Topic: If a transwoman was circumcised at birth but always identified as a girl...
Anonymous A started this discussion 12 years ago #34,916
...does it count as female genital mutilation?
Elim joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 7 minutes later[^] [v] #480,636
the circumcision was performed before the hypothetical person in question was able to form a gender identity so nope
Just a regular genital mutilation you don't even have to gender it but it's technically a male genital mutilation if you want to gender it since it was performed on a penis
A baby with a penis
Plus the nature of the phrase 'female genital mutilation' connotes biology/sex more so than gender so
There
Just a regular genital mutilation you don't even have to gender it but it's technically a male genital mutilation if you want to gender it since it was performed on a penis
A baby with a penis
Plus the nature of the phrase 'female genital mutilation' connotes biology/sex more so than gender so
There
Elim double-posted this 12 years ago, 24 seconds later, 8 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #480,637
Dumb post OP
My post was going to just say 'no' but the body was too short
My post was going to just say 'no' but the body was too short
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 12 years ago, 4 minutes later, 12 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #480,638
@previous (Elim)
So the mutilation of a female's genitals does not count as female genital mutilation?
So the mutilation of a female's genitals does not count as female genital mutilation?
Elim replied with this 12 years ago, 59 seconds later, 13 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #480,639
Elim double-posted this 12 years ago, 1 minute later, 14 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #480,640
@480,638 (A)
The mutilation was performed on an organ that the person doesn't/won't identify with anyway? It's a stupid hypothetical what is your point
The mutilation was performed on an organ that the person doesn't/won't identify with anyway? It's a stupid hypothetical what is your point
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 3 minutes later, 18 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #480,641
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 26 minutes later, 45 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #480,645
@OP please drink Domestos
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 12 years ago, 8 minutes later, 53 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #480,647
Ash !bbKEtchUp. joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 1 minute later, 54 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #480,648
Sigh
Elim replied with this 12 years ago, 5 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #480,652
@480,647 (A)
No? I'm saying that transgender people experience dysphoria. I'm talking about non-ops. You seem not to understand the gender/sex dichotomy? That the phrase in question connotes biology and that a penis isn't a biologically female organ? What don't you get slowpoke come on
No? I'm saying that transgender people experience dysphoria. I'm talking about non-ops. You seem not to understand the gender/sex dichotomy? That the phrase in question connotes biology and that a penis isn't a biologically female organ? What don't you get slowpoke come on
Elim double-posted this 12 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #480,654
@480,647 (A)
Additionally male circumcision is an entirely different procedure with different origin and lore surrounding it than what you are attempting to compare it to
I don't get what you're trying to do OP start making sense
Additionally male circumcision is an entirely different procedure with different origin and lore surrounding it than what you are attempting to compare it to
I don't get what you're trying to do OP start making sense
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 10 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #480,670
Circumcision is where the doctors cut off the foreskin of the penis. Are you perhaps thinking of castration where the testicles are removed?
Elim replied with this 12 years ago, 18 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #480,673
@previous (F)
Well removal of anything unnecessarily could technically be called 'mutilation' and they do call genital cutting of biological females 'female circumcision' sometimes
Well removal of anything unnecessarily could technically be called 'mutilation' and they do call genital cutting of biological females 'female circumcision' sometimes
Anonymous G joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 12 hours later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #480,725
Their body is not female no matter how much they identify as it. So lolno, obviously not.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 12 years ago, 15 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #480,729
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 3 hours later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #480,763
@480,637 (Elim)
add a period at the end of your no
also, this thread is dildoes
add a period at the end of your no
also, this thread is dildoes
(Edited 50 seconds later.)
Elim replied with this 12 years ago, 1 hour later, 18 hours after the original post[^] [v] #480,781
dead dw !jdTkvovFCQ joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 2 hours later, 20 hours after the original post[^] [v] #480,794
what is even the point of this thread
Anonymous C replied with this 12 years ago, 20 minutes later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #480,795
beckyderp !8ElfFaoFao joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 40 seconds later, 21 hours after the original post[^] [v] #480,796
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 2 hours later, 23 hours after the original post[^] [v] #480,814
I don't know, but it does raise a good point on the ethics of neonatal circumcision. It places the control of the child's genitals in the control of the parents, that it isn't the child's own but their parents. That if it isn't theirs, what right do they have to commit to SRS?
Or it's just yet another >shitarse >opinion thread.
Or it's just yet another >shitarse >opinion thread.
(Edited 32 seconds later.)
Elim replied with this 12 years ago, 51 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,816
@previous (K)
@previous (K)
> It places the control of the child's genitals in the control of the parents, that it isn't the child's own but their parents.
What?????
@previous (K)
> It places the control of the child's genitals in the control of the parents, that it isn't the child's own but their parents.
