.:US May Ban Genital Mutilation Parents:.

[debwalin]

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

[Tedob1]

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.

[Green Bird]

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).

[Leviatan]

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/

[GreekGoddess]

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.

[Vorlin]

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.

[Terr]

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.

[GreekGoddess]

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

[rcgreen]

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.