.:US May Ban Genital Mutilation Parents:.

Quote:

---

US authorities have threatened to ban dozens of Somali refugee families from emigrating to America because the parents have mutilated the genitals of their young daughters.

The traditional circumcision rite is believed to have been carried out recently on girls as young as two after their families were told the act was illegal in the United States.

Some 12,000 Somalis, members of a persecuted minority, are being held in camps in Kenya en route to the US.

The ordeal usually happens at night.

The young girls are held down on the floor by their families - the mutilation takes place without any anaesthetic...

Read the full article here.

---

Even though I disagree with the mutilation that is taking place, I don't see how the U.S. can ban immigrants, who have already committed the act against their child from coming to the U.S.. I realize that we make the rules who come and go, and that mutilation against anyone is wrong here, but punishing for an act that didn't even happen here, seems wrong. Like I said, I do not agree with it, but it is their culture. What does everyone else think?

I read this story on Waris Dirie when it first appeared in Reader's Digest

Quote:

---

In a nomadic culture like the one I was raised in, there is no place for an unmarried woman, so mothers feel it is their duty to ensure their daughters have the best possible opportunity to get a husband.

And since the prevailing wisdom in Somalia is that there are bad things between a girl's legs, a woman is considered dirty, oversexed and unmarriageable unless those parts--the clitoris, the labia minora, and most of the labia majora-are removed. Then the wound is stitched shut, leaving only a small opening and a scar where the genitals had been-a practice called infibulation.

---

What bothered me about the article you mentioned, is this part:

Quote:

---

In recent months, dozens of Somali parents, preparing to move to the US, have been rushing to subject their daughters to this agonizing ritual, knowing it is illegal in America.

---

A while ago, there was this big fuzz in Belgium about whether Muslim women should be allowed or not to wear their head wraps for the photographs on their ID-cards. After a lot of discussion, they actually are allowed to do that. My question is: respecting their culture, ok... but to what extent? What if some members of an ancient cult wanna move to the US? A sect that still offers children to their god or something...?

I think this Sick traditional circumcision ceremony needs to be banned from earth!

A good start would be to refuse them in the USA and for i care every civilized country!

This kind of behaviour makes me sick!

<stupid question>How do you circumsize a girl?</stupid question>

<answer that already has been supplied>the clitoris, the labia minora, and most of the labia majora-are removed</answer that already has been supplied>...

Don't tell me you're after the actual details...:/

No no no no no.....I don't care when or where this type of behavior occured. People who do this to their children shouldn't be given refuge anywhere. I don't care how close-minded you may think I am...this is ignorance on the part of an entire race. IMO, a good solution would be to allow them to immigrate, and then throw them in jail for child abuse. Particularly as Neg quoted, the ones who hurry up and do it to their daughters in preparation for immigrating to any country where it is illegal. It is illegal in this and other countries because it is barbaric, inhumane, cruel and altogether hideous. Just stop and think for a few minutes exactly WHAT is being done to these girls, and what they will NEVER be able to experience from life because of it.

Deb :(

Quote:

---

Originally posted here by debwalin
this is ignorance on the part of an entire race.

---

First of all let me say I agree with you Deb. It's wrong what they're doing to their own flesh and blood, BUT that does NOT give anyone the right to stereotype.....


Edit: To the negger that gave his/her reason as "F*** You", you're an idiot.
2nd Edit: Deb I know you well enough to know that you're not one to stereotype :) No apology was needed and I sure don't accept it :p

The really bad news is that this sort of mutilation does
happen in the USA, but not for religious reasons, but under the guise
of modern medicine.

Quote:

---

Initially doctors thought Chase should be reared as a boy, and she was named Charlie. But further consultation with different doctors led to the decision to raise her as a girl. She was renamed Cheryl. Her parents decided, under medical advice, to have her clitoris removed, in order to "normalize" her appearance toward that of a girl. This clitorectomy was meant to help her develop a female gender identity

---

http://www.luckymojo.com/tkintersex.html

A small but significant number of people are born with "ambiguous genitalia",
which can mean any thing from a boy with too small a penis to a girl (apparently normal)
who has XY chromosomes. They are often surgically altered as infants.
:cool:

Mahakaal...you are right and I apologize. It wasn't right for me to say it like that...because I'm sure there are parents who choose not to do this to their children. It makes me angry to think of it, and I think it's horribly wrong, but it was also wrong of me to stereotype everyone. Sorry.

Deb

Let's all protest against orthodox Jews now, shall we? I mean, jeez... I personally find it repugnant, but I don't think it's worth the blatant hypocrisy.

Terr, it's not exactly the same thing. Men who are circumcised are done for a number of reasons, arguably good or bad...but women who are circumcised are done for one reason and one reason only. It deprives them of all sexual pleasure, and ensures that intercourse is as painful as possible, because women are assumed to be promiscuous and unfaithful by nature. There is no way to fix this, there is no way to change it, and little girls who have it done to them have automatically, by someone elses decision, had this part of their lives completely removed. Now I'm not saying sex is the most important thing in the world, or even in a marriage, but it IS important, both for the relationship, and the womans feelings of self worth and happiness. It seems sad to me that these girls won't ever be able to have a satisfying sexual relationship in their lives.