What?????
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 12 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,817
Elim replied with this 12 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,818
@previous (A)
Not a dumb one, no. I haven't heard any opinions in here though just accusations of opinions
Not a dumb one, no. I haven't heard any opinions in here though just accusations of opinions
kook !!32zdfdzi+ joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 47 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,820
No because they are not a female. They may be a woman, but they are still male.
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,828
no because trannies are a fetish, not a gender
kook !!32zdfdzi+ replied with this 12 years ago, 11 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,875
Killer Fucking Lettuce !!iNo3FkiZx joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,877
Anonymous D replied with this 12 years ago, 48 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,879
Anonymous K replied with this 12 years ago, 31 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,881
@480,816 (Elim)
In America it is the parents' choice on whether the son gets cut or not, not the son's choice. That if female genital mutilation is regarded as highly immoral, barbaric and disgusting, why is it okay to perform it on a male infant, who may or may not identify as a female later in life? Why is the genital cutting regarded as completely okay for one sex, and completely wrong for the other?
Ah well. Perhaps I am looking into this a bit too deep for a shitty, stupid ShitArse thread.
@previous (D)
> > ShitArse
> > opinion
In America it is the parents' choice on whether the son gets cut or not, not the son's choice. That if female genital mutilation is regarded as highly immoral, barbaric and disgusting, why is it okay to perform it on a male infant, who may or may not identify as a female later in life? Why is the genital cutting regarded as completely okay for one sex, and completely wrong for the other?
Ah well. Perhaps I am looking into this a bit too deep for a shitty, stupid ShitArse thread.
@previous (D)
> > ShitArse
> > opinion
Elim replied with this 12 years ago, 54 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,886
@previous (K)
Oh what are you some men's rights whiny baby boy? The female procedure is leagues more dangerous/disabling/disfiguring. I'm not saying that circumcision should be overlooked like it is in the west, it's a bad practice, but it's incomparable
Oh what are you some men's rights whiny baby boy? The female procedure is leagues more dangerous/disabling/disfiguring. I'm not saying that circumcision should be overlooked like it is in the west, it's a bad practice, but it's incomparable
my dad cuts peepee for living joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 10 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,896
@previous (Elim)
not really, they are both tiny snips off of extra skin, its quite funny that people actually think that
not really, they are both tiny snips off of extra skin, its quite funny that people actually think that
Elim replied with this 12 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,901
@previous (my dad cuts peepee for living)
Fricking channers think everything's a tiny dick pissing contest
"The practice involves one or more of several procedures, which vary according to the ethnic group. They include removal of all or part of the clitoris and clitoral hood; all or part of the clitoris and inner labia; and in its most severe form (infibulation) all or part of the inner and outer labia and the closure of the vagina"
Additionally, for the nth time, a penis is not a vagina and vice versa
Fricking channers think everything's a tiny dick pissing contest
"The practice involves one or more of several procedures, which vary according to the ethnic group. They include removal of all or part of the clitoris and clitoral hood; all or part of the clitoris and inner labia; and in its most severe form (infibulation) all or part of the inner and outer labia and the closure of the vagina"
Additionally, for the nth time, a penis is not a vagina and vice versa
squeegee joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,903
who the fuck cares, don't have your children spayed. problem solved.
my dad cuts peepee for living replied with this 12 years ago, 9 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,904
@480,901 (Elim)
protip: sewing a vagina shut isnt circumsion, nothing is being cut off.
additionally, there is a male analouge to clitoris & hood removal called bisectomy(dont look if squeemish) where the penis is cleaved into two parts or the double bisectomy(second verse same as first) which produces four parts flapping about in the wind. in both cases the flappies must be cauterized or you risk it rotting off producing many infectio s
protip: sewing a vagina shut isnt circumsion, nothing is being cut off.
additionally, there is a male analouge to clitoris & hood removal called bisectomy(dont look if squeemish) where the penis is cleaved into two parts or the double bisectomy(second verse same as first) which produces four parts flapping about in the wind. in both cases the flappies must be cauterized or you risk it rotting off producing many infectio s
(Edited 2 minutes later.)
Anonymous K replied with this 12 years ago, 1 hour later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,928
@480,886 (Elim)
> Oh what are you some men's rights whiny baby boy?
Not at all. MRA douchebags like the OP merely exist to be the male chauvinist counterpart to the SRS douchebags. They both spew out worthless, uneducated opinions and both are a detriment to actual feminists and advocates of equality.
> The female procedure is leagues more dangerous/disabling/disfiguring.
I know that. But there is no need to debate over which is the lesser or greater evil to justify one or the other. Both practices need to end.
> I'm not saying that circumcision should be overlooked like it is in the west, it's a bad practice, but it's incomparable
I know, but in regards to property rights violation it's basically the same. It still ends with a child getting its genitals cut for the sake of getting it cut. Yes, biologically, what happens to the girls is far worse, but in terms of property rights violations, there is really no different.
