While the whole world was debating the American Academy of Pediatrics’ position on “female genital cutting”—the AAP was against it before they were for it, and now, after an outcry, they’re against it again—Alice Dreger and Ellen Feder have been raising the alarm about “medical research” currently being conducted at Cornell University. A pediatric urologist at Cornell—Dix Poppas—has been operating on little girls with what he judges to be oversized clitorises, cutting away important clitoral tissues, and then stitching the glans to what remains of the shaft. Poppas claims that, unlike past clitoral-reduction procedures, his procedure is “nerve sparing.”
First big problem: “nerve-sparing” surgeries don’t always work. And the chunks of these girls’ clitorises that the doctor is cutting away—large pieces of their clitoral shafts—may be just as important as the clitoral glans. Dreger:
To shorten these clitorises, Poppas is saving the glans (tip) but cutting out parts of the shaft. Bo Laurent has pointed out that Masters and Johnsons showed that many women masturbate by rubbing the shafts of their clitorises. (Think about it: the clit is the homologue of the penis. How do men masturbate?) Many women seem to find their clitoral glans almost too sensitive. Poppas’s patients are loosing the option of touching parts of their shafts, because he’s throwing them out (after the cut-away parts have been sent to pathology to see if he accidentally took out a nerve).
There’s lots to be outraged about here: there’s nothing wrong with these girls and their healthy, functional-if-larger-than-average clitorises; there’s no need to operate on these girls; and surgically altering a girl’s clitoris because it’s “too big” has been found to do lasting physical and psychological harm. But what’s most outrageous is how Poppas is “proving” that his surgery “spares nerves.” Dreger and Feder:
But we are not writing today to again bring attention to the surgeries themselves. Rather, we are writing to express our shock and concern over the follow-up examination techniques described in the 2007 article by Yang, Felsen, and Poppas. Indeed, when a colleague first alerted us to these follow-up exams—which involve Poppas stimulating the girls’ clitorises with vibrators while the girls, aged six and older, are conscious—we were so stunned that we did not believe it until we looked up his publications ourselves.
Here more specifically is, apparently, what is happening: At annual visits after the surgery, while a parent watches, Poppas touches the daughter’s surgically shortened clitoris with a cotton-tip applicator and/or with a “vibratory device,” and the girl is asked to report to Poppas how strongly she feels him touching her clitoris. Using the vibrator, he also touches her on her inner thigh, her labia minora, and the introitus of her vagina, asking her to report, on a scale of 0 (no sensation) to 5 (maximum), how strongly she feels the touch…. Poppas has indicated in this article and elsewhere that ideally he seeks to conduct annual exams with these girls….
Although we have tried, we have been unable to locate any other pediatric urologist who uses these techniques. Indeed, we doubt many would, because we think most would—as we do—find this technique to be impossible to justify as being in these girls’ best interests. We understand that these tests might produce generalized knowledge that shows whether Poppas’s techniques are better than some other surgeons’, but it isn’t clear to us how this kind of genital touching post-operatively is in individual patients’ best interests. If the testing shows a girl has lost sensation through the surgery, her lost clitoral tissue cannot be put back. However, the tests would seem to expose the girls to significant risk of psychological harm.
In the course of our inquiries, made in preparation for this publication, nearly all clinicians to whom we described Poppas’s “clitoral sensory testing and vibratory sensory testing” practices thought them so outrageous that they told us we must have the facts wrong. When we showed them the 2007 article, their disbelief ceased, but they then seemed to become as agitated as we were. At an international conference two weeks ago, when Dreger told Ken Zucker, a psychologist at the Hospital for Sick Children in Toronto and member of the clinical establishment, about this, Zucker said that we could quote him as saying this: “Applying a vibrator to a six-year-old girl’s surgically feminized clitoris is developmentally inappropriate.” We couldn’t find a clinician who disagreed with Zucker.
Yang, Felsen, and Poppas describe the girls “sensory tested” as being older than five. They are, therefore, old enough to remember being asked to lie back, be touched with the vibrator, and report on whether they can still feel sensation. They may also be able to remember their emotions and the physical sensations they experienced. Their parents’ participation may also figure in these memories. We think therefore that most reasonable people will agree with Zucker that Poppas’s techniques are “developmentally inappropriate.”
The 2007 article documenting Poppas’s research is here.
Now more from Dreger’s post at Psychology Today:
So why the heck do Poppas and other surgeons do these surgeries? They believe it is necessary to ensure “normal” sexual development…. Many of us happen to think “normal” sexual development is actually likely to be thwarted by having parts of your genitals taken away without your consent, and thwarted by follow-up exams like the ones we are describing. Ellen and I have gotten to know hundreds of adults born with sex anomalies who went through these medical scenes growing up. Many have told us that the genital displays involved in the follow-up exams were more traumatic than any other part of the experience. Indeed, when I once asked a group of women with androgen insensitivity syndrome what they wanted me to work on primarily in my advocacy work, they said stopping the exams, particularly those in which med students, residents, and fellows parade through to check out the surgeon’s handiwork.
There’s so much to be angry about I hardly know where to start. Applying a vibrator a girl’s clitoris after it’s been surgically shortened may demonstrate that she still has “sensation” in what’s been left behind—that she still has a few nerve endings that function—but that’s not proof that she hasn’t been physically or emotionally harmed by the surgery and those traumatic follow-up “procedures.” These post-op visits with the doctor and his vibrator do the girls no good—what can the doctor do if a girl reports no sensation? reassemble her clit?—and retaining sensation isn’t proof that these girls will grow up to be healthy, sexually functional adults. All of the tissues that make up the clitoris—the glans, the stem, the erectile tissues—are important to sexual response, orgasm, and fulfillment, not just the part of the clitoris that’s “normally” exposed.
There’s another disturbing reason this surgery is being performed: girls with large clitorises are more likely to identify as lesbians when they grow up. Needless to say (or maybe not-so-needless): carving up a girl’s clitoris does nothing to change the underlying hormonal and genetic factors that contribute to lesbian orientation and identity. Big clits don’t make lesbians—lesbians sometimes make big clits. These surgeries are partly motivated by out-and-out homophobia, by the belief that “fixing” a large clit somehow prevents lesbianism. (Larger penises correlate positively with gayness in males but no one is out there shortening boys’ penises.)
Please go and read Dreger and Feder’s piece—”Bad Vibrations“—at the Bioethics Forum. And read Dreger’s post at her own blog.
And if you’re reading this and you’re a student at Cornell: female genital mutilation is being practiced on your campus. What are you going to do about it?
More in NEWS
Local (and not-so-local) news from your favorite writers.
I THINK ANOTHER TERM FOR THIS IS FEMALE CIRCUMCISION. EVERYONE IS OBJECTING, BUT I SEE NOTHING DIFFERENT FROM HAVING BABY BOYS CIRCUMCISED. WOULD YOU CIRCUMCISE YOUR SONS? ASIDE FROM THE VIBRATION– HOW IS IT DIFFERENT?!?
FEMALE CIRCUMCISION IS A COMMON PRACTICE IN AFRICAN COUNTRIES, AS MALE CIRCUMCISION IS COMMON HERE IN THE US.
PERSONALLY, I OBJECT TO ALL FORMS OF CIRCUMCISION AKA “GENITAL MUTILATION”.
Calling the KettleBlack & anyone who sees this as the same – In my view what you are referring to – the removal of a young boys foreskin is different to what is being referred to in this article. If you remove the foreskin from a males penis he will still have the full feeling of his member and in some cases this is done to improve the feeling if the skin is tight or restricting in someway. In the case of these females if you read the article full nerve tissue is being removed not skin, muscle and fully functioning nerve endings which are part of the stimulation/feeling sexually for a woman. Doing this to a female is in effect taking off a males bell end not just his foreskin. Yes it is a different feeling for a male, none the less fully functional.
Yes it is a practice in parts of Africa, but it is not one that is good, nessccarily right or consenting. Women as well as children are treated with such poor disregard. When we don’t understand something it is pulled apart and destroyed instead of allowing exploration, asking questions or taking a softer approach. It is insecurity that leads to these destructive actions, it is fear and ignorance. Human beings are amazing, we are different and diverse, why do we have to mutilated to feel better.