Deb

It might be better to take the ones that its too late to stop the mutilation of, then release a statement to the effect that it is not only illegal in the united states but that the practice itself is found repulsive. In the future all children will be inspected and those, found to have been mutilated since the date of this message, will not be allowed entry. Mandatory classes on sex and sexuality in the US should be established for all those who wish entry from that country. No test or anything, just indoctrination. This is not a custom we want to emigrate with them

This really seems, to us, (and is) a hideous thing to have done, but there is no room for liberal thinking in a nomadic tribe. Where an unwanted woman does not survive. This has been done, with what has been considered by the parents, to be in the best interest of their daughter. Sexual pleasure is last on the list of priorities in a land where the acquisition of the next meal isn’t certain. Im sure the removal of a limb, pennis or vocal cords would be done if the survival of a child could be assured by it.

Depriving these people sanctuary would be a terrible wrong, for that’s supposed to be the nature of the US. Education is the only way to stop this from happening here. Guaranteeing every persons survival in Somalia, three meals a day, an education, medical care…the basics, is the only way to stop it in Somalia. The very act of ‘have nations’ allowing people to go hungry in ‘have not’ nations, is no less an atrocity.

Post #1

Hmm, I'm guessing the ban was set to discourage any people who would like to immigrate to the U.S. in the future from doing it to their daughters (the ones who haven't yet).

I did a little resaearch and it seems there are 2 sorts of female circumcision.
Apparently some women are having it done as some sort of cosmetic reason ( I know don't ask), either way check this site out.
http://www.geocities.com/hoodectomy/

That's what I'm saying. What's done is done, and although we may disagree with the culture, we should not deny them refuge. I don't agree that it should be practiced here, but all refugees are to abide by the laws of the country they are entering, but to punish them for things they did before coming to the country, and furthermore, punishing the circumsized women and children who are examples of the culture, doesn't seem to be right.

I think this falls under the same kind of jurisdiction that boys in europe went through when they would be castrated when young to keep their unaltered voice for singing. Knowing the timeframe we're talking about, I don't think there was much of any kind of anaesthetic and that was done for one purpose and one purpose only, the entertainment for the nobles and such.

As for other countries and their "cultures" and "traditions", nobody needs to look any further than anywhere there's a US embassy stationed. Chances are, we're to abide by strict rules due to their policies and whatnot, yet they come over here and can do whatever they want regardless of repercussion. And nobody can convince me that "exporting" said person/family back to their country is anywhere near the same thing we would get if we did the same thing in their country. Prime example: friend of mine worked in an embassy in the military in the middle east. He gets drunk, drives, hits someone, and is gone the next day. He's also demoted on rate (not rank), fined by the country, and is honorably discharged from the US Army. Pretty shitty, I think...considering multiple offenses of the same kind have been done by the middle eastern class when they're over here. One "diplomat" brings his whole family over, including all his wives, of which they have multiple cars, with no licenses (this was in DC in 1997), and they drive like ****ing maniacs. One woman hits a kid crossing a street, breaking both legs, keeps going, until the police run her off the road but they can't do anything because A: she's got diplomatic tags on her vehicle and B: she doesn't speak a damned word of english. What happens? Nothing. The guy gets exported as does his family. What happens after that? Hell if I know but I don't think it's anywhere near as "justified" as what we get overseas.

Sorry about the rant, but actions like this and others are all too prevalent. We just happen to have too many bleeding heart liberals in office and groups that seem to want to cater to making every person happy on the planet, minus those that live in the US.

Disclaimer: the statement above is wholly my own, of my own opinion, and does not reflect on those of AO, its members, or anyone else involved, express or implied.

EDIT: I do think we should make travel/immigration the same per country. Example: Saudi Arabia requires Americans or anyone non-muslim/arab to have a visa to enter the country, strictly for business. Make it the same for them. This one-way street crap we've been doing for the past God-knows-how-long needs to stop.

I'm not defending the practice, but I just find the talk of denying them refuge on those grounds to be something of a knee-jerk reaction. Now, I'm not sure exactly WHAT is happening, and on the medical level, I don't really want to know. I agree with Tedob in that the best thing to do is make it abundantly clear to the parents that such action virtually isolates their daugters from useful marriagability toward anyone who is not in their current group.

On the other hand, what if they WANT to maintain their cultural grouping that they currently have? It could very well be MORE attractive, as a way to keep outsiders from marrying in. Who knows. We don't really know their exact motives or sequence of reasoning, only what the news says it is traditionally.

Actually, the procedure is very gruesome in the way it is performed. And yes, I disagree with the practices that are taking place. However, as long as they do not practice it here, I don't see why they cannot enter this country. As I said before...why punish the victims of the 'crime', especially those who may not agree with what their parents had them go through?

Here are some light-shedding articles on the procedure. Now, as I said, I don't agree with what is being done, but they should be able to come to this country as long as they don't do it here, you can't take back what has already been done and maybe, the culture will evolve. Who's to say really?

http://www.religioustolerance.org/fem_cirm.htm
http://www.theatlantic.com/unbound/flashbks/fgm/fgm.htm
http://www.mwlusa.org/pub_fgm.html

This last one has pictures of a female circumcision. If you do not like needles, do not look. If the female genitalia will disturb you, you've been warned:

http://www.noharmm.org/femcirctech.htm

Maybe we shouldn'n prohibit them from entering the country, but
allow it under one condition. All the men of the tribe must
agree to let us cut off their peckers.
:cool: