No need to be insulting, fellow-poster-person.Stromtrooper said:Alright, I got to stop you there. A female circumcision usually is performed to prevent the female from wanting to have sex. In other cases they are to make it impossible for a female to have sex. A male circumcision, while wholly unnecessary, has no negative consequences and is based on either religious practices or tradition from WWI where in the soldiers got circumcisions to prevent their dicks from rotting off when they were waist deep in mud for most days. To compare the two is incredible arrogant and insensitive. You are a dick.Celestialum said:Okay, how about this though. I'm circumcised, and I don't want to be. It's considered absolutely horrendous to circumcise a female, so why should it be any different to circumcise a male?
Yes, I understand physically, the two operations are very different. But my point is this: you are mutilating a child. Your child very well may not agree with your reasoning for that mutilation when it grows up. So don't cut your kid.
That said, however, female and male circumcision is often done for the same reason: tradition. Many believe this tradition originated from the same logic: both are intended to reduce sexual pleasure during intercourse (as both kinds of circumcision do) as a way of discouraging the individual from lustful thoughts.
Female circumcision often conjures the idea of infibulation - the sewing shut of the vagina after circumcision. This is a minority when it comes to actual female circumcision - it is most often the removal of the clitoral 'hood' - which is very much the same as removing the foreskin of the male. Both contain a lot of nerve-endings and the removal of both reduces sensation.
Don't go around insulting people, that's just plain rude. It's best to be especially prudent when the other person makes some good points, since that just makes you come off as many times worse the insult you threw at them.