RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM)

RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

kittinSol -> RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (1/20/2009 12:24:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cjan In this case, fuck cultural differences. Some things are more important , like basic human rights . Yes.

MissSepphora1 -> RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (1/20/2009 12:59:02 PM)
Yes, it's one of those "cute" cultural things that us westerners have no right to mess with. Like honor killings, not allowing girls to go to school, and splashing girls with acid if they don't do as a man thinks they should. Not to mention stonings for adultry, and hanging rape victims. What are we westerners thinking?

MissSepphora1 -> RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (1/20/2009 1:02:22 PM)
ahhh... and let's not forget that "cute" cultural thing in Saudi Arabia of marrying adolescent girls off to old men. http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/01/17/saudi.child.marriage/

dcnovice -> RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (1/20/2009 1:04:40 PM)
MissSepphora, you keep putting "cute" in quotes. Have you actually seen sources describing these practices as "cute"? If so, do please post links.

slaveboyforyou -> RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (1/20/2009 1:16:23 PM)
quote: So if we end immigration does this mean I get to kick all of you white assholes off of our land? Pleeeeeeease. Are you going to drain the white portion of yourself and deport it too? It's quite obvious you're not a full-blooded American Indian. Exactly what percentage of your blood has to be American Indian to qualify as not being white? [8\|]

YourhandMyAss -> RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (1/20/2009 1:17:11 PM)
Not all women get breast jobs for this reason and this reason alone. Some do it for their self exteme and confidence in themselves. quote: ORIGINAL: Gwynvyd This made me instantly think of boob jobs. The ones with smaller boobs get boob jobs to attract or keep a male mate. ( or to make better money stripping ) Often female friends encourage this idea of mutilation, and even hold buy so and so some boobs parties. So if this mutilation of our natural breasts is to keep or find a mate.. and we are subjecting ourselves to it.. and with our female friends back up.... how does this differ from FGM? It is either the breasts, or the Vagina. They are both being altered. Just my idea on it. Gwyn

Aszhrae -> RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (1/20/2009 3:39:01 PM)
Does it really matter what percentage of Gwynvyd that is native. Its enough that its in direct heritage to her current self. Only the purists seem concerned about matters of blood percentage. The fact that she stands up and defends the rights of individual's concerning human rights, I would applaud her for it. As for her post in reaction to those that would want for immigration to shut it doors. How about returning Canadian intellectual property to north of the 49th parallel. The simple fact that Gwynvyd did start this thread to bring up a serious occurrence practiced elsewhere for discussion and she did ask for public opinion. I really have little understanding as to why the purity of blood even came up. This thread has little to do with that inquiry. The fact that FGM still occurs in the world because men choose to oppress women sexually I really do find atrocious. They convince women with fear, intimidation, and making decisions of the innocent and naive. Honestly any man that would perform FGM on a woman of any age, should have his balls crushed between two bricks. Go ahead and search for examples of FGM and look at the pics before you comment about it being allowed to continue. Any male that supports such a procedure, even in controlled environment, should perhaps think about how it might feel if their dick was disensitized for the rest of their lives and unable to enjoy the pleasure of a BJ.

slaveboyforyou -> RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (1/20/2009 3:53:28 PM)
quote: Does it really matter what percentage of Gwynvyd that is native. Its enough that its in direct heritage to her current self. Only the purists seem concerned about matters of blood percentage. The fact that she stands up and defends the rights of individual's concerning human rights, I would applaud her for it. When someone makes comments about the evil white man; when they are obviously very white, I will call pretentious bullshit on it. My family has been here since the early 18th Century, and there is some American Indian blood in my family. But I don't go around deriding my European ancestors, claiming to be an American Indian. I especially don't go along with this nonsense that I am not allowed to comment on current immigration policies because of my European ancestory. We have a lot of politically correct, faux Indians running around parroting this nonsense. So yeah, it does matter.

Vendaval -> RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (1/20/2009 4:02:44 PM)
Hello Gwynvyd, You could also mention the complications for pregnancy and childbirth when this practice is done to a woman. Problems such as having to cut open the thorns for the baby to come out and bleeding to death. I agree that basic human rights trumps cultural sensitivity in this matter, same goes for human trafficking.

