Traditional initiation is a rite of passage into manhood for young males that is practiced by various ethnic groups in Africa, including parts of South Africa. Among them are the Xhosa, Ndebele, Sotho and Venda communities.
Not from what I’ve seen in n America - most girls under 16 already have their ears pierced. And such ear mutilation of girls without their ability to consent seems to be culturally fine.
Of course the two situations aren’t identical, that’s how analogies work and it’s still a useful part of critical thinking.
The point is that it’s not quite as black and white as many people think. If these boys at 16 want their diicks cut and it’s part of their culture and done properly, I’m not going to say it’s bad. Obviously in the case of this article, it was not done right.
Circumcision just after birth is a separate issue; but I’m not particularly against it having had it done to me and not feeling that I am lacking anything as a result.
Intersex infants having surgeries forced upon them is morally wrong.
Removed by mod
Here we go with the intentional misunderstanding. Stop mutilating the private parts of infants.
Removed by mod
Let me guess if someone critiques states persecuting women for having lifesaving abortions “that’s bigotry too”
Those are some mighty self-righteous words for somebody who advocates chopping off clitorises.
Removed by mod
You may not want to, but you are.
Removed by mod
You’re the one defending it.
Stop being a bigot, it’s their culture after all.
Unnecessary procedures to mutilate the body are morally and ethically wrong regardless of the age of the patient.
For fucks sake. How on earth can you be in defense of this abuse? Please, explain why you support this.
Like getting ears pierced?
Ears are predominantly pierced when age of consent is reached and no place will do it without that consent.
Parents doing this to their children without consent- are abusing their children.
So in a way, yeah- like ears being pierced.
Additionally, pieced ears heal back if left alone. Circumcision is permanent mutilation.
Man I love blowing up false equivalency fallacies! Thanks for this!
Not from what I’ve seen in n America - most girls under 16 already have their ears pierced. And such ear mutilation of girls without their ability to consent seems to be culturally fine.
Of course the two situations aren’t identical, that’s how analogies work and it’s still a useful part of critical thinking.
The point is that it’s not quite as black and white as many people think. If these boys at 16 want their diicks cut and it’s part of their culture and done properly, I’m not going to say it’s bad. Obviously in the case of this article, it was not done right. Circumcision just after birth is a separate issue; but I’m not particularly against it having had it done to me and not feeling that I am lacking anything as a result.
We’re going to agree to disagree on this.
Removed by mod
Read up
I am curious now, what is usually done in this case?
The doctor forces down vuvloplasty and calls the baby a girl because people are afraid of unique plumbing.