[Maru]

Originally Posted by parmnion

I will outright ask you why, after being hit as punishment as a kid. You would then go on to hit your own kid if you ever likely to have one!

Its like racists in a way, being allowed to get away with racism cause their parents were.

I'm wondering which scenario effects the victim the most.

Should we be OK with a stranger doing so? A stranger or several strangers might, depending on the context and the situation. I never understood having a problem with corporal but then allowing other individuals the stance to assault other individuals on the basis of character assessments alone, at any age. We can't have it both ways. Violence is violence.

My point is not meant to detract from your point, parm. You ask a very pertinent question and I think that's a question many new parents ask themselves. These practices were in our culture because there didn't used to be this sort of nanny culture. Well, we went through a period of nanny culture that was quite bad actually, where neighbor's would turn their head despite the neighborhood problem child getting his *** beat by his father down the street for practically no reason. So yes, unchecked authority is bad. On the other hand, now, police are called, HOAs (Home Owner's Associations) record violations for the littest of things like leaving toddler toys out in the grass (God forbid kids be kids), and now society is nudging govt to that level as well...

...but why do you think the practice was introduced? I think people tend to think it is specifically for the purpose of facilitating authority, but I think my biggest take-away from having been spanked as a child was that the world does not revolve around me and my every thought.

The bus driver tried to handle it "the old fashioned" way... in my old neighborhood, this was "the line" and we thought twice about crossing it. Calling the police was something that the local public nuisance/nanny state did.

Consider that line a thinking a little bit. It was thought a lesser person not only wants, but demands, third parties to come in and resolve their differences. Before the era of internet and cell phones, the third party was about as far away as it took you to run home (if you could get away) to call for help on your landline or to a family member. So differences had to be resolved often without third party input. The worst alternative is that we are found in an alleyway with the wrong person (who we misspoke to)... or... that kid is found later hanging out with the wrong crowd bullying/targetting overs... humans by nature have little bullies instilled in them, and while spanking is certainly not a benign action, it helped facilitate a lesson in the concept of personal power and there being forces beyond our limitations.... that also taught that life itself was also not benign, in fact, there were often difficult aspects and malignant aspects of human-nature that do not consider our well-being or have our best interest... a child today has more options at their disposal (call fam for help or record any wrong-doing for evidence later), but a child of those days didn't have a family or protective structure following them everywhere they went...

Now that things have changed with technology and nanny-style "community policing", those lessons are a little bit more complicated than they used to be. Yes, we shouldn't subject ourselves to a problematic situation or purposefully push someone's buttons who may do harm to us... but on the other hand, if that person is able to get it on camera, they may have a juicy lawsuit on their hands. Even better if those recorded are well-known in any way shape or form, then they can sell that footage/imagery to TMZ/CNN and reap interview $$$$$. Very complicated now There are incentives to cause trouble where before that really could have damaged our reputation with our local folk and may have still resulted in immediate arrest anyway. Sometimes fines... something our prior generations maybe could not have afforded.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I think that would be a huge generalisation there parm, there are only very small pockets of "civilisation" that support FGM.

I'd never even heard of it until I first came to SD.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Maru

I'd never even heard of it until I first came to SD.

You never heard of FGM until you came on TIBB? Really?

[Marsh.]

"Ooh, kids would be so much better behaved these days with a little domestic violence"

Ok.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

You never heard of FGM until you came on TIBB? Really?

Nope. It's not a topic of conversation here and definitely not in the news. Maybe now I hear about it now that I listen more to partisan media, but even then it's still very rare to hear about it...

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by parmnion

After looking at the demographic of countries practicing female circumcision, and the numbers who have suffered from it. I think it would be unfair to say anything other than black people are ok with it.

Why? Because "black people" all hail from and represent the same countries?

It's as ridiculous a comment as "white people believe...".

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Maru

Nope. It's not a topic of conversation here and definitely not in the news. Maybe now I hear about it now that I listen more to partisan media, but even then it's still very rare to hear about it...

It's a something that's topical as a human rights issue/women's rights issue. Not so much in the news but it's certainly something people know about, I'm surprised it's not something Americans know about

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

It's a something that's topical as a human rights issue/women's rights issue. Not so much in the news but it's certainly something people know about, I'm surprised it's not something Americans know about

Ironically, I think it's because our media is so left-leaning. It's too close to America's soft spots (Islamophobia, ethnocentrism, nativism, etc). We don't tend to discuss such cultural topics beyond the broader consensus.