Aszhrae -> RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (1/20/2009 4:37:12 PM)
Anything done to the body should be as a result of personal, well-informed choices. Wonder how many women would choose FGM to become marriageable, if they knew that there the choice jeopardizes not only the life of the women during birth but may also harm the infant. That there is good possibility that delivery of any infant might also result in the woman's death. slaveboyforyou, I agree with Gwynvyd on the fact that the first settlers were evil and also the government policy without fair representation were responsible for the subjugation and genocide of many native tribes that the world will ever know of again. Why did they do this? Land of course. What cheap beads and rifles could not purchase, many lands were taken, stained by native blood. The land belongs to native inhabitants that first settled the lands. Good ol' white man (male) takes what he wants much the same way as the men do the same to their women in lands that support the practice of FGM. Mutilation of a lesser people seems to be a standard practice among most men. I guess that is what allows them to get it up when they need to. Subject matter does relate, but indirectly. Its about taking what is not yours to take by force, terrorism or misdirection.

philosophy -> RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (1/20/2009 4:52:54 PM)
.....tolerance of cultural practises is not a blank cheque. The trick is knowing where to draw the line. We could use an external standard, such as the UN declaration of Human Rights, the Bible or the US constitution and we can say these rights are protected. We can follow our gut feelings and if a given practise disgusts us personally we can agitate against it. Some combine the two.....letting their gut instincts decide which parts of an external standard to adhere to and which parts to ignore. Is there a right answer? Demonstrably not yet. As a species we haven't solved this problem. When it comes to FGM the difficulty isn't in knowing whether or not one opposes it......it's knowing on what basis one does so. What precedent does that basis set?

Amaros -> RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (1/20/2009 5:01:27 PM)
She looks pretty Native American to me slaveboy, and her comments were directed at somebody bitching about immigration, and therefore cogent. Without getting into who has dibs, she's entitled to her opinion, it's not "bullshit", see Johnson v. McIntosh - they've got every right to bitch. quote: This thesis, that the implicit but overarching purpose of the M'Intosh rule against private purchases of Indian land was cheap acquisition of Indian lands, is consistent with the historical discussion in Part 1. The unwavering opposition of administrators and legislators to private purchases from the very beginning of European colonization, even in the face of intense lobbying and bribery by the United Companies and similar holders of Indian deeds, demonstrates that popularly elected officials felt the M'Intosh rule was quite valuable. It had little effect on the distribution of wealth among Europeans; its value must have come from its negative effect on Indian welfare. The willingness of the courts to reaffirm the rule against private purchases in a case where jurisdiction was questionable at best indicates the importance officials continued to attach to the rule. The plaintiffs, as shareholders of companies that assembled significant capital to attempt such private purchases, demonstrated that the danger of bidding for Indian lands was not theoretical. History and Interpretation of the Great Case of Johnson v. M'Intosh. "No immigration" is pretty much equivalent to "no honor amongst thieves". America is supposed to stand for truth and Justice, this is truth, deal with it. And you might want to ponder another truism: some things never change - Europeans emigrated over here mostly because they were treated worse than Indians.

slaveboyforyou -> RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (1/20/2009 5:03:23 PM)
quote: slaveboyforyou, I agree with Gwynvyd on the fact that the first settlers were evil and also the government policy without fair representation were responsible for the subjugation and genocide of many native tribes that the world will ever know of again. Why did they do this? Land of course. What cheap beads and rifles could not purchase, many lands were taken, stained by native blood. The land belongs to native inhabitants that first settled the lands. Good ol' white man (male) takes what he wants much the same way as the men do the same to their women in lands that support the practice of FGM. Mutilation of a lesser people seems to be a standard practice among most men. I guess that is what allows them to get it up when they need to. Subject matter does relate, but indirectly. Its about taking what is not yours to take by force, terrorism or misdirection. Actually, most of the deaths in the Americas during European colonization were due to disease. Since they weren't aware of what caused disease, I wouldn't call it genocide. If you think the indigenous people of the Americas didn't do brutal things to each other, than you need to do some more research. Hernan Cortez (conquerer of the Aztecs) was cheered by natives in the Yucatan, because they saw him as a savior from the Aztecs. The Aztecs and the Mayans routinely raided weaker tribes to capture people needed in human sacrifices. Depending on the God they were trying to appease; these sacrifices included methods like, cutting out the hearts from the living, boiling people, burning people alive, feeding people to animals, cannibalism, and many other enlightened activities. It's been documented that up to 100,000 people were murdered in a single week of Aztec ceremonies. Who were the genocidal maniacs? The Plains Indians didn't have the horse until Europeans introduced them. Before that, they had to resort to herding bison herds off of cliffs to kill them for meat. Tribes in the current northeastern United States like the Mohawks routinely burned their captives alive. By the way, slavery was quite common amongst most tribes in the Americas. As for women, they were mostly chattel. So spare me this misinformed ideal about the noble savage. It's actually a very racist ideal that was created by idealistic, white Europeans. It's total bullshit.