My passion for this article comes from being able to relate to part of the piece and the fact I have the freedoms I do. As a black female living in London I have so much choice. If I had been born in Africa I may have been damaged in this way. If I was a young girl living near Cornell I would be part of this research, with only my parents to protect me, who may not be as well informed as they should be.
Are these young woman being asked how they feel about this? Do they have a choice? There are times in this world when animals have more rights than women, how is that right?
[MOB: We have found a witch! May we burn her?
[KNIGHT: How do you know she is a witch?
[MOB: She looks like one!
[WOMAN: They dressed me up like this! And this isn’t my nose, it’s a false one!
[MOB: Well, we did do the nose. And the hat. But she has got a wart!]
The thing I find horrifying about this story is the vast numbers of people, many claiming to possess college degrees, who read a post based on a blog located on a site belonging to an organization with a clear, established political position; believed every word of it; and immediately began tweeting, emailing, and reposting the story alongside demands that the doctor involved be publicly castrated and flogged. At this point we have people wholeheartedly embracing a repost of a repost of a rewrite of a completely one-sided opinion piece and burning up the Internet with their outrage.
Don’t they teach critical thinking in college anymore?
When critical thinkers read a ghastly story, written entirely from one side using inflammatory language, they do not think, “My god, one of the best medical colleges in the country, with a global reputation for excellent clinical services, is permitting a sadistic pervert to lop off children’s clitorises for No Good Reason and then force the parents to watch while he molests them! I must drop everything and write scathing letters and urge others to do the same!”
Critical thinkers know that if something sounds too horrendous to be true, it probably isn’t. Critical thinkers start looking for the other side of the story.
I know it’s hard to tear yourself away from this orgy of unreflective condemnation, but an hour on Google researching this particular travesty yields the following information:
The doctor involved is a widely- respected pediatric urologist.
The condition referred to does not just result in “slightly enlarged clitorises.” At its moderate to most pronounced form, it results in a clitoris that looks so much like a penis, the fetus is often identified as male by trained sonographers; the newborn is confirmed as male by the obstetrics team; and the first clue that the child is in fact female is when the doctor diagnoses undescended testicles, ultrasounds the baby, and finds a uterus, fallopian tubes, ovaries, and a vagina–which is sometimes conjoined with the urethra, which is where a pediatric urologist comes in. If you are a critical thinker, you will see why this might actually necessitate surgery.
A chief criticism of clitoris reduction is that it damages nerves and leaves the girl with no sexual sensation. The doctor at the center of this storm believed he could modify the procedure to leave the nerves intact. A critical thinker would wonder how else a doctor might test nerve viability following surgery. A doctor who worried that surgery on a person’s hand has damaged some nerves would poke it with a pin.
A critical thinker also wonders why the holy hell everyone is in a twist over the fact that the child’s parents were in the room. Exactly how does that it make so much worse?
A critical thinker asks why people are so overwrought at the thought of this test anyway. Do they have a problem with the idea that children have sexual feelings? Or do they believe that a child who has be taught not to let anyone EXCEPT a doctor or parent touch her there will suddenly associate a doctor’s touch with sex, instead of assuming that the doctor is just doing what doctors do–examining a patient?
Of course it’s embarrassing. But it needn’t be scarring, unless the kid happened across the original blog, which describes the procedure in terms more pornographic than academic.
We can argue over whether parents should agree to this surgery. But can we take a moment from our festival of moral revulsion to look at it from their point of view? These are not soccer moms who think their daughters would be more perfect with a slimlined clitoris. These are new parents with one hell of a shock. Within 24 hours after the joyful birth of a son, they learn that their baby is a girl with a serious medical condition that will require lifelong treatment–and she has what will look to any casual observer like a penis. Remember what monsters kids can be toward a child who is even mildly different? Imagine what would happen if word gets around in third grade that your precious daughter has a penis. These parents aren’t thinking cosmetically, they are thinking protectively, and they deserve our compassion, not knee-jerk condemnation.
Of course it would be a better world if everyone treated differences with respect instead of instinctive horror and disgust. But judging from the hysteria surrounding this very biased, very sensationalized story, it will take a couple more cycles of human evolution before even proponents of that point of view can react from a place of calm rationality instead of pure, overheated emotion.
[KNIGHT: And what do you burn apart from witches?
[MOB: More witches!]
@303
Alternatively, people who have both critical thinking and a working knowledge of the kind of medical atrocities performed by “well-meaning” doctors throughout history and are, or have listened to, adult intersexed individuals and the physiological trauma they exhibit from having had genital surgery without their consent AND are, or have listened to, people who were molested as children — all of these people find the act of this to be an atrocity.
So maybe you’re the one who needs a little more education.
Also, FYI, children will also be absolute monsters to someone who wears a funny colored shirt or likes to sit quietly in a corner reading a book, or has buck teeth, or doesn’t wear name brand shoes, and frankly, many adults aren’t that better, so I seriously, seriously don’t think that anyone should be making judgements about their children’s bodies based on how the public will treat them. You can change someone’s opinion of you a lot faster than your body.
Barbwire- yes indeed, critical thinkers might think those points. Informed thinkers, on the other hand, might know that:
1. There is no medical reason to reduce these childrens’ clitorises
2. There is no evidence of any kind that having a clitoris larger than the norm causes any sort of developmental or psychological problems
3. Since there is no reason do be doing the surgeries in the first place, there is no need to develop better techniques for it
4. Widely respected doctors have done far worse throughout history
5. People who have gone through this sort of thing almost universally report that it was traumatizing, especially, if say, the child’s parents were in the room watching with approval
Those are some things an informed thinker might think.
Hi,
My penis was cut off just for being to large? it was only 2 1/2 inches. Women don’t have a penis. So mine was cut off. Well Men have a penis, and now this Man doesn’t. I want it back.
Andrea’ Thats An-Drea like the wrestler.
This is absolutely appalling. They are now telling you not to circumcisize penis’ but this guy is starting on little girls. How horrible and disgusting.
You understand that the fact that you consider this surgery “an atrocity” does not make it so, right? I mean, I think it’s an atrocity when I see grossly overweight people loading their grocery carts with junk food, but I also know that that’s an opinion, not a fact.
And since you’ve been careful to explore both sides of this issue, you know that many women who have had the surgery are grateful that it was done while they were young, right?
Anyway, I’m not here to register an opinion about this surgery. I’m here to ask people to do some research before they start smearing someone all over the Internet.
There’s a Facebook page against this now, if anyone wants to join.
https://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=1…
Cornell’s Institutional Review Board is clearly an epic fail. This research is blatantly unethical and never should have gotten past them. The best treatment for the condition these girls have is NO TREATMENT. Leave it alone and let them decide as adults if they want to be operated on. Whatever harm a big clit might cause, it’s nothing compared to the harm of being mutilated and then molested by a doctor in front of your parents.
It’s not that shocking really… Our country already seems to think genital mutilation if perfectly decent in the form of circumcision.
@BarbWire
Your request implies the assumption that the people here haven’t read the study, that the general indignation on this thread is uninformed, and that if we only read it, we’d be persuaded to see things from an “objective” point of view.
I’ve read the study, I’m still indignant, and I remain of the opinion that not only is this surgery, which amounts to cosmetic reconstruction, wholly unnecessary, but potentially psychologically scarring for these children. The number of girls who are grateful that they had the surgery done young doesn’t negate the number of kids who are damaged by surgery like this, particularly when you consider that the grateful girls weren’t given a choice and will never be able to know any differently.
Your insistence on objectivity, your defense of Dr. Poppas on the grounds that he is widely respected, and your call for us to inform ourselves reeks of arrogance.
