U.N. seeks a global ban on female circumcision

UNITED NATIONS The U.N. General Assembly unanimously approved a resolution Thursday calling for a global ban on female genital mutilation, a centuries-old practice stemming from the belief that circumcising girls controls women's sexuality and enhances fertility.

It has also been linked to religious and cultural practices, although Muslim and Christian leaders have spoken out against it.

Although not legally binding, General Assembly resolutions reflect international concerns and carry moral and political weight.

The U.N. said in 2010 that about 70 million girls and women had undergone the procedure, and the World Health Organization said about 6,000 girls were circumcised every day.

The resolution, cosponsored by over 100 countries and adopted by consensus, calls the practice harmful and a serious threat to the psychological, sexual and reproductive health of women and girls.

It calls on the U.N.'s 193 member states to condemn the practice and launch education campaigns to eliminate it. It also urges all countries to enact and enforce legislation to prohibit the practice and to end impunity for violators.

According to Amnesty International, female genital mutilation is commonplace in 28 countries in Africa as well as in Yemen, Iraq, Malaysia, Indonesia and among certain ethnic groups in South America, but it is also a worldwide concern because it is also practiced by immigrants in diaspora communities.

Amnesty International's U.N. representative Jose Luis Diaz called the resolution "a first" for the General Assembly and an important moment for campaigners against "this grotesque practice."

[RonaldGoldmanPhD]

African female genital cutting and American male genital cutting have the following similarities: 1) Over 100 million procedures have been performed on current populations. 2) It is unnecessary and extremely painful. 3) It can have adverse sexual and psychological effects. 4) It is generally done by force on children. 5) It is generally supported by local medical doctors. 6) Pertinent biological facts are not generally known where procedures are practiced. 7) It is defended with reasons such as tradition, religion, aesthetics, cleanliness, and health. 8) The rationale has currently or historically been connected to controlling sexual pleasure. 9) It is often believed to have no effect on normal sexual functioning. 10) It is generally accepted and supported by those who have been subjected to it. 11) The decision is generally controlled by men though women may be supportive. 12) Those who are cut feel compelled to cut their children. 13) The choice may be motivated by underlying psychosexual reasons. 14) Critical public discussion is generally taboo where the procedure is practiced. 15) It can result in serious complications that can lead to death. 16) The adverse effects are hidden by repression and denial. 17) Dozens of potentially harmful physiological, emotional, behavioral, sexual, and social effects on individuals and societies have never been studied. 18) Where female genital cutting* is practiced, cutting the genitals of males is often practiced. 19) On a qualitative level, cutting the genitals of male and female children are one and the same thing. 20) To allow us to develop into our maximum individual and social potential, we must stop the cutting of genitals of both sexes.
*A form of American female genital cutting is episiotomy, an obstetrical ritual that may precede hospital childbirth. It has no proven benefit.

[brinxster]

It needs to be banned on non-consenting boys as well. Let them decide when they are adults capable of making such a paramount decision. Circumcision reduces sexual pleasure in men by 75% and heightens their risk of erectile dysfunction fourfold... that's unforgiving to do this to someone against their free will.

We need to promote HUMAN rights, not just female rights.

[Hugh_Intactive]

Good! Now just make that gender-neutral. Sauce for the goose.... And sure, male genital cutting is very different from female genital cutting, but leaving children's genitals alone is indivisible.

[RonJLow]

I can't even believe that BOTH male and female forced genital cutting weren't banned last century.

[Rodrigo_Girao]

Circumcision was banned by Hadrian, 19 centuries ago. As the Historia Augusta registers: "at this time the Jews started a war because they were forbidden to mutilate their genitals."

Nothing could paint a more negative portrait of jews: complete fanatics who chose to wage a hopeless war against the most powerful empire in the history of the world, ultimately having their little nation wiped out of existence, instead of giving up on a sadistic blood ritual.

[Leftydems]

Barbaric is as barbaric does. This is a horrible practice forced on girls at 12 years old by their parents, I've read. Warped! Walk through a mall and check the public, or spend 10 minutes in a bar at its peak sometime, and ask yourself how history will remember us.

[PourpaixPourpaix]

After seeing what the women in America have done in the last 50 years, won't be me who criticizes African culture.

[hypnotoad72]

Why not circumcision in general?

It's mutilation, regardless of gender it's being practiced on.

[Vierotchka]

Precisely.

[kernals12]

what excuse is the GOP going to make up not to ratify this treaty? last time it was threat to homeschooling, what's it going to be this time

[cleric77]

Is barbaric ritual is more cultural/tribal than religious. It is practiced within a male-dominate culture--believing that it will surpress the female sexual pleasure/desire. No wear in all Sacred Writings either Jewish, Islam, or Christian is it commanded to be observed.

[tiredofliberals]

OMG The UN has no power They are a waste of money

[hypnotoad72]

OMG, you haven't realized we have almost 200 countries (190+) on this sad planet, all of which have disparate political, economic, and religions paradigms that are all incompatible with each other at some point, which was why the UN was created in the first place - as means for all countries to discuss and deliberate?


Now add in"globalization" where, once scrutinized, represents nothing in terms of the redundancy and other issues needed to prevent problems in the system (such as a flood causing a massive spike in the cost of hard drives since all HDD plants were constructed in that sole region that also happened to be a happy flood plane... but I could put in plenty of examples that show how nominal "globalization" is, and the sole reason it exists (exploitation, profiteering...))

oh well...