This is something that is practised for religious reasons in many places. I'm particularly referring to the form known as "pharaonic" which removes all external and internal genitalia rendering all sexual feeling impossible. I have my own views on this but would like to hear others first.

Minerva

Many African countries have been conducting educational campaigns against this practice. Canada (and I believe the US) have received women as refugees who feared having it forced on them if they returned to their homeland.

That's the good news.

The downside is that it is sometimes practiced even in North America where families can find a doctor willing to perform the operation.

..practiced infibulation on slaves (both male and female), using genital piercing an heavy gauge rings. It was not about religion, but about controlling the slave. I think that, then and now, that is it's primary purpose and I do not approve -- not that anyone is likely to ask me.

As a "religious" practice (as opposed to a social one), I have reservations since I think an oath of chastity achieves much the same end.

__________________
Grassaf, Eolas

A lifelong commitment to avoid all forms of sexual stimulation takes an enormous amount of willpower and can be incredibly difficult at times. Some have seen surgery as the answer to this. My own personal opinion is that this is cheating, taking the easy way out.

Minerva

... I think one has to face the difficulty, head on. I agree, surgery is "taking the easy way out", but it also eliminates the necessary element of choice. It's like a person who has no legs taking an oath never to run a marathon -- a bit meaningless, don't you think?

I would say that, if your will is not equal to the subject of the oath, then perhaps the gods and your ancestors are telling you something? It may be best to heed them, and to heed your own needs.

Unfortunately, we live in an age when people want to take the easy way out of a great many things.

__________________
Grassaf, Eolas

Is there any such thing as a harmful religious idea? Of course not, don't be silly!

__________________
evangelicalhumanist: Greek "eu"=good and "angelos"=messenger. Spreading the good news of Humanism.

The word seems to be spreading that female genital mutilation is a harmful practice, though there is still much to be done toward eradicating the practive.

More controversial is male circumcision. Not so long ago the medical establishment in North America encouraged the routine circumcision of all male infants and many families, without any religious motives at all still see it as acceptable--especially if the father was circumcised.

But the medical establishment now considers it unnecessary and potentially harmful.

How long before it becomes disapproved even as a religious practice?

In the Hellenized Mediterranean culture of the 1st century CE, young Jewish males often tried to disguise or surgically reverse their circumcision to avoid the social stigma connected with it.

If dominant Western cultures become intolerant of male as well as female circumcision, will we see even more intolerance of Muslims and others who practice it?

Let me be quite clear about this. When I brought up the subject of female circumcision I was referring to an informed choice made by an adult. The genital mutilation of infants, both male and female, is despicable and should definitely be banned.

Minerva

I do not believe in female genital mutilation. I don't care whether it's for religious purposes or not. To me, this is just another way for a male to dominate a female. The excuse may be religious but the underlying motive is domination.

It sickens me that this is still going on in the world. And as Gluadys says, it also goes on in North America as well. And the sad thing is, some women encourage it.

Now here comes the paradox...I do believe in male circumcision...under certain circumstances. Let me explain. As a young boy, probably 7 or 8, my husband got an infection under his foreskin. He had, obviously, not been circumcised. So at the age of 7 or 8 he had to undergo the procedure.

When our son was born my husband insisted that he be circumcised as he didn't want our son to ever experience what he had been through...he hadn't been put to sleep for the procedure. I agreed to our son being circumcised because I knew of my husband's experience. Our son being circumcised had nothing to do with religion or beliefs, simply to do with wanting to keep him from a worse fate later on.

If I had it to do over again today I would probably still agree to having him circumcised, although I'd give it a lot more thought. I do not think, however, that this is a procedure that most males should have. In fact, in most cases, I think it's unnecessary.

Maggie

__________________
So much to learn and see and do

What is the reasoning behind the female circumcision and why is female sexuality a threat?

__________________
InterfaithForums.com-Where your ideas and beliefs count.