I imagine this is being sold to parents as a “fix” for hermaphroditism, right? That a large clitoris is being described as a freakish penis that will make it impossible for them to be “normal” women with “normal” sexual and psychological development. You know, the kind of normal sexual and psychological development that happens after being masturbated yearly by a doctor with your parents watching. Doctors need to stop pushing conformity as the epic goal of childhood and parents need to get over their misguided hopes that their children will “fit in” with all the other kids. “Normal” is boring and overrated anyway, and surgeries on children too young to possibly give informed consent just to accomplish normality are often times more about the parents than the child. Who will be more embarrassed about a larger than normal easy to find clitoris: the girl who has it or the parent who has to explain it to family and baby sitters? Same with extra toes, foreskin, and whatever else culture tells us to hack off at birth.
I am shocked and disgusted! This ‘doctor’ is a pedophile, can’t anyone see that? I can’t believe a parent would allow this to happen to their daughter.
Big fucking deal. Guys have been circumcised for ages, and now that it’s happening to women, they get all squeemish. get over it.
@joseph4GI
Apparently, I’m “no better than people in Africa then.” Really? I, a commenter, am as bad as the people who cut off little girls clitorises? Really? I astonish myself- my comments must have been positively scarring to approach those levels. Next you’ll be comparing me to a child molester or Hilter. Anyways, no matter how angry I was or how very much I disagree with you, I certainly haven’t resorted to name calling. You just took this from passionate discussion to bitchfest. Congrats.
“You cannot condemn an action in one instance, but then condone it when it happens in your home country.”
I don’t condone it, as I stated previously. But I do think its an entirely different discussion.
First of all, to actually ‘circumcise’ a girl would be to remove the clitoral hood. Removing the clitoris is comparable to cutting off the head of the penis, not the foreskin. Even more, in this study he was actually cutting off the female equivalent of a man’s shaft. So, again, not foreskin. Its like a doctor looks at you and says, “Well, 7 inches is the average male penis and yours is 10. We should remove 3 inches to prevent you from having psychological and social problems!”
There are vastly different effects as well. A cleanly performed male circumcision still allows for proper penile function- that is, you can pee, have sex, not experience pain during sex, and even enjoy sex. FGM removes all pleasure from sex, and makes it a horribly painful experience. That’s actually the point of it in the cultures that practice it. Oftentimes the wound gets infected, in severe cases even developing gangrene. Girls are more likely to develop yeast and urinary tract infections, experience excruciating pain when they urinate, or even take away a girls ability to urinate properly.
Also, you imply that circumcision has no benefits. Many studies have shown it to reduce female to male HIV transmission as well as the transmission of other STDs. Whether or nor you agree with those studies is up to you, but there are no studies showing any benefits to FGM- quite the opposite. Also, you act as if everyone who has their child circumcised is cruel or blindly following the masses, instead of just following their own opinions of these studies. (Just because you put quotes around the word studies does not actually discredit them) Also, cut cocks are easier to keep clean. It’s a fact. You may not value this over having your foreskin, but again, thats your call.
“Unless you’re willing to talk about the boys, then shut the heck up about the girls.”
I am willing to talk about the boys, in a setting that doesn’t detract from what happens to the girls. Because they’re not the same! FGM and male circumcision are two very different things!
While male circumcision is a legitimate ethical conversation, FGM never is. But because FGM rarely even gets mentioned (I’ve yet to see this hit the national media, for example) its important to focus on it while its in spotlight.
The fact is, there are lots of people that don’t know about FGM, or what it means or that it happens- its not talked about a lot in our society. You act as if FGM gets talked about incessantly while the dubious nature of male circumcision is ignored- I’d say they’re talked about both pretty equally. Actually, male circumcision may actually be talked about more, because no one goes onto those blogs and derails the conversation to FGM. I would like to actually thank you for talking about FGM at the end of your (very long) response, as that’s more than most of the derailing posters have done on here. Though I wouldn’t just leave it at “FGM is horrible. DUH!” as there are actually some people on here arguing for the surgeries- clearly its not as widely hated as we’d like to think.
Finally, while I do disagree with male circumcision, I also think they have different levels of urgency. To me, this discussion is like a deity saying to you- “You can stop all murders or all assaults.” Frankly, I’m going to pick murders, as to me it seems like the worse of two terrible things. Same thing here. Not because its happening to girls, but because it is a completely different matter.
So to wrap things up with a quote from Dan-
“The problem with most anti-circumcision activists[…] is a tendency to wildly overstate the anti-circumcision case.
“When you claim that “a man loses much of his capacity for sexual pleasure when he’s cut,” all the cut guys out there reading your letter — guys like me and my boyfriend and most every guy we know, gay and straight — think, “Hey, I’m cut, and I derive plenty of ‘sexual pleasure’ from my cock. These anti-circumcision crybabies are full of shit.” And comparing male circumcision (the removal of the foreskin) to female genital mutilation (the removal of the clitoris) doesn’t help, either. Removing the clit is comparable to cutting off the head of the penis, not the foreskin, and comparing the two procedures comes off as cheap, “me too” victim mongering. A little less hysteria, a little less overstatement, and a lot less anti-Semitic rhetoric, and anti-cutting forces might change more people’s minds.”
Hey Barbwire~
You can find lots of research about the aftermath of these surgeries in psychological studies. I’ve never seen anything but story after story of people who describe their bodies as having been “mutilated,” and the violation of their trust in parents and doctors. The people in these studies look into your eyes and beg you to accept people who are different. To leave other peoples’ bodies the flying fuck alone.
If you really do believe there are women out there who are happy with their surgically reduced clitorises, please post a source.
And I’m sure since you are such a college educated critical thinker you know that Wikipedia isn’t really a medical resource, right?
I was circumcised at 3 and a half – My parents were assured that I was too young to remember it. Yeah, right! I remember every bit of that day right up to the rubber mask and the ether. And I remember waking up in a vast hall full of steel barred cribs and screaming with the burning between my legs.
I’m 47xxy and I’m the son of a mother who was given Diethylstilbesterol to prevent miscarriages, DES. I’m also a Two Spirit in that I have a very feminine brain and a passable male body. The reflexive therapy for xxy persons is Testosterone shots or patches at doses based on “normal” males. These doses can vary a great deal depending on what “normal” they’re going by.
I was lucky. I missed being diagnosed. Yes, I suffered a lot from slow maturation, being more comfortable in the company of women, having soft teeth as a child and teen, and ending up with small testicles. But I was a man, could have good relations with women and good, sometimes great sex.
Today, many xxy children are being given Testosterone “for their own good”, “to make men of them” and to “normalize” them and prevent them from becoming gay. Yet we have met many xxy’s who wished they’d never seen Testosterone. It’s a very strong hormone and in large doses can convert to estrogen either through an enzyme or as a result of belly fat. The problem is that most of this therapy has never included baseline lab work of the entire endocrine and enzyme panel to determine what xxy patients actual hormone interactions are.
This kind of therapy is typical of what happens to all intersex people and persons with disorders of sex development – a term intersex people abhor in that it implies the necessity o f
“re-ordering”. A common condition that happens in men is penile hyoerplasia where the urethra does not come out of the end of the penis but instead comes out on the shaft or at it’s base. Surgeons routinely “fix” this condition with surgeries that at best scar the shaft. (at worst? Try not to imagine it.) Most of the time these surgeries eventually fail and are often done several times using grafted skin to reform the urethral opening. These grafts are not the same kind of tissue so they too have a high failure rate. It is worth noting that men who escaped such “normalizations” are quite content to sit to pee – have worked out successful ways to have sex and to father children. (Yet doctors will assure parents that without the “fix” the children will be traumatized by other children, in gym class, and will have trouble reproducing. We suspect that all of these worries are based in the Doctor’s own unhappy childhood’s and gym experiences.)
