You are reading a single comment by @hugo7 and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.
  • Paragraph 4 -

    Darby describes these theories as "conflicting", and states that "the only point of agreement among proponents of the various theories is that promoting good health had nothing to do with it."

    Maybe I'm a fast reader.

  • I've no doubt that Darby is better versed on cock than me.

    However, the rest of the article lists numerous references to health and hygiene from a range of sources. For that reason I dismissed his "the only point of agreement..." bit.

    I didn't think that many of the theories were all that conflicting either.

  • Yes but your argument was

    1. Male circumcision is for keeping dicks clean
    2. Female circumcision is a tool of the patriarchy to keep women down
      ergo FGM is far worse, and claiming that circumcision is worse is wrong.

    My point was that your argument was pretty simplistic and reductive of a broader cultural practices that ignores their origins outside of the judeo/christian/islamic faiths. "It's all blokes keeping they dicks clean in the desert" is a bit crude. It also doesn't so much to advance your argument that FGM is worse that MGM.

    tl:dr - Stop chopping people's junk because God said so / lack of soap / patriarchy / rite of passage. It's all fucked up. Deliberate mutilation behind the guise of "tradition" is fucking tragic. Saying that's worse for women than men because "reasons" really misses the point.

About

Avatar for hugo7 @hugo7 started