That's part of what attracted me to SD topics, actually, is that conversations here are not so filtered. Americans can be so sheltered here because most media for as long as I've been alive anyway has been delivered through such a thick filter.

Besides, it has the word "genital" in it and I couldn't see Anderson Cooper & co using those words so carelessly With the topic of gender identity though, etc, we see more usage of those kinds of terms, but it's understandable in a medical context. I don't think genital mutilation is something people want to hear when they turn on the television during prime-time. Right-wing media is more likely to bring it up given the human-rights related abuses, but then they will almost immediately be squashed by the opposition as racism/ethnocentrism... since obviously to delve into such topics, we'd have to then climb into discussions of WHO practices it... and that's deeper than most media wants to go now-a-days. We already know too the more vulgar folk who will usurp that conversation. The Ann Coulters of political discourse, etc... and that's enough to bleach it from the national/mainstream rhetoric here... US media in general is still very uptight and censorship heavy imo...

[parmnion]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I think that would be a huge generalisation there parm, there are only very small pockets of "civilisation" that support FGM.

An estimated 200 million women and girls alive today have had it, and there will be another 3 million each year who have to suffer from it, im assuming they will all be black girls.


I think that proves that black people support it.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Maru

Ironically, I think it's because our media is so left-leaning. It's too close to America's soft spots (Islamophobia, ethnocentrism, nativism, etc). We don't tend to discuss such cultural topics beyond the broader consensus.

That's part of what attracted me to SD topics, actually, is that conversations here are not so filtered. Americans can be so sheltered here because most media for as long as I've been alive anyway has been delivered through such a thick filter.

Besides, it has the word "genital" in it and I couldn't see Anderson Cooper & co using those words so carelessly With the topic of gender identity though, etc, we see more usage of those kinds of terms, but it's understandable in a medical context. I don't think genital mutilation is something people want to hear when they turn on the television during prime-time. Right-wing media is more likely to bring it up given the human-rights related abuses, but then they will almost immediately be squashed by the opposition as racism/ethnocentrism... since obviously to delve into such topics, we'd have to then climb into discussions of WHO practices it... and that's deeper than most media wants to go now-a-days. We already know too the more vulgar folk who will usurp that conversation. The Ann Coulters of political discourse, etc... and that's enough to bleach it from the national/mainstream rhetoric here... US media in general is still very uptight and censorship heavy imo...

Interesting Maru, it is a shame though that the left leaning side would protect culture over women or more specifically little girls. I have a cousin actually who works for an organisation in Brussels who are actively working to stop FGM.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Interesting Maru, it is a shame though that the left leaning side would protect culture over women or more specifically little girls. I have a cousin actually who works for an organisation in Brussels who are actively working to stop FGM.

i wish they would stop MGM too and one of the worst culprits apart from Jews is USA

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

i wish they would stop MGM too and one of the worst culprits apart from Jews is USA

Yeah, I agree although it's not as damaging as FGM. Tbf though in the USA it seems to be a standard practice for all baby boys not just Jewish boys

[Livia]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

i wish they would stop MGM too and one of the worst culprits apart from Jews is USA

Yes, because that's exactly the same thing as cutting off a girls clitoris with no anaesthetic, by an unqualified person and with unsterilized blades while family members hold her down, and then sewing her up so she can just pee and menstruate. Never mind what happens when her husband wants sex, or when she has a child... And there are Millions - MILLIONS - of women who have suffered this, some right here in the UK.

Yes, male circumcision must be JUST the same... or it wouldn't get brought up, by a man, ever time FGM gets brought up.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Livia

Yes, because that's exactly the same thing as cutting off a girls clitoris with no anaesthetic, by an unqualified person and with unsterilized blades while family members hold her down, and then sewing her up so she can just pee and menstruate. Never mind what happens when her husband wants sex, or when she has a child... And there are Millions - MILLIONS - of women who have suffered this, some right here in the UK.

Yes, male circumcision must be JUST the same... or it wouldn't get brought up, by a man, ever time FGM gets brought up.

Snipping off a part off a babys knob for NO good reason is Snipping off a part off a babys knob for NO good reason

[Livia]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

Snipping off a part off a babys knob for NO good reason is Snipping off a part off a babys knob for NO good reason

Please don't try to make the issues sound the same when women suffer so much more otherwise you're just minimising their struggle and taking part in insufferable whataboutism. I know you don't agree with male circumcision, you say so all the time. That's your right, start a campaign if you feel so strongly, just please don't slip it into the discussion every time FGM comes up.

[Redway]

Originally Posted by internetkid

How is it any different? It is wrong to assault ANYONE regardless of their sex!!