Whether we view CAH as intersex (and many with CAH refuse the designation) or DSD as DIx Poppas has called them, or simply a female with an enlarged clitoris, these “experiments” are typical of the kinds of operations that have been going on for more than 60 years on any and all infants and children found to have ambiguous genitals. It’s time that these adventures in surgery and psychological trauma come out of the privacy of obstetric rooms with their Gender Identity Teams who terrify parents of newborns with the news that their baby may not be normal but that a simple operation will correct them. To date, most of these parents are not made aware of any of the survivor organizations out there for CAH, PAIS, AIS, XXY, 5 alpha, Sox gene failures etc. or for the intersex groups. Instead, parents are usually told their child has rare condition that can be fixed. Of course if the child has a micro penis – the normal procedure is to cut off the penis, build a vagina from colon tissue, and teach the parents to dilate the “vagina” daily until such time as the child can do it him/herself. (No, I’m not kidding.)
WE MUST STOP THIS NOW!
We thought we were on the right path in the ’90’s but then the medical profession insisted on calling us Disorders of Sexual Development. Those of us who’ve managed to survive their mutilations and pulled their psyches out of our objectified and traumatized trash bins, as well the rest who escaped notice demand that our situation be studied with extreme ethical oversight: DO NO HARM! We demand that further study follow real scientific protocols, with controls, and data acquisition aimed at developing therapies and or procedures that enhance our lives as human beings not as objects for further study.
For hundreds of years, those of us with variations of human sexual development have been isolated from the rest of the population either as freaks, objects of study, or for self preservation. The last due to the socio/cultural faith of the binary: that humans are male or female. It’s time for the socio/cultural faith to change. We are not abominations – we are humans desiring the right to keep our bodies intact until such time as WE deem a change is in order.
“Big fucking deal. Guys have been circumcised for ages, and now that it’s happening to women, they get all squeemish. get over it.”
Wrong thing to say – little girls are getting their sexual organs cut apart, in a manner that stops them from ever experiencing an orgasm or enjoying sex when they are past puberty. Little girls are getting probed and “put to the test” with a vibrator to see if the cutting did any damage and or ruined their sexual experience at the age of -6-, not 10, not 12, not 5, or younger. This is a sick sick practice that needs to stop. I am a mother of three precious girls, and one boy (Whom is intact, I am proud to say) and I could not possibly imagine ever letting a doctor ruin what they were born with.
Please, please, please!!! Anyone and everyone who is outraged by this NEEDS TO WRITE LETTERS AND EMAILS!!! Nothing will get done if we all just sit here and comment on how disgusting this is! If everyone writes strong (NOT threatening – this accomplishes nothing!) letters and emails to the dean of medicine – dean@med.cornell.edu , the president of the university – president@cornell.edu , and Dr. Poppas himself – dpoppas@med.cornell.edu , explaining how wrong this practice is and demands that it stop, we have a chance to have something done about it! It only takes a minute or two to write an email, you can even copy and paste the comments you have made here! Just make sure to sound professional – We need to be taken seriously to accomplish what we set out to do! But the most important thing is to click the send button.
Now crossing over to the UK (story-wise):
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/…
and some more background here:
http://sexualitymatters.wordpress.com/20…
jane
xx
As a patient advocate for people born with a Disorder of Sex Development (historically called Hermaphrodite, also called Intersex), I am amazed at the outcry here. For decades a small army of doctors, ethicists, legalists, parents and people affected with a DSD have been working to change the way we are treated. We have made progress but Dr. Poppas is practicing THE STANDARD of CARE. In fact he is considered one of the best surgeons practicing… there are also not-so-crafty surgeons doing the same thing. Although, the follow up “treatment”, that’s Dr. Poppas’ idea. He’s hoping to prove to advocates that he’s sparing nerves (something we’ve been shouting about for years). No matter how many nerves are spared, no matter how proficient the surgeon: nerves ARE cut. Damage is done.
Advocates have made a strong argument for better, patient centered care. Information and FAMILY guidelines are available free at Accord Alliance http://www.accordalliance.org
http://www.facebook.com/home.php?#!/Acco…
To each of you I ask: Please take your outrage and turn it into positive action.
Learn MORE about PATIENT CENTERED CARE. Not all care teams view risky surgeries with doubtful benefits as best care practices.
Anger can misdirect us from the real issues. Seeking a target for our outrage doesn’t solve the very real problems facing parents as they try to make the best decisions for their children. Please, have compassion for these often frightened, overwhelmed, possibly selectively informed parents. Some of the medical conditions that cause a DSD are life threatening, lifelong illnesses. Parents are in a whirlwind of “What do I need to do to help/save my child?!” What we say to every parent: Focus on any life threatening, medically NECESSARY issues. A large clitoris or a small penis are NOT life threatening. There is no proven benefit or advantage to doing a cosmetic surgery on your infant. There are no proven benefits or advantages of doing these surgeries EVER unless the person that ‘owns’ that body understands the benefits and risks. Take a deep breath, get more information, connect with a support group of parents with kids just like yours. Your child will be fine… just love them the way they are.
This type of care, these types of surgeries, have been the Standard of Care for over half a century. If it’s a new topic to you it’s only because everyone has been told NOT to talk about it. Care has been filled with shame, secrecy and isolation. I urge you to be informed, join others into the conversation, promote acceptance and understanding the larger issues involved. The odds are you already know someone with a DSD but they just don’t know how to talk with you about it.
I won’t suggest you not be outraged. I’m glad about that. You join a knowledgeable, diverse community and we’re happy to have the attention. But we’ll be happiest when society accepts our differences, when physicians stop trying to change our bodies to some definition we don’t fit before OR AFTER surgery.
Please keep following this issue. We are working on harnessing this incredible energy to support real change and we’ll continue to need that energy – your energy – to make it happen.
hey yo has anyone even thought in addition to all things wrong about this, but this/these surgeons sound like they need serious checks on themselves like on the “creeeepy” part that hit me like NBC’s “to catch a predator”, this creepshow sounds more to me like sexually deviants/molestation/punch out these ethically fucked pieces of shit that I will not associate the title M.D. too, but convict featured on “Lockup’s Predators Raw – new 2010 edition…Stu
and yet, if you were to go to another entry on slog or other blather houses, you could easily find hetero men (or dane the comedian) talking about how they don’t like the looks of large inner labia. or, in a thread about naked baristas in everett, many commenters felt the need to say there were some super “ugly vaginas” in the batch of photos released to the stranger. you don’t think that makes people feel self-conscious and insecure about what they look like, all of you so-kind and concerned slog commenters? you don’t spouting your opinion on how people look, which many of you do all the time, contributes negatively to the world? think again? and next time you are tempted to make an unpleasant remark in the real world or online, about the way someone’s dresses, looks, carries themselves, etc, ask yourself, am i helping or hurting …. and then shut your mouth.
WTF Dan?! Are you going to just post this outrage and not give people an advocacy vehivle to direct their outrage through action??? An email of the Poppas, or the Director of the department he works for? Something???
And how exactly have the parents come to determine that their daughters have abnormally large clitorises? Is the girl walking around showing it to people and calling it a penis? This whole scenario is just really F’d up. And wait… large penises mostly belong to gay men? What is this about? Where’s this study? Why has porn been lying to me?
@ohflattery, 317
Sorry ohflattery, but a good deal of your information is utterly wrong. Try reading the circumstitions.com website for excellent analyses of the HIV studies, for example, or go to this article:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/heal…
Or this:
http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2007/…
How about Rachel Stalling’s study of genitally mutilated women, showing lower rates of transmission of AIDS?
http://www.ias-2005.org/planner/Abstract…
Or the recent study of mutilated women who emigrated to Italy, who reported orgasms about 69% of the time?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17970…
Or the study of Korean men, showing great dissatisfaction with sexual pleasure after circumcision?
http://www.health.am/sex/more/the-effect…
Or Van Howe’s study of the most sensitive parts of the penis?
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journ…
You compare allegedly clean American hospital circumcision of males, which still kill over a hundred boys a year in this country alone:
http://www.mensstudies.com/content/b64n2…
to African “bush” mutilations of girls, but why not be honest and compare the “bush” mutilations of boys as well?
http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/2…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/103504…
http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/article…
http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&…
http://www.timeslive.co.za/local/article…
How about watching this shocking video showing what actually happens to boys (with a machete)?