In my opinion, both practices pale in comparison to what they do to intersex children at birth in America, but no one really talks about that one. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if a few "transgender" people were actually intersex at birth and had the "wrong" surgery done. Like this fellow.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/15/mark-pam-crawford-intersex-child_n_3280353.html
> Oh what are you some men's rights whiny baby boy?
Not at all. MRA douchebags like the OP merely exist to be the male chauvinist counterpart to the SRS douchebags. They both spew out worthless, uneducated opinions and both are a detriment to actual feminists and advocates of equality.
> The female procedure is leagues more dangerous/disabling/disfiguring.
I know that. But there is no need to debate over which is the lesser or greater evil to justify one or the other. Both practices need to end.
> I'm not saying that circumcision should be overlooked like it is in the west, it's a bad practice, but it's incomparable
I know, but in regards to property rights violation it's basically the same. It still ends with a child getting its genitals cut for the sake of getting it cut. Yes, biologically, what happens to the girls is far worse, but in terms of property rights violations, there is really no different.
In my opinion, both practices pale in comparison to what they do to intersex children at birth in America, but no one really talks about that one. Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if a few "transgender" people were actually intersex at birth and had the "wrong" surgery done. Like this fellow.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/15/mark-pam-crawford-intersex-child_n_3280353.html
Anonymous K double-posted this 12 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,929
The only biological comparison one could make between FGM and circumcision is the removal of the clitoral hood. But this shouldn't be a debate of biology.
squeegee replied with this 12 years ago, 57 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,938
i don't know why y'all are all so concerned about other people's dicks.
it's bordering on obsessive at this point. either go suck one or shut the fuck up about them. god damn.
it's bordering on obsessive at this point. either go suck one or shut the fuck up about them. god damn.
Anonymous K replied with this 12 years ago, 15 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,944
@previous (squeegee)
> i don't know why y'all are all so concerned about other people's dicks.
Some people are so obsessed with other people's dicks that they'll pay a doctor to give their newborn infant genital cosmetic surgery. Some will obsess to the point of paying an old Jew to suck on it because the bearded man in the sky said so.
> it's bordering on obsessive at this point. either go suck one or shut the fuck up about them. god damn.
Hang on. Let me rephrase your statement to be in defense of female circumcision.
i don't know why y'all are all so concerned about other people's vaginas.
it's bordering on obsessive at this point. either go lick one or shut the fuck up about them. god damn.
> i don't know why y'all are all so concerned about other people's dicks.
Some people are so obsessed with other people's dicks that they'll pay a doctor to give their newborn infant genital cosmetic surgery. Some will obsess to the point of paying an old Jew to suck on it because the bearded man in the sky said so.
> it's bordering on obsessive at this point. either go suck one or shut the fuck up about them. god damn.
Hang on. Let me rephrase your statement to be in defense of female circumcision.
i don't know why y'all are all so concerned about other people's vaginas.
it's bordering on obsessive at this point. either go lick one or shut the fuck up about them. god damn.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 12 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,945
@480,938 (squeegee)
All the hispanic men are uncut, don't you want Texan children to fit in with what are to be the majority of your population?
All the hispanic men are uncut, don't you want Texan children to fit in with what are to be the majority of your population?
Anonymous D replied with this 12 years ago, 38 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,949
squeegee replied with this 12 years ago, 36 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,955
@480,944 (K)
> changing the world one bbs thread at a time
@480,945 (A)
i don't care about other people
> changing the world one bbs thread at a time
@480,945 (A)
i don't care about other people
Elim replied with this 12 years ago, 57 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #480,958
Anonymous K replied with this 12 years ago, 4 hours later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #480,971
@480,949 (D)
> > ShitArse
> > opinion
@480,955 (squeegee)
> >changing the world one bbs thread at a time
Why do you have to be such a rude fuck about this?
@previous (Elim)
I just don't really like being associated with MRAs you know? They don't really care about the rights of men at all. They just want to be able to subside off govt. benefits and eat like disgusting pigs without mockery.
> > ShitArse
> > opinion
@480,955 (squeegee)
> >changing the world one bbs thread at a time
Why do you have to be such a rude fuck about this?
@previous (Elim)
I just don't really like being associated with MRAs you know? They don't really care about the rights of men at all. They just want to be able to subside off govt. benefits and eat like disgusting pigs without mockery.
squeegee !first/o5zA joined in and replied with this 12 years ago, 12 minutes later, 2 days after the original post[^] [v] #480,974
@previous (K)
> Why do you have to be such a rude fuck about this?
i believe people should use their talents
> Why do you have to be such a rude fuck about this?
i believe people should use their talents