NuevaVida -> RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (1/20/2009 5:25:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaveboyforyou quote: So if we end immigration does this mean I get to kick all of you white assholes off of our land? Pleeeeeeease. Are you going to drain the white portion of yourself and deport it too? It's quite obvious you're not a full-blooded American Indian. Exactly what percentage of your blood has to be American Indian to qualify as not being white? [8\|] It is my understanding that anyone who is 25% Native American (or more) qualifies for Native American benefits in this country. So, to answer your question - 25% is the percentage to qualify as "non white."

slaveboyforyou -> RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (1/20/2009 5:51:48 PM)
quote: It is my understanding that anyone who is 25% Native American (or more) qualifies for Native American benefits in this country. So, to answer your question - 25% is the percentage to qualify as "non white." Actually, the Cherokee will include you on their rolls if you can prove 1/16 degree in heritage. My family has never done this. I don't need to be a minority to feel special. I'm not talking about "benefits." I just find it odd and amusing that so many European descended people want to latch on to any non-European ancestory while completely forgetting their European ancestory. It's become fashionable to try and become an oppressed minority. Somehow, I doubt these people actually experience any real racial discrimination. I think it has more to do with a need to feel special and unique.

aravain -> RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (1/20/2009 6:00:45 PM)
~Fast Reply~ I liken it to Circumcision in my opinion, though to a higher degree. I find it a disgusting, horrible practice. Personally I don't think it should be done ever though I would make the allowance that CONSENTING ADULTS (not children, as both are usually practiced on) could be allowed to search for either... ON THEIR OWN. I would prefer that both be completely internationally outlawed, but I'm not truly an idealist. I understand that it will never happen... but it IS my preference. Screw cultural sensitivity. I don't think modifications, of any type beyond physically lifesaving, should ever be performed on any child (including the barbaric practice of getting a young girl's ears pierced). Once someone's of age I think it's up to them, within the bounds of rationality. I would still argue to outlaw FGM (and male circumcision) for the same reason that I would argue to outlaw voluntary amputation that does not provide a clear health benefit. shrug that's my opinion on the subject, though.

kittinSol -> RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (1/20/2009 6:26:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaveboyforyou It's become fashionable to try and become an oppressed minority. You know, a lot of people claim Oirish ancestry for that very reason. And you can't do much more European than that.

lighthearted -> RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (1/20/2009 7:03:44 PM)
I would have to cast my vote with those who expressed the opinion of, whatever happens between consenting adults is no business of mine. as the mother of two young girls, their health and safety is paramount to me. while I can understand a mother's need to ensure their children's future, the thought of mutilating them to achieve that is repulsive to me. their entire beings are so precious to me; I find it nearly impossible to imagine that feeling would change in me due to cultural influences. I do acknowledge hypotheticals are nothing more than...hypotheticals.

slaveboyforyou -> RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (1/20/2009 7:35:28 PM)
quote: Slaveboy, just to stay on topic, of course, and not digress into irrelevant pre-Colombian Indian history, I would gladly mutilate your genitals for you. Then, perhaps, you'd have something relevant to contribute to this thread. It's relevant, because the OP mentioned in it one of her posts cjan. I commented on it, and others decided to expand upon it. It wasn't a hijack. If you'd read all the posts you'd know that.

NuevaVida -> RE: Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) (1/20/2009 8:16:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slaveboyforyou quote: It is my understanding that anyone who is 25% Native American (or more) qualifies for Native American benefits in this country. So, to answer your question - 25% is the percentage to qualify as "non white." Actually, the Cherokee will include you on their rolls if you can prove 1/16 degree in heritage. My family has never done this. I don't need to be a minority to feel special. I'm not talking about "benefits." I just find it odd and amusing that so many European descended people want to latch on to any non-European ancestory while completely forgetting their European ancestory. It's become fashionable to try and become an oppressed minority. Somehow, I doubt these people actually experience any real racial discrimination. I think it has more to do with a need to feel special and unique. Oh OK. So you asked the question already knowing the answer, to try to make a derogatory remark against the OP. Got it.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875