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=…
You said “While male circumcision is a legitimate ethical conversation, FGM never is” – why? Other countries don’t find it so:
http://mensnewsdaily.com/2010/05/30/roya…
I am not stating all these facts as if they justify FGM, far from it. I am opposed to all forms of coercive mutilation, medical, religious or otherwise, for both genders, and would like to see this monstrosity end, forever. But those who mutilate in other cultures are not stupid, though to us their practices are vile; every time an American protests their mutilations while minimizing (or defending) male circumcision here, this is perceived as pure cultural bigotry (“you think what you do is okay, while telling us we are wrong”). I appreciate that you say you are opposed to circumcision but trying to attack female genital mutilation while minimizing, protecting or defending male circumcision does nothing — but defend FGM.
End Female Genital Mutilation at Cornell University
this is the name of the facebook group…
please, everyone, write to the people at weill/cornell…the more we do this and the sooner, the faster this will stop!!!
For those on Facebook you can join the group: End Female Genital Mutilation at Cornell University. Not sure if anything is being organized just yet, but at least it’s a start to get our names in one place.
For those of us who are affiliated with Cornell (staff, faculty, students, alumni, and their families) join the Facebook group: Concerned Cornellians Against FGC-A Petition. Don’t forget to sign the petition!
Still no examples of grateful patients I see…
Funny how after a lecture like that she can’t actually back up her words.
@ 141 and 317 — they are the same issue in that they are both about permanently altering the form and function of a person’s healthy genitals without their consent. Something that is wrong and bad, period, and that no person is justified in doing to another person. I really don’t understand the “well it’s not nearly as bad for men so we shouldn’t be as outraged about them” stance. Would you not be as outraged if we were talking about removing the female prepuce? What about the labia, for the purpose of making it “cleaner”? Those are both analogous to male circumcision or the reasons for it.
Also, this notion that sexuality is not affected by circumcision is bullshit. Yes, circumcised men can still orgasm, but erectile dysfunction is a huge problem in our culture, especially as men age, and that *is* related to the absence of the foreskin and scar tissue. Dryness and discomfort in women during intercourse, another huge problem in our culture (no, there isn’t just something wrong with women that so many need lube) is also related to the absence of the male foreskin.
The integrity and wholeness of my son’s genitals is JUST AS important as that of my daughter’s. This case is particularly horrible because of the molestation factor, and yes the mutilation is worse than the average male circumcision. It doesn’t follow that male infant circumcision does not affect sexuality and should not be opposed as strongly as female circumcision.
So, at or before the age of five the girls are deemed to have a larger than average clitorises. The onset of puberty causes profound changes in the overall appearance and structure of genitalia, so the question begs: Would their clitorises still seem larger than normal when they reach sexual maturity?
Horrible, obviously. Children can’t consent, placing “normality” over complete sexual function when the child can’t possibly know which is more important to her, awful.
But preventing lesbians is a stretch. I don’t think a parent sees an unusal clit and says “OMIGOD she might be gay,” I think the parent sees her and says “OMIGOD she’s not a normal woman, can we help her?” I would be totally fine with having a gay child, for instance, but I would still have the latter reaction. I wouldn’t ask a surgeon to operate unneccessarily on my daughter’s genitals, of course, but I would have the reaction.
The problem is that parents see a norm as an absolute requirement, and they don’t read enough of Dan’s articles to know there are many healthy adults with a wide variety of types of junk in their pants. I am sure that there are some big-clitted straight women out there who are 100% ok with how they are, for example, and maybe even some adult women who elected to have their big clits reduced because bikini bottom normalcy is their top priority. The obvious answer is to let women make their own choices when they are old enough to know what is going on.
Hopefully publicizing this issue will wake some people up – even if, like me, they don’t buy the homophobia angle. So good job, Dan.
I’ve said that this isn’t unusual. I’m not sure I was believed.
Some actual cases:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twe8p0R8t…
This happens all the time.
There are worse cases. This one, for example.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OG1cG0Uu…
Regarding the topic of cutting one sex being worse than the other, the subject is a red herring. I could site evidence supporting the severe results of cutting boys and other evidence down playing the severity of cutting girls, but that would only divert attention from the truth: Nobody should be cutting, amputating, scarring, or even tattooing children without an immediate need. There is no need to circumcise boys and I highly doubt there is any immediate need to reduce the size of a large clitoris in a child. If a surgery can wait until adulthood, then it should: then the child has become an adult who can determine whether, what, and how much for theirself.
I think that it is great that some of you are fighting to stop the people who are cutting girls. I thought that it was illegal by Federal law to cut girls without need, but I suppose that the law does not bar falsehoods trumped up by physicians. My work is with the general populace to educate people that it is wrong and hurtful to cut the genitalia of children without immediate medical need regardless of whether the child is male, female, or intersex. I hope that, one day, all parents will understand that they have a duty to keep their children whole regardless of what some quack tries to trump up.
@Joseph4GI for 283 and 284: Right on! The real issue is GM and how nobody should be forced into unnecessary genital surgeries even if they are done with seemingly good intentions.
All cutting and amputating is by definition MUTILATION. Mutilation is not a subjective term as some people try to make it. If there is no need, then leave it alone regardless of cultural, legal, or gender bias!
@ohflattery
“Apparently, I’m “no better than people in Africa then.” Really? I, a commenter, am as bad as the people who cut off little girls clitorises? Really? I astonish myself- my comments must have been positively scarring to approach those levels. Next you’ll be comparing me to a child molester or Hilter. Anyways, no matter how angry I was or how very much I disagree with you, I certainly haven’t resorted to name calling. You just took this from passionate discussion to bitchfest. Congrats.”
This is but a twist of words on your part, and I will not respond to it.
“First of all, to actually ‘circumcise’ a girl would be to remove the clitoral hood. Removing the clitoris is comparable to cutting off the head of the penis, not the foreskin.”
I disagree. Comparing the head of the penis to the clitoris is like comparing apples to oranges. Actually, no, more like grapefruits to a blueberries. I severity is a red herring. Cutting off a piece of a person’s genitals is the same offense, no matter what size. The clitoris, even the ciltoris of most women dwarve in comparison to the foreskin of even a small child. Let’s not get into the whole “my clitoris is bigger than your penis head” argument. It’s not going to work.
“There are vastly different effects as well. A cleanly performed male circumcision still allows for proper penile function- that is, you can pee, have sex, not experience pain during sex, and even enjoy sex. FGM removes all pleasure from sex, and makes it a horribly painful experience. That’s actually the point of it in the cultures that practice it. Oftentimes the wound gets infected, in severe cases even developing gangrene. Girls are more likely to develop yeast and urinary tract infections, experience excruciating pain when they urinate, or even take away a girls ability to urinate properly.”
This is all unfounded, baseless arguing on your part. Is that what makes male circumcision “different” and “less worse” than a female circumcision? That you’re still able to pee, have sex and have painless sex? Because your claim that “removes all pleasure from sex and makes it a horrible painful experience” is wrong. Actually, where are you getting this information? Do you know that even women that undergo infibulation, which is the “worst” kind of FGM that exists, can experience orgasm? You DO know that in South Africa, where boys are circumcised at the same age as women, often lose their penises to gangrene? You really have absolutely no idea of what you are talking about.
“Also, you imply that circumcision has no benefits. Many studies have shown it to reduce female to male HIV transmission as well as the transmission of other STDs. Whether or nor you agree with those studies is up to you, but there are no studies showing any benefits to FGM- quite the opposite. Also, you act as if everyone who has their child circumcised is cruel or blindly following the masses, instead of just following their own opinions of these studies. (Just because you put quotes around the word studies does not actually discredit them) Also, cut cocks are easier to keep clean. It’s a fact. You may not value this over having your foreskin, but again, thats your call.”
Circumcision in males has about the same “benefits” as girls. I’m afraid any “study” that you can quote regarding male circumcision and STD transmission is wrong. They’re all rigged and concocted by pro-circumcision doctors, kind of like Poppas here.
