|
Neulich auf Facebook so nen typischen Post gesehen; essentiell:
"Ich kann verstehen wieso Männer es schlimm finden, wenn Jungs gegen ihren Willen beschnitten werden, aber überlegt mal, weibliche Beschneidung ist viel schlimmer und jeder, der behauptet, dass Beschneidung bei Jungs ähnlich wäre, hat keinen Respekt verdient!"
Das spiegelt auch recht gut die vergangenen Diskussionen hier wieder; man kann nicht auf sachlicher Ebene über beides reden, ohne dass ein Wettbewerb draus gemacht werden muss.
Grandioser Post einer Frau darunter:
If people think male circumcision isn't as bad, they're very misinformed. Circumcision for females isn't "as bad" either, most of the time. Often it's ritualistic pricking or removal of the inner labia ONLY. But you hear the horror stories of people cutting of the clitoris and sewing women up, but that is NOT the norm. In the cultures that do practice the brutal forms of FGM, where they remove the clitoris and labia, it is done as a ceremony BY WOMEN as a sign of the victim becoming a woman. And guess what? The man's situation is just a brutal. The men will remove the the foreskin with no anestesia, no sterile environment, and is extremely painful, as in the case for females. It's to mark the transition into puberty.
The idea the most men don't care... yeah, most don't. Neither do most circumcised women. In a survey of 3,805 Sudanese women, of which 89% had experienced FGM; 96% said they would do it to their daughters and 90% favored the continuation of the practice generally. This is in a culture with the more severe forms of FGM.
Whatever is wrong for female circumcision is wrong for male circumcision, and often times the severity of the practices are very comparable. But no one ever hears about or talks about the men.
I'll finish with a quote by Nelson Mandela, and his experience with circumcision: "Flinching or crying out was a sign of weakness and stigmatized one’s manhood. I was determined not to disgrace myself, the group or my guardian. Circumcision is a trial of bravery and stoicism; no anaesthetic is used; a man must suffer in silence. [Before] I knew it, the old man was kneeling in front of me. … Without a word, he took my foreskin, pulled it forward, and then, in a single motion, brought down his assegai [knife]. I felt as if fire was shooting through my veins; the pain was so intense that I buried my chin in my chest. Many seconds seemed to pass before I remembered the cry, and then I recovered and called out, ‘Ndiyindoda!’ [‘I am a man!’]"
Noch einer von ner anderen Frau:
Anyone who says that they are not the same thing, doesn't understand what is occurring or what is being taken away. Granted, there are more types of FGM, but the type to only remove the clitoral hood is exactly the same as the removal of foreskin. Both are gross human rights violations sold as a witch doctors cure all. Asides from very rare circumstances, there are no benefits to this at all. It has been debunked by medical professionals all over the world who don't exploit the monetary gain from such a practice. The risks and complications happen way too often. If you think it's okay, and not a big deal, to amputate a healthy part of an infant - you're wrong and fucking stupid.
______________________
today we're going to fix you
|
