[Livia]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

You went off topic to make a point about FGM in a thread that had nothing to do with FGM, but yeah, I went a little off course.

I was wrong about the hysterectomy thing, but let me turn it around and use men and vasectomy instead. The principal is the same, but I was incorrect on my initial assertion.

Have your thread back, I'm out.

You can make all the analogies you like, it doesn't alter the fact that FGM and male circumcision are not the same thing. You didn't even know male circumcision is mostly done for hygiene and medical reasons! Maybe it's best you're out.

[Beso]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Its usually like..a really tight painful foreskin.

I do wonder sometimes how many men would chose to have it done as adults, if it hadn't been done to them as kids. I doubt it would be many. I know a lot of men say they are happy with it, but they have known nothing else..and I cannot see men queuing up to have bits of their penis chopped off.

Also now wondering if I should split this discussion off from this thread into its own...but splicing usually goes wrong when I do it

I dont mind it turning this way vicky...very interesting opinions...leave as is please.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Yeah, there is never a reason for FGM..and its so much more extreme than male circumcision. I do agree mind, that male circumcision should only be allowed for medical reasons in children as I do not believe that parents 'own' their babies body

I was circumcised at age 7 for medical reasons but I do agree with this, and for the same reasons, it's essentially cosmetic surgery if it isn't for a medical reason and NO parent has the right, in my opinion, to alter their child's body permanently for cosmetic or cultural reasons. When it's religious I think at the very least it should be left until the teens, for consent reasons. Also because it should really never be done under the age of 4 or 5. The foreskin is actually "attached" (doesn't retract) before that age, and removal before that age is what causes most of the scarring / damage that some people report in later life. It's a MUCH more simple procedure after the point where the skin can retract on its own.

But yes in terms of comparison... FGM isn't even close to the same physical procedure. The male equivalent of removal of the clitoris would be removing the entire glans (bell end, or "gerry helmet", if you will) .

[Redway]

Originally Posted by smudgie

Rape is rape, I agree, however there are different degrees.
All rapists found guilty of the crime should be punished accordingly.
Date rape.
A “friend” helps himself when helping you to bed due to you being drunk.
A partner decides he will turn you over and force anal sex against your wishes.
A stranger viciously attacks and rapes you walking home late at night (or any other time).
The mental anguish should be taken into account in all cases.

Rape’s rape no matter what. Don’t matter the circumstances.

I wouldn’t be looking for ways to get people lighter sentences for commiting the sickest crime there is when they’re all guilty of the exact same thing.

Mental anguish is subjective. How should that be a factor in deciding what sort of prison sentence rapists get?

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Redway

Rape’s rape no matter what. Don’t matter the circumstances.

I wouldn’t be looking for ways to get people lighter sentences for commiting the sickest crime there is when they’re all guilty of the exact same thing.

Mental anguish is subjective. How should that be a factor in deciding what sort of prison sentence rapists get?

But conviction rates are abysmal, the sentence for most rapists is "nothing at all because they walk out of court free".

What if lightening sentences resulted in a significantly higher conviction rate? Is it better for fewer rapists to receive harsh sentences and the majority to get away with it, or for more rapists to receive a lighter custodial sentence than before but at least be convicted (and thus, added to the sex offenders register)?

That's the crux of the discussion really but you're overlooking pragmatism in favour of outrage.

[bots]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

But conviction rates are abysmal, the sentence for most rapists is "nothing at all because they walk out of court free".

What if lightening sentences resulted in a significantly higher conviction rate? Is it better for fewer rapists to receive harsh sentences and the majority to get away with it, or for more rapists to receive a lighter custodial sentence than before but at least be convicted (and thus, added to the sex offenders register)?

That's the crux of the discussion really but you're overlooking pragmatism in favour of outrage.

But the government and prison authorities are trying to free up spaces by releasing those with lighter custodial sentences, so I'm afraid that tactic doesn't have a future. We need to change in line with technology. People can live in the community now, but be completely restricted in what they do. We are talking here about criminals that would usually avoid prosecution, so tag em, track em and get them on the sex offenders register ... at least then they are registered as guilty.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by Livia

I've changed my mind, let's brand them and see how long it takes for people to have hysterics about their rights. Because the fact that little girls under 15 STILL undergo female circumcision in the UK and no one seems to be doing anything about it is a national disgrace. Tattoo? Definitely not. Have your clitoris cut off and your vagina sewn up, without anaesthetic and with unsterilized cutting tools... seemingly acceptable. FGM has been illegal since 2003 since when 170,000 female have gone through the procedure in the UK with no convictions at all.

That's shocking Livia,I didn't know that,I knew it happened but not on such a scale and I thought it was rare in the UK, it's disgusting that there have been no convictions.