Riddle me this, flat, can you tell me WHY there are no “studies” showing the “benefits” of FGM? The answer is right here under our noses; we would not allow them. We are immediately outraged by any “study” that seeks to legitimize and rationalize taking a girl’s organs and chopping them up. To quote male “studies”, condemn FGM studies, and then proceed to tell me that “there are all kinds of MGM studies that show MGM shows benefits, but no FGM studies” is pure self-servience.
I don’t think I ever condemned anyone that had their child mutilated as “cruel.” I will say they are blindly following the masses, if they are not outright being convinced to allow doctors to do it. Mind you, it is quite precisely what is happening here with Poppas. I don’t blame the parents here; it’s DOCTORS who are supposed to know better than their patients, much more their patients’ parents.
As for “cut cocks are easier to keep clean,” here’s another baseless claim. You’ve never had one, I’m sure. I own an anatomically correct penis, and I’ve been with quite a few women in my life. I can tell you from experience that cleaning my penis is no “harder” than it is for my wife to clean her vagina. No, it’s NOT a “fact.” It’s your fantasy.
About the quotes around the word “studies,” I do it because those studies have already been blown out of the water by authorities. Those who continue to tout them have a serious delusional problem called self-serving biased perception.
“I am willing to talk about the boys, in a setting that doesn’t detract from what happens to the girls. Because they’re not the same! FGM and male circumcision are two very different things!”
Sorry, as long as you have that mindset, you are being sexist and you need to sit down.
“While male circumcision is a legitimate ethical conversation, FGM never is. But because FGM rarely even gets mentioned (I’ve yet to see this hit the national media, for example) its important to focus on it while its in spotlight.”
I’m afraid you’re mistaken.
We have all agreed here that it will be unacceptable to talk about the “pros and cons” of FGM. WHY is this different with MGM? WHY is it a “legitimate” ethical conversation?
I’m not sure WHAT planet you live on, but that FGM is horrible is already quite-accepted. It really needs no mention. Mention FGM, and you get long threads like the one you’re typing on. Your argument simply has no basis in fact.
“The fact is, there are lots of people that don’t know about FGM, or what it means or that it happens- its not talked about a lot in our society. You act as if FGM gets talked about incessantly while the dubious nature of male circumcision is ignored- I’d say they’re talked about both pretty equally. Actually, male circumcision may actually be talked about more, because no one goes onto those blogs and derails the conversation to FGM. I would like to actually thank you for talking about FGM at the end of your (very long) response, as that’s more than most of the derailing posters have done on here. Though I wouldn’t just leave it at “FGM is horrible. DUH!” as there are actually some people on here arguing for the surgeries- clearly its not as widely hated as we’d like to think.”
You should really get around more.
FGM IS more openly talked about. But that’s because it’s pretty much generally accepted that it’s a barbaric practice. You really will not have any contest there.
Male circumcision IS ignored. Infact, whenever people mention circumcision, it’s to tout all the “benefits” and how parents have this big “choice.” (Parents have no choice with their daughters.) People AGAINST them ARE ignored, they’re cut short in time, or they’re dismissed as “special interest quacks.” (When the opposite is true.)
Male circumcision IS only talked about in hidden blogs, and when you go, you will actually have no trouble “deraling ” the conversation with FGM; everyone pretty much agrees they’re both equally wrong.
There are actually people on here arguing in favor of FGM and what Poppas is doing, but have you noticed how terribly underwhelmed people against it are?
Do you seriously think the idea that FGM is horrible is contested in this country?
“Finally, while I do disagree with male circumcision, I also think they have different levels of urgency. To me, this discussion is like a deity saying to you- “You can stop all murders or all assaults.” Frankly, I’m going to pick murders, as to me it seems like the worse of two terrible things. Same thing here. Not because its happening to girls, but because it is a completely different matter. “
This line of thinking is seriously flawed. I will reiterate; no one seems to think there is anything wrong with murder. But the reasoning people who would rather that people that bring up male circumcision be quiet is that “rape should be ignored because murder is worse.”
There is no “difference.” Taking a healthy, non-consenting individual and cutting off parts of his or her genitals is the exact same principle.
The “difference” is that while taking a boy, strapping him down, ripping his foreskin off his glans, sticking it in a clamp and slicing it off is acceptable in this country, we will not allow as much as a “ritual nick.”
“”The problem with most anti-circumcision activists[…] is a tendency to wildly overstate the anti-circumcision case.”
I’m afraid that this is the very problem with FGM. They have a tendency to wildly overstate the FGM case, while wildly minimizing male circumcision.
I’ll reiterate; FGM opponents don’t have an uphill battle. They preach to the choir. It’s really easy to swim with the flow.
FGM isn’t a problem here in the states (Save this horrendous case with CAH patients.), MALE circumcision is. It’s a problem and people would rather anti-circumcisionists wouldn’t bring it up.
“”When you claim that “a man loses much of his capacity for sexual pleasure when he’s cut,” all the cut guys out there reading your letter — guys like me and my boyfriend and most every guy we know, gay and straight — think, “Hey, I’m cut, and I derive plenty of ‘sexual pleasure’ from my cock. These anti-circumcision crybabies are full of shit.” And comparing male circumcision (the removal of the foreskin) to female genital mutilation (the removal of the clitoris) doesn’t help, either. Removing the clit is comparable to cutting off the head of the penis, not the foreskin, and comparing the two procedures comes off as cheap, “me too” victim mongering. A little less hysteria, a little less overstatement, and a lot less anti-Semitic rhetoric, and anti-cutting forces might change more people’s minds.” “
I’m not sure I ever made the claim that a man “loses much of his capacity for sexual pleasure.” That is a claim people make about FGM (that women lose pleasure).
I’m afraid it really doesn’t help to be conguring up subjective annecdotes. Go to Africa and ask women how they feel about having undergone through FGM. Quite a few women will react like Dan. We “FGM crybabies are full of shit.”
Doesn’t erase the reality of the situation that FGM (as well as MGM) is a violation of basic human rights.
You only try to convince yourself when you make the claim that “removing the clit is not comparable to removing the foreskin.”
Taking a healthy, non-consenting individual and cutting off part of his genitals is the same principle violated. It violates the same human rights, and it doesn’t matter that the parts cut off are “different.” Remember; we told the AAP that we would not allow them to endorse as much as a “nick,” where FGM wouldn’t “remove” anything.
It’s not “what” is being removed, but the principle. You don’t take someone and cut off part of his genitals because YOU don’t think it’s “worse” than cutting off part of a girl’s genitals.
@ohflattery
“Apparently, I’m “no better than people in Africa then.” Really? I, a commenter, am as bad as the people who cut off little girls clitorises? Really? I astonish myself- my comments must have been positively scarring to approach those levels. Next you’ll be comparing me to a child molester or Hilter. Anyways, no matter how angry I was or how very much I disagree with you, I certainly haven’t resorted to name calling. You just took this from passionate discussion to bitchfest. Congrats.”
This is but a twist of words on your part, and I will not respond to it.
“First of all, to actually ‘circumcise’ a girl would be to remove the clitoral hood. Removing the clitoris is comparable to cutting off the head of the penis, not the foreskin.”
I disagree. Comparing the head of the penis to the clitoris is like comparing apples to oranges. Actually, no, more like grapefruits to a blueberries. I severity is a red herring. Cutting off a piece of a person’s genitals is the same offense, no matter what size. The clitoris, even the ciltoris of most women dwarve in comparison to the foreskin of even a small child. Let’s not get into the whole “my clitoris is bigger than your penis head” argument. It’s not going to work.
“There are vastly different effects as well. A cleanly performed male circumcision still allows for proper penile function- that is, you can pee, have sex, not experience pain during sex, and even enjoy sex. FGM removes all pleasure from sex, and makes it a horribly painful experience. That’s actually the point of it in the cultures that practice it. Oftentimes the wound gets infected, in severe cases even developing gangrene. Girls are more likely to develop yeast and urinary tract infections, experience excruciating pain when they urinate, or even take away a girls ability to urinate properly.”