“How is it any different?”

Really? Don’t be stupid.

[thesheriff443]

We are a long way off the original thread.

[arista]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

We are a long way off the original thread.

Yes miles off topic.

[parmnion]

Originally Posted by Livia

Yes, because that's exactly the same thing as cutting off a girls clitoris with no anaesthetic, by an unqualified person and with unsterilized blades while family members hold her down, and then sewing her up so she can just pee and menstruate. Never mind what happens when her husband wants sex, or when she has a child... And there are Millions - MILLIONS - of women who have suffered this, some right here in the UK.

Yes, male circumcision must be JUST the same... or it wouldn't get brought up, by a man, ever time FGM gets brought up.

All some off them have to look forward to is the rubbing of leaves into the vagina so it stays dry because the bloke likes the look of a clean dry vagina or prefers the difficult entry....



True facts.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

We are a long way off the original thread.

Idc, this is good discussion. But mods could always split into a new thread.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Livia

Yes, because that's exactly the same thing as cutting off a girls clitoris with no anaesthetic, by an unqualified person and with unsterilized blades while family members hold her down, and then sewing her up so she can just pee and menstruate. Never mind what happens when her husband wants sex, or when she has a child... And there are Millions - MILLIONS - of women who have suffered this, some right here in the UK.

Yes, male circumcision must be JUST the same... or it wouldn't get brought up, by a man, ever time FGM gets brought up.

Wow. I have scarring of the bladder and it's nigh impossible to stop the pain once it is set off without invention. Pelvic pain in general is no walk in the park. It tend to becomes recurrent if left untreated and with there are so many nerve-endings there, it's more difficult to treat than pain in other areas. So probably people think "take a pain pill". It's really not that simple. There are so many sensitive areas there, involuntary reflexes, etc. For example, the bladder filling and pressing up against damaged nerves could lead to bladder spasms, which are also involuntary. The pain can spread to other areas. Then adding in the stress element. Like any muscle, tension links pretty closely with how we feel, our mental state. High stress means more tension, which leads to tightening. Tightening up means more pain, especially in areas with scar-tissue, which the procedure sounds like it would lead to a lot of scar-tissue. There's also people who have physiological reactions to sexual trauma/shaming as well, for example, conditions such as vaginismus. That could complicate treatment as well. That has to be a complete hell. That's probably the intent.

I would not compare that to a circumsion. Religious folk want to reproduce. Can't do that when your junk feels like it is on fire all the time.

To bring this back OT. Another form of arraignment against the kid in the OP maybe?... "Well somebody wasn't circumsized when they were younger" ...

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Maru

To bring this back OT. Another form of arraignment against the kid in the OP maybe?... "Well somebody wasn't circumsized when they were younger" ...

Well, it's a good example of how people can come to completely false correlations!

The rate of infant circumcision in the US has been falling over time. The rate of mass shootings has been increasing over time. So it stands to reason that if EVERYONE was circumcised, there would be no mass shootings at all! Damn you, foreskin. Damn ALL the foreskins!

[parmnion]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Well, it's a good example of how people can come to completely false correlations!

The rate of infant circumcision in the US has been falling over time. The rate of mass shootings has been increasing over time. So it stands to reason that if EVERYONE was circumcised, there would be no mass shootings at all! Damn you, foreskin. Damn ALL the foreskins!

I'm now wondering if trumps been man made from all those bitter chopped of foreskins.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Well, it's a good example of how people can come to completely false correlations!

The rate of infant circumcision in the US has been falling over time. The rate of mass shootings has been increasing over time. So it stands to reason that if EVERYONE was circumcised, there would be no mass shootings at all! Damn you, foreskin. Damn ALL the foreskins!

I'm going to start throwing around some baseless accusations during the next game day. It sounds like a potential solid plot material for a table top RPG anyway. I will suggest it to our GM. ("You should bring in a priesthood obsessed with circumcizing the nation... and include a Leather Trumpet somehow")

Maybe that is the secret to his name...

[Toy Soldier]

Originally Posted by Maru

I'm going to start throwing around some baseless accusations during the next game day. It sounds like a potential solid plot material for a table top RPG anyway. I will suggest it to our GM. ("You should bring in a priesthood obsessed with circumcizing the nation... and include a Leather Trumpet somehow")

Maybe that is the secret to his name...

Apparently he actually does own a trumpet fashioned entirely out of discarded foreskin. He plays a sad tune in a minor key every night from the top of a hill, in respect for the loss experienced by all cut men.