SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
New legislation signed into law by Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder on Tuesday makes female genital mutilation a felony punishable by up to 15 years in prison. The laws apply both to doctors who conduct the procedure and parents who transport a child to undergo it. "Those who commit these horrendous crimes should be held accountable for their actions, and these bills stiffen the penalties for offenders while providing additional support to victims," Gov. Snyder said in a statement. "This legislation is an important step toward eliminating this despicable practice in Michigan while empowering victims to find healing and justice."
The governor also signed a bill allowing for a health professional's license or registration to be revoked if he or she is convicted of female genital mutilation.
Michigan is the 26th state to ban the practice; the state laws go into effect in October. The practice was banned in the United States in 1996, but Michigan's laws impose harsher penalties than the federal law. The package of bills comes amid the federal criminal trial of an emergency room doctor in Michigan, Jumana Nagarwala, charged with performing the procedure on multiple girls at a clinic in suburban Detroit. The Department of Justice says it believes the case is the first to be brought under the federal law. Another doctor and his wife are also charged in the case, the AP reports.
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by driven on Friday July 14 2017, @07:39PM (6 children)
Nothing significant is lost with male circumcision (I'm assuming that is what you're talking about).
Female genital manipulation results in the patient/victim being unable to enjoy sex or orgasm.
Big difference.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 14 2017, @08:03PM
Over 2/3 of the penis nerve endings are in the part that is removed, including 100% of the male body's external estrogen receptors.
Sometimes the tightness of the scar causes scrotal skin to be pulled onto the shaft of the penis. This is gets discovered at puberty, when the person gets a hairy penis.
Sometimes the result is a bent penis, again due to tight scar tissue.
Sometimes the penis, or the tip of it, ends up getting removed. (infection, inept cutting, etc. -- the usual surgical risks)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 14 2017, @09:20PM (4 children)
Who are you to decide what is and is not significant? That is subjective Mutilating someone's genitals doesn't suddenly become okay merely because you feel that the procedure changes nothing of significance. I would feel the same way even if it was literally just a snip; we shouldn't be mutilating or cutting people's genitals at all without their consent, period. The supposed medical benefits don't matter because they can be had in other ways (good hygiene, safe sex practices, being selective about partners, or not having partners) and because violating people's rights is not okay merely because there are (or may be) a few medical benefits.
People tend to get caught up in arguments about how bad MGM is and how many nerve endings are destroyed and whatnot, which I believe is a mistake. We must oppose all of these unnecessary procedures because they violate someone's fundamental right to control their own bodies.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by driven on Saturday July 15 2017, @01:03AM (3 children)
Who are you to decide what is and is not significant?
Well being circumcised I'm qualified to say that, in at least my case, sex has never been an issue. I can't speak for everyone out there, but I think making male circumcision out as some kind of genocidal nightmare is blowing it out of proportion. On the global list of problems to tackle, I think it's a lot further down than female genital mutilation.
What about cutting the umbilical cord? Fuck, I have a right to remain attached to my mother until the cord falls off naturally. Bloody barbaric medical procedures.
(Score: 2, Flamebait) by isostatic on Saturday July 15 2017, @01:48AM (1 child)
So because you've only got half a cock you think little boys should be equally disfigured?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 15 2017, @03:57AM
You need to learn how to read.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 15 2017, @02:43AM
I said it is subjective. To me, the problem isn't whether it actually makes sex less pleasurable, but that we are violating people's right to control their own bodies, even if they later say they are okay with their mutilated genitals.
Every violation of someone's human rights is a large issue. There are bigger issues, but that is inconsequential since we can try to solve multiple issues at once.
MGM is still something that happens at an alarming rate in first world countries, so it needs to be tackled. Both should be banned.
I fail to see your logic in this case. Does the foreskin fall off naturally and cause you to be attached to your mother? You could also use this line to mock anyone who is opposed to any non-consensual surgical alteration of people's bodies, not just for MGM. Oh, you're opposed to FGM? Well, what about the umbilical cord, then? Gotcha! Even lopping people's arms off would be no exception, because your argument did not take into account the severity of the procedure or the properties of the body part being altered/removed/cut.