This is all unfounded, baseless arguing on your part. Is that what makes male circumcision “different” and “less worse” than a female circumcision? That you’re still able to pee, have sex and have painless sex? Because your claim that “removes all pleasure from sex and makes it a horrible painful experience” is wrong. Actually, where are you getting this information? Do you know that even women that undergo infibulation, which is the “worst” kind of FGM that exists, can experience orgasm? You DO know that in South Africa, where boys are circumcised at the same age as women, often lose their penises to gangrene? You DO know that the whole reason circumcision exists in the states today is because it began in the Victorian era as a way to keep boys from masturbating? “Decreasing pleasure” is EXACTLY why boys were circumcised. You really have absolutely no idea of what you are talking about.
“Also, you imply that circumcision has no benefits. Many studies have shown it to reduce female to male HIV transmission as well as the transmission of other STDs. Whether or nor you agree with those studies is up to you, but there are no studies showing any benefits to FGM- quite the opposite. Also, you act as if everyone who has their child circumcised is cruel or blindly following the masses, instead of just following their own opinions of these studies. (Just because you put quotes around the word studies does not actually discredit them) Also, cut cocks are easier to keep clean. It’s a fact. You may not value this over having your foreskin, but again, thats your call.”
Circumcision in males has about the same “benefits” as girls. I’m afraid any “study” that you can quote regarding male circumcision and STD transmission is wrong. They’re all rigged and concocted by pro-circumcision doctors, kind of like Poppas here. BOTTOM LINE: There is no STD that is prevented by circumcision; circumcised men get every STD that intact men get. There is absolutely no study, nor doctor, nor professor that can refute this. IF “studies” were correct, circumcision would “reduce the risk” by some silly number at best. 60% for AIDS? Really? Is there a reason why circumcision failed in the 1980s when close to 90% of all US men were already circumcised from birth?
Let’s talk about the latest crock. Circumcision is supposed to “Reduce the risk of HPV by 35%.” And that’s progress? Really? What about that 65%? Circumcision is supposed to “reduce the risk of herpes by 28%.” 28%. And that is somehow supposed to be laudable. 28%? And for the 72% of the men that get herpes and pass it on to their partners… “oops?” Absolute and sheer STUPIDITY anyone actually takes this crap seriously. When all you have to do is wear a condom. Me, no thanks. I’m married. Someone tell my why the majority of males that get HIV in this country happen to be circumcised at birth.
Riddle me this, flat, can you tell me WHY there are no “studies” showing the “benefits” of FGM? The answer is right here under our noses; we would not allow them. We are immediately outraged by any “study” that seeks to legitimize and rationalize taking a girl’s organs and chopping them up. To quote male “studies”, condemn FGM studies, and then proceed to tell me that “there are all kinds of MGM studies that show MGM shows benefits, but no FGM studies” is pure self-service. There are quite a few FGM “studies” that show that women who have undergone FGM have a “lowered risk of HIV.” WHY don’t you see these? Because major medical journals like the Lancet would get CREAMED by the AAP. They would get their asres handed to them by anti-FGM groups. The WHO, UNAIDS and UNICEF would lose all credibility.
I don’t think I ever condemned anyone that had their child mutilated as “cruel.” I will say they are blindly following the masses, if they are not outright being convinced to allow doctors to do it. Mind you, it is quite precisely what is happening here with Poppas. I don’t blame the parents here; it’s DOCTORS who are supposed to know better than their patients, much more their patients’ parents. I’ll say it again; I don’t condemn parents who decided to go through with circumcisions; like Dr. Poppas’ victims, those parents only did what they were told “what’s best” by people they trusted.
As for “cut cocks are easier to keep clean,” here’s another baseless claim. You’ve never had one, I’m sure. I own an anatomically correct penis, and I’ve been with quite a few women in my life. I can tell you from experience that cleaning my penis is no “harder” than it is for my wife to clean her vagina. No, it’s NOT a “fact.” It’s your fantasy.
About the quotes around the word “studies,” I don’t do it with the intention of “taking away credibility.” The flaws in these so-called “studies” are so glaringly obvious, it’s not even funny. Just as it is clear that cutting out a girl’s shaft is mutilation and Poppas is a quack, it is so clear that these “studies” are but a hoax being used to promote circumcision. Look at who wrote them, and HOW and you’ll get a picture. Check out who Bailey, Halperin, Gray, Moses etc. are, and you’ll see that there is a flagrant conflict of interest. There has got to be something wrong with “studies” with which realities in other parts of the world don’t correlate. (IE, WHY does the US have higher STD transmission rates than various countries in Europe? Asia? WHY, even though the majority of men are circumcised, is the HIV transmission RISING in Israel? Google “haaretz” and “HIV” or “AIDS” to read up.)
“I am willing to talk about the boys, in a setting that doesn’t detract from what happens to the girls. Because they’re not the same! FGM and male circumcision are two very different things!”
Sorry, as long as you have that mindset, you are being sexist and you need to sit down.
“While male circumcision is a legitimate ethical conversation, FGM never is. But because FGM rarely even gets mentioned (I’ve yet to see this hit the national media, for example) its important to focus on it while its in spotlight.”
I’m afraid you’re mistaken.
We have all agreed here that it will be unacceptable to talk about the “pros and cons” of FGM. WHY is this different with MGM? WHY is it a “legitimate” ethical conversation?
I’m not sure WHAT planet you live on, but that FGM is horrible is already quite-accepted. It really needs no mention. Mention FGM, and you get long threads like the one you’re typing on. Your argument simply has no basis in fact.
“The fact is, there are lots of people that don’t know about FGM, or what it means or that it happens- its not talked about a lot in our society. You act as if FGM gets talked about incessantly while the dubious nature of male circumcision is ignored- I’d say they’re talked about both pretty equally. Actually, male circumcision may actually be talked about more, because no one goes onto those blogs and derails the conversation to FGM. I would like to actually thank you for talking about FGM at the end of your (very long) response, as that’s more than most of the derailing posters have done on here. Though I wouldn’t just leave it at “FGM is horrible. DUH!” as there are actually some people on here arguing for the surgeries- clearly its not as widely hated as we’d like to think.”
You should really get around more.
FGM IS more openly talked about. But that’s because it’s pretty much generally accepted that it’s a barbaric practice. You really will not have any contest there.
Male circumcision IS ignored. Infact, whenever people mention circumcision, it’s to tout all the “benefits” and how parents have this big “choice.” (Parents have no choice with their daughters.) People AGAINST male circumcision ARE ignored, they’re cut short in time, or they’re dismissed as “special interest quacks.” (When the opposite is true.) News outlets spend more time talking about all the “benefits” of circumcision, rather than actually talk about the ethic of taking a healthy, non-consenting individual and cutting off part of his genitals. Ethic and morality clearly only applies to women and their genitals. Men and boys simply don’t have the same rights, and this is acceptable.
Male circumcision IS only talked about in hidden blogs, and when you go, you will actually have no trouble “derailing ” the conversation with FGM; everyone pretty much agrees they’re both equally wrong. It is people against FGM who take on this “don’t take my spotlight, I’M more important” kind of attitude.
There are actually people on here arguing in favor of FGM and what Poppas is doing, but have you noticed how terribly underwhelmed people against it are?
Do you seriously think the idea that FGM is horrible is contested in this country?
“Finally, while I do disagree with male circumcision, I also think they have different levels of urgency. To me, this discussion is like a deity saying to you- “You can stop all murders or all assaults.” Frankly, I’m going to pick murders, as to me it seems like the worse of two terrible things. Same thing here. Not because its happening to girls, but because it is a completely different matter. “
This line of thinking is seriously flawed. I will reiterate; no one seems to think there is anything wrong with murder. But the reasoning people who would rather that people that bring up male circumcision be quiet is that “rape should be ignored because murder is worse.”
There is no “difference.” Taking a healthy, non-consenting individual and cutting off parts of his or her genitals is the exact same principle.
The “difference” is that while taking a boy, strapping him down, ripping his foreskin off his glans, sticking it in a clamp and slicing it off is acceptable in this country, we will not allow as much as a “ritual nick” for girls. It is a double-standard. It is double-think.