[Beso]

170, 000 cases and not one conviction.....


Lets all let that sink in for a bit.....now ask why there have been no convictions?

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by parmnion

170, 000 cases and not one conviction.....


Lets all let that sink in for a bit.....now ask why there have been no convictions?

Is it something to do with the PC liberal left?

Or

As this isn't mainstream muslim practice, you're dealing with an even more isolated community within an already increasingly isolated community, so you will have trouble gathering evidence, taking witness statements, and then expecting people to witness against their own families with intimidation and honour practices (Which again, are abhorrent practices), just like any criminals attempting to cover up their crimes.

It's actually a genuine issue that would make a worthy discussion thread, but I somehow get the feeling that an honest discussion isn't what this about as there was no genuine segue on to the topic.

[smudgie]

Originally Posted by Redway

Rape’s rape no matter what. Don’t matter the circumstances.

I wouldn’t be looking for ways to get people lighter sentences for commiting the sickest crime there is when they’re all guilty of the exact same thing.

Mental anguish is subjective. How should that be a factor in deciding what sort of prison sentence rapists get?

Try turning it on it’s head.
Rather than lighter sentencing for the less violent rapes, make it heavier sentencing for the most violent.
Being in fear of your life and violently assaulted would get the highest sentencing and punishment for me.

[arista]

"Rape is rarely violent and doesn’t merit a jail term,
claims Germaine Greer"

Yes She has a way
with her words.
She was on CNN Talk HD
the other week.

She was at the Hay Festival
this week,

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by smudgie

Rape is rape, I agree, however there are different degrees.
All rapists found guilty of the crime should be punished accordingly.
Date rape.
A “friend” helps himself when helping you to bed due to you being drunk.
A partner decides he will turn you over and force anal sex against your wishes.
A stranger viciously attacks and rapes you walking home late at night (or any other time).
The mental anguish should be taken into account in all cases.

Yeah but each of those cases are rape, no matter the circumstances. I wouldn't say those were degrees.

There are degrees of sexual harassment/assault, rape being one. But all of the instances you list should carry the same punishment as they are the same crime whether the victim was attacked by a loved one, a stranger, in a dark alley or in their own home.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Well, there's rpae that causes other injuries, and not, but I guess you can easily get around that with in those cases charging with both rape and gbh/abh?

Oh yeah, definitely. If a rape also included a vicious beating for good measure then other charges would or should be thrown in too.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

What civilised society - it is becoming less so by the day and a more dangerous one to live in for all of us. Generally the streets are more dangerous than they have been for some time with rape, the grooming of young vulnerable girls and knife crime and murder soaring.

A molly coddling philosophy that tolerates religious and cultural barbarism from some - so they can feel morally superior, whilst attempting to control and intimidate others to achieve their idealistic goals of ‘inclusivity’ that does far more harm than good - and all without realising the irony!

So your answer to tackling the decreasing civility in our society is to make it more so?

Nah.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Livia

I've changed my mind, let's brand them and see how long it takes for people to have hysterics about their rights. Because the fact that little girls under 15 STILL undergo female circumcision in the UK and no one seems to be doing anything about it is a national disgrace. Tattoo? Definitely not. Have your clitoris cut off and your vagina sewn up, without anaesthetic and with unsterilized cutting tools... seemingly acceptable. FGM has been illegal since 2003 since when 170,000 female have gone through the procedure in the UK with no convictions at all.

Apples and oranges. One example does not really impact the other.

FGM is vile and more should be done to prevent it and the law should be altered to make convictions easier but none of that is related to the thread at hand.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

What civilised society - it is becoming less so by the day and a more dangerous one to live in for all of us. Generally the streets are more dangerous than they have been for some time with rape, the grooming of young vulnerable girls and knife crime and murder soaring.

A molly coddling philosophy that tolerates religious and cultural barbarism from some - so they can feel morally superior, whilst attempting to control and intimidate others to achieve their idealistic goals of ‘inclusivity’ that does far more harm than good - and all without realising the irony!

You call out barbarism while endorsing it through the idea of branding people and other extreme measures. I honestly don't understand how you can't see your own hypocrisy.

[Beso]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

Is it something to do with the PC liberal left?

Or

As this isn't mainstream muslim practice, you're dealing with an even more isolated community within an already increasingly isolated community, so you will have trouble gathering evidence, taking witness statements, and then expecting people to witness against their own families with intimidation and honour practices (Which again, are abhorrent practices), just like any criminals attempting to cover up their crimes.

It's actually a genuine issue that would make a worthy discussion thread, but I somehow get the feeling that an honest discussion isn't what this about as there was no genuine segue on to the topic.

This has nothing to do with isolating muslims though, fgm is practiced by christians as well.