If you are talking about the removal of the clitoris your friend is wrong. Anatomically it has a purpose and it is the most sensitive part of a female's reproductive organs. It is the equivalent of the male penis. Removing it is another way in which to control a woman's sexuality.
Female genital mutilation
- Thread starter lucifers angel
- Start date
If you are talking about the removal of the clitoris your friend is wrong. Anatomically it has a purpose and it is the most sensitive part of a female's reproductive organs. It is the equivalent of the male penis. Removing it is another way in which to control a woman's sexuality.
Moderator's Note: Flames deleted & warning sent. Please do not refer to other members as "idiot."
As an anthropologist I'm fully aware of FGM.
thats nice, have you ever had a patient ask you to redo it after you cut through the tissue so they can give birth. Have you ever had the MOTHER ask for you to do it to her daughter
It was at that point i stoped beliving that its "male dominance over women" its no more about that than MGM is females showing sexual dominance over MEN
I do think its child abuse but if an ADULT wants it done what right do any of us have to tell her she cant as long as she can give informed concent (ie she a) knows what she is doing and b) isnt being forced into it)
It was at that point i stoped beliving that its "male dominance over women" its no more about that than MGM is females showing sexual dominance over MEN
I do think its child abuse but if an ADULT wants it done what right do any of us have to tell her she cant as long as she can give informed concent (ie she a) knows what she is doing and b) isnt being forced into it)
Why the selective posting?
http://www.theage.com.au/news/world...ision-unislamic/2006/11/24/1163871589618.html
Though I will say that the women towards whom this is directed, are ignoring it. They do not feel that the imams have a right to tell them what they can do with their bodies. Go figure.
Your answer is ambiguous. You have merely shown that Al-Azhar was present at the conference. It does not necessarily follow that he agreed with those who objected to genital muttilation. Was a unaminous vote carried ?
Assuming he did change his mind , then he was going back on an earlier fatwa. This would be typical of the way religion operates. Muslinm women are expected to submit to whatever nonsense emanate from so-called scholars, not to mention the suffering inflicated on them. Why did an outside organization have to call the conference ? Had they not done so, it can be assumed that the earlier ruling would still apply
Catholics are expected to folow ex-cathedra prouncements made by the Pope of the day. One Pope can overturn what one of his predecessors said.
I cannot understand how a rational person can accept such nonsense.
Al Azhar has binding fatwas. The others do not.
Did he change his mind or stick to his guns ?
They aren't really supposed to.
I just had to dredge up this thread to say:
I really don't see how male circumcision (rather brutally and without anaesthetic crushing and tearing off the foreskin, impairing the function of a perfectly healthy penis) is perfectly acceptable in the USA whereas female circumcision (essentially removing a vestigial penis and scrotum with the only tools available, dirty instruments and no anaesthetic because, shock fucking horror, third world surgery is rather primitive) is apparently such a horrible crime to you yanks.
Last edited:
Al Azhar being a university, does not have guns, but yes, the fatwa is still binding, since it has not been overwritten by a later one.
Shockingly, no one can be forced to follow a fatwa, so it has little effect on those determined to follow the practice.