“”The problem with most anti-circumcision activists[…] is a tendency to wildly overstate the anti-circumcision case.”
I’m afraid that this is the very problem with FGM. They have a tendency to wildly overstate the FGM case, while wildly minimizing male circumcision.
I’ll reiterate; FGM opponents don’t have an uphill battle. They preach to the choir. It’s really easy to swim with the flow.
FGM isn’t a problem here in the states (Save this horrendous case with CAH patients.), MALE circumcision is. It’s a problem and people would rather anti-circumcisionists wouldn’t bring it up.
“”When you claim that “a man loses much of his capacity for sexual pleasure when he’s cut,” all the cut guys out there reading your letter — guys like me and my boyfriend and most every guy we know, gay and straight — think, “Hey, I’m cut, and I derive plenty of ‘sexual pleasure’ from my cock. These anti-circumcision crybabies are full of shit.” And comparing male circumcision (the removal of the foreskin) to female genital mutilation (the removal of the clitoris) doesn’t help, either. Removing the clit is comparable to cutting off the head of the penis, not the foreskin, and comparing the two procedures comes off as cheap, “me too” victim mongering. A little less hysteria, a little less overstatement, and a lot less anti-Semitic rhetoric, and anti-cutting forces might change more people’s minds.” “
I’m not sure I ever made the claim that a man “loses much of his capacity for sexual pleasure.” That is a claim people make about FGM (that women lose pleasure).
I’m afraid it really doesn’t help to be conguring up subjective annecdotes. Go to Africa and ask women how they feel about having undergone through FGM. Quite a few women will react like Dan. We “FGM crybabies are full of shit.”
Doesn’t erase the reality of the situation that FGM (as well as MGM) is a violation of basic human rights.
You only try to convince yourself when you make the claim that “removing the clit is not comparable to removing the foreskin.”
Taking a healthy, non-consenting individual and cutting off part of his genitals is the same principle violated. It violates the same human rights, and it doesn’t matter that the parts cut off are “different.” Remember; we told the AAP that we would not allow them to endorse as much as a “nick,” where FGM wouldn’t “remove” anything.
It’s not “what” is being removed, but the principle. You don’t take someone and cut off part of his genitals because YOU don’t think it’s “worse” than cutting off part of a girl’s genitals.
Please spare me the anti-Semite card. People against male circumcision aren’t “anti-Semite,” anymore than people against FGM are “anti-African.” Over 95% of circumcisions in America are gentile, secular circumcisions that happen at hospitals; I’m against ALL of it.
I’d like to address THIS little number:
“Removing the clit is comparable to cutting off the head of the penis, not the foreskin, and comparing the two procedures comes off as cheap, “me too” victim mongering.”
Cutting off parts of people’s genitals is cutting off parts of people’s genitals. To say “cutting off the foreskin is not the same as cutting off the clitoris” is cheap “only women are victims” victim mongering.
It is SEXIST to be minimizing male circumcision while blowing female circumcision out of proportion.
Women that undergo FGM DO experience orgasm and sexual sensations, and quite a few women would be insulted at the claim that they don’t.
No one is claiming that one form of genital mutilation is “worse” than the other. (Well, maybe YOU are…)
What I’M claiming is, genital mutilation is genital mutilation. Taking a boy or a girl and tying him or her down to have part of his or her genitals cut out is the exact same principle, the exact same violation of basic human rights.
How much bigger the piece of flesh is removed, how “severe” people think a procedure is, how much sexual functionality is left is really secondary.
Whether or not someone wants to be circumcised should be HIS body HIS choice.
There is no medical necessity for Poppas to be doing what he does to girls. The same applies to circumcision and baby boys.
It is the same principle violated, it is equally ethically repugnant. You can’t condemn one without condemning the other. To insist on doing so is a double-standard; you’re only condemning/condoning what you feel comfortable with and are unwilling to measure both procedures with the same yardstick.
This article horrifies me. I can’t believe that this kind of thing is allowed to happen!
as an adult woman who has two children, I have enough trouble going to see a gynocologist (the only one where I live is male) I find it embarrassing and humilliating and avoid it um less absolutely necessary. if I feel this way as an adult how would a 6year old child feel? how could a mother do this to her child?
Why can’t genitals be left as they are until the end of puberty and then the individual concerned can see a doctor if he/she wants to.
I just don’t understand how this is good medical practise. I will think twice before fully trusting a doctor ever again.
i wonder why this doctor isn’t concerned about shortening the penises of young boys who have larger than / longer than “average” penis size? would that “psychologically impact” them as they grow up?
this doctor sickens me. i feel literally sick to my stomach. and why the parents would allow their child to be subject to this is unbelievable and also sickening. oh my lord.
I wonder what Andy at Dunder-Mifflin would say…
I keep going back and reading these articles and one question stands out in my mind that I haven’t seen asked. Before I can try to process all the rest, I have to know what makes the parents of children as young as five and six seek out this kind of medical attention in the first place? Everyone’s focusing on the doctor’s decision that the girls’ clits are too big, but I’m still wondering how they even got that far. Are parents measuring these things now? Is there a comparison scale that I’m unaware of? Are first graders coming home from school and asking why Judy’s and Megan’s are smaller? This isn’t sarcasm, either. (Okay, maybe the last one, a little.) Just–really. How do parents get to that first step where one says to the other over dinner that they really need to get this looked at by a professional?
Violation of ETHICS? Call CORNELL? How about violation of federal LAW? Screw Cornell! Call the federal PROSECUTORS! Has no one told Cornell about the federal Anti-female Genital Mutilation Act? As for parental “consent” (to violation of federal law), parents have no right to consent to amputation of healthy body parts from their children, and any such “consent” does not protect violators from prosecution. Throw the book at everyone involved. Send all of them to jail for the maximum sentence allowed. The only people calling Cornell should be the federal prosecutors.
I am stunned. I read through all the articles and am gobsmacked and repulsed. This is institutionalised sadistic pedophilia.
“Everyone’s focusing on the doctor’s decision that the girls’ clits are too big, but I’m still wondering how they even got that far. Are parents measuring these things now?”
I’ve read a lot of articles on this outrageous practice, and they are all missing the answer to this question, and it is plainly stated in the study itself. Most of the girls undergoing this procedure have Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia; check it out on google images. It is not accurate to say that these girls have large clitorises; their gentiles do in fact resemble male gentiles, but they have XX chromosomes and are completely functional as females. That said, I can see how a parent could be so concerned about raising a daughter who appeared to have a penis that they would go to a doctor about it and consider even an outlandish surgery like this one to help their daughter have a “normal” life.
Is it horrible? Yes. I cried the first time I read about this issue. It is unimaginable to me that anyone would abuse another human being like this…but it’s going to take a revamping of human sexuality that ceases to classify us as “men” and “women” with pre-defined gender roles and allows us to simply live as selves, individuals in a complex universe who all find our own paths to happiness. At this point, the doctor may be forced to cease his abuse of these young girls…but they will be abused by others down the road anyway. It’s a much larger issue than just one man with a vibrator.
HAAALLLLOOOOOO!!! Check this supposed scholar guy – he is a sex pervert – till when will he keep the annual follow-ups with the parent standing by?? Soon, the kid, not so ‘kid’ any more will be going for check ups alone and i can assure you – more likely than not – this man will be abusing the kids. He is already molesting the girls with the vibrators and all. He has already molested the girls by cutting off their clitoris – he is mutilating these kids.
Where must one go to have this person arrested?? What laws do they have in this place???
What kind of parent allows this to happen to their kid?
There is NO justification for this – and someone should show the researcher and the Provost of this university the outrage expressed in this site – they have to stop that nonsense.
Karambu Ringera, Kenya
this is Nazi science. and I wish I meant that as hyperbole.
does Mr. Spock have a beard in this universe?? this sick puppy needs some passive-aggression reduction surgery on his dick immediately.
I am now off to discover contacts at Cornell to continue my stunned outrage.
Let’s call it even and stop mutilating CHILDREN, regardless of sex.