the problem. If you use "mutilation" as the third word, you're disrespectful against the women it has been used on, despite the fact that it is a mutilation, though only if we're talking about anything beyond removal of the clitoral hood

Comments

[aphelion_orion]

First off: Word. Word word WordyMcWord.

I find this dancing around the term frankly ridiculous, myself. In my eyes, it is mutilation, even when the woman in question has been brainwashed into wanting it (because her husband will love her, because she will get a husband, because she won't shame her family, because that's a good woman's duty, etc). In my opinion, we aren't equipped with anything we don't need, save perhaps the appendix, so attempting to pass off this kind of thing as surgery is something that personally offends me. A surgery is, in my eyes, a medical necessity which is performed because a woman's (or person's) health is at risk, and equating the completely unnecessary destruction of female genitalia to something like a health risk is something I consider an affront

[electrainverted]

Hee, hi babe. XD You got as riled up as I got, I see.

I should probably say the post that sparked this pointed out that we should use terms that those having been affected by, or live in cultures that use the various forms of FG...W uses, one of which is FGE (female genital excision, but that's just "removal" and that doesn't... encompass the dimension of "removal" that's involved in this practice. I mean, how can any word be enough to encompass the "removal", the destruction of a part, not just of genitals, but of sexuality, pleasure and enjoyment?
What I have trouble with isn't (not really) using words those women uses, but... that none of those words encompass the totality of it. Destruction. That's what it is. It's like saying that we shouldn't call a rape a "rape" because the woman who was raped doesn't, even when it was a rape. And if that's imperialistic and whatall, damn it, I can't help it, but I don't care

[aphelion_orion]

Heh, yeah. (Dangit MSN why won't you let me log in D:).

Seriously? I don't get where they're coming from. The term FGM has nothing to do with being disrespectful to the victims (what, PC people, am I not allowed to call them victims anymore, either?), it has to do with calling the practice what it is. Jesus, that's like saying calling a blind person "blind" is disrespectful.

This is why I am at odds with this political correctness shit. Not only is it trying to act like "if you don't say it you don't mean/think it", it is also trying to soften terms which should be harsh because dammit, they are harsh and horrible and all kinds of wrong. Rape is rape, not "non-consensual sex" or "gray rape" or "oh it's not rape at all it was just forceful sex". FGM is mutilation, with all the brutality the act entails. And call me crazy, but a person really suffering from the condition, suffering from being raped or mutilated might want to have a word strong enough to express her pain and suffering.

The majority (all? I have no idea) of our boys

[electrainverted]

I think that "naming it" is part of my problem, too, yes. I mean, if I cut off a person's lips and their nose and then sew the hole over the nose together and the lips too, leaving only a little hole there for liquid food, and call that as "needed" in the name of "health, beauty, ease of maintenance and 'marriageability'", it doesn't matter what anyone says, that's brutal mutilation by cutting off parts essential to a person and their view of themselves, nevermind eating and breathing (aka, bodily maintenance)!

I'm thankful male circumcision never got much of anywhere here in Europe, the thought of what all circumcised little boys have to live with... the "operation" itself... brr. Ew.

[aphelion_orion]

Yeah, exactly. I completely agree.

It's funny, in a very sad way, how the human race is constantly trying to deny a woman pleasure and self-fulfillment, in the most insidious ways. You aren't allowed to eat because you'll get fat. You aren't allowed to go out because you'll get raped. You aren't allowed to wear what clothing you want because you'll get raped. You aren't allowed to enjoy sex because man won't like you if you do. You aren't allowed to have small breasts or a big ass or round thighs because then man won't like you. You aren't allowed to smell like your clean, freshly bathed self because man doesn't like you if your vagina doesn't taste like strawberries. And so on and so forth. GRRR.

On the topic of male circumcision, I found out a pretty interesting tidbit from my mom just now... apparently another weird reason why this thing became so popular in America was that by removing the foreskin, pleasure/stimulans was reduced and men could maintain their erections for longer. What kinds of weird is that? I'm sure I don't

[electrainverted]

Oh, yes, let's just deny women any pleasure, especially the ones "independent" of man, at all! I had never considered the "destruction of non-reproductive sexuality" (besides the "keep a woman chaste, etc etc" part of FGC, and now it seems so obvious. *idiot*
There's so much we "shouldn't" be to be "desirable", it's exhausting, not to talk about disgusting.

O____o WTF?

(I see you has kittins. I has kittins too! xD)

[aphelion_orion]

Really? I never thought of it as much else. If you look at the countries where it is most widely practiced, most of them are highly restrictive societies, particularly where female roles and expectations are concerned.

The way I see it, FGM has two main purposes: a) Intensifying a man's pleasure by sewing up the hole so it'll be tighter, and b) cutting off most, if not all, of a woman's means to think of the contact as enjoyable/pleasurable. Of course "keeping the woman chaste" has a large part in this, but a crazy number of men are convinced that women feeling pleasure are the devil's spawn and need to be eliminated.

And even if you leave out those nutjobs, there's plenty of them going HOMG NOEZ WOMENZ RITE (MEN)PR0N WRYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!1111eleventy The concept of women having sex drives is apparently a fairly recent one.

Yeah, seriously WTF. Dominance issues/proving yourself to be an unfeeling stud, anyone?

(Kittins make everything better. *gives more kittins*)

[electrainverted]

a) Intensifying a man's pleasure by sewing up the hole so it'll be tighter, and
The only "fault" with this is that the hole has to be slit open again for sex. They sew her up with a hole only large enough for pee and menstrual blood, part of which ensure that she won't be sexually promiscuous, and then her husband slits it open with a knife at the wedding night (I have read, though, that in some instances he's supposed to tear her open with his (steel haaaard) penis to show his manliness, and use of knife is the "lesser" option). Ugh.

And even that "women have sex drives too" is hardly accepted yet. Fantastic, isn't it?

(I has no more kittins. =( But we can give the kittins Tia's Love Shack to play in.)

[aphelion_orion]

Ah, my bad. Except that that option makes almost makes me want to puke more than the other.

I'm so thrilled, I can hardly contain this. Seriously, I've seen whole essays written on the "Why yaoi?" question, but the only thing I respond with when a twat asks me is "Why not?" and then I automatically disregard everything they say afterwards.

(I shall invite my last kittins to live in Tia's Love Shack. It seems like a nice place!)

[electrainverted]

It's not as if it's in any way improved with that conclusion, no.

xDD And why not, indeed? I mean, there's no other reason to pair up any one at all than the "Because". Because they have great chemistry, because I want to see what they'll do, because the story wants to go that way, because... :D So many "becauses"!

(A very nice place indeed, just have them minding the albino snake and all the bottles hanging from the ceiling, and they'll be fine!)