Is male and female genital mutilation comparable?

Many people have said, male genital mutilation, known more commonly as circumcision, which is performed on males is not comparable with female genital mutilation.

And like all claims, this claim must be investigated to see if it is true. So is it? The short answer is, yes they are comparable. This claim that they are not is a result of things like sexism, where men are tough and women are in need of special protection. As well, it comes from a lot of misinformation, people’s ignorance of the human male and female anatomy. Not to mention what really happens to both genders.

When people claim that they cannot be compared, they often say this because they are believing rumors and myths about male and female genital mutilation. While they are comparing the most rarest and destructive form of female genital mutilation with the most common form of male genital mutilation.

Comparing male and female genital mutilation in this way does make it look as if they are not that comparable. Some would even argue that comparing them to each other in this way is intentionally done in order to justify the continuation of the practice being done on one gender, while restricting the practice to Comparing

Comparing both in this way is unfair, and greatly misleading as it does set up a situation where it looks like one is not comparable to the other. However, what most people fail to realize is that there are multiple different forms of female genital mutilation as well as many different forms of male genital mutilation. And when you compare them based upon their type and how common they are; they become highly comparable and even indistinguishable in some ways from one another.

So let me demonstrate my own claims here. To show how they are not so different, let’s look at the different categories a female genital mutilation.

Each form is categorized into different types, type I, type II, type III and type IIII. I have even found some to categorize into more types, or even into even further subsections, however, first simplicity, we are going to use the models that at least to me, seem to follow the same structure with the same amount of types (I though IIII) in their model.

Now onto the types starting with female types.

• Type I  – Partial or total removal of the clitoris and/or the prepuce (clitoridectomy).
• Type II  – Partial or total removal of the clitoris and the labia minora, with or without excision of the labia majora (excision).
• Type III – Narrowing of the vaginal orifice with creation of a covering seal by cutting and appositioning the labia minora and/or the labia majora, with or without excision of the clitoris (infibulation).
• Type IIII  – All other harmful procedures to the female genitalia for non-medical purposes, for example: pricking, piercing, incising, scraping and cauterization.

Now let’s take a look at the different types of male genital mutilation.

• Type I – excision or injury of part or all of the skin and specialized mucosal tissues of the penis including the prepuce and frenulum (circumcision, dorsal slit without closure).
• Type II – excision or injury to the glans (glandectomy) and/or penis shaft, (penectomy) along with Type I MGM. Any procedure that interferes with reproductive or sexual function in the adult male.
• Type III is categorized as – excision or destruction of the testes (castration, orchidectomy) with or without Type II MGM.
• Type IIII – unclassified: includes pricking, piercing or incision of the prepuce, glans, scrotum or other genital tissue; cutting and suturing of the prepuce over the glans (infibulation); slitting open the urethra along the ventral surface of the penis (sub-incision); slitting open the foreskin along its dorsal surface (super-incision); severing the frenulum; stripping the skin from the shaft of the penis; introducing corrosive or scalding substances onto the genital area; any other procedure which falls under the definition of MGM given above.

After reading both, chances are you are starting to see similarities now that they have been arranged by types. However, I want to continue to make my case here about this. And address a common objections, that I suspect that some will ask, and that is the claim that how Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) removes a women’s ability to feel pleasure and the claim that Male Genital Mutilation (MGM) is beneficial, but let’s continue with the similarities for now.

Type I MGM Removes the foreskin which is a highly erogenous tissue that greatly reduces sexual sensation when removed. This tissue is where almost all the human males fine touch nerves are located. In fact, it is the foreskin that has more nerve endings, then any other part of the penis. Simply put it is unmatched when it comes to the male’s anatomy.

Part of this foreskin is a Y-shapped, web-like tissue on the underside of the foreskin that tethers it to the glands of the penis. This is called the frenulum. It contains the most concentrated area of nerve endings in the foreskin. With intact men finding it to be very pleasurable to touch. It is often described as the male G-Spot. And the few men who had this part of the penis remain, even if its a small part, after circumcision find this area to be an area they enjoy being touched.

This is comparable to Type I and even type II FGM. Where the labia minora and/or clitoris (described as a G-Spot) are removed. With the clitoris being the area of the female that contains the most densely pact area of nerve endings and fine touch receptors. Similar to men, removing this has the effect of reducing sexual sensation, but contrary to popular believe, it does not remove all pleasure (More on that in a moment). The effect sexually appears similar to what happens with males.

So let’s make a quick comparison.

Male Type I

• It removes highly erogenous tissue.
• It removes the most sensitive part of the genitalia.
• It reduces sexual sensation.
• It removes fine most tough receptors.
• It removes the area with the most concentrated area of nerve endings.

Female Type I and II

• It remove highly erogenous tissue.
• It removes the most sensitive part of the genitalia.
• It reduces sexual sensation.
• It removes fine most tough receptors.
• It removes the area with the most concentrated area of nerve endings.

Clearly, they are very much comparable and these are just the most common forms of MGM and FGM. I will concede that comparing the worst form of FGM is hard to compare to male circumcision (Type I MGM). Though I would argue on some level, they still are.

With that being said, I think I have made my point here. However, I can’t maintain this claim, unless I address the objections that many, who are reading this post may be screaming at their monitors at this point. So let’s go over the reasons people may still give me to object and then address each one.

• FGM removes all pleasure and is like castration.
• FGM was invented to remove the women pleasure.
• FGM has the women sewn up and must be cut open to have sex, and sometimes they are sewn back up, and this is repeated each time she has sex.
• MGM (Circumcision) has health benefits FGM does not.
• MGM cannot be compared to FGM because it is done to girls in non sterile huts with glass, rocks or any other object that can be found.

Let’s start with the claim, FGM removes all pleasure and is like castration.

This is something you will usually only hear in the Weston world. However, this claim is untrue and has even been studied.

In one, study titled, “Pleasure and orgasm in women with Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C).” It had been shown that there was little to no difference between women who had undergone FGM and women who had.

If you don’t want to read the scientific paper above, as that can be complicated for some, then click here for a simplification of the findings.

With that said, clearly we can see; the only thing like castration is, well castration. Which can happen during a normal circumcision surgery on males and males only.

Next Claim is FGM was invented to remove the women pleasure.

No one actually knows why, or how it started. However, even if we grant this, we could argue the same about MGM, from castration, to circumcision. We do know in the US that one reason for circumcision gaining a foothold was due to the idea that it would reduce the pleasure men, and boys feel.

Nonetheless, this is an irrelevant point, because it does not say if MGM and MGM cannot be compared. Or that it does or does not have such an effect, or cannot be compared to the effects on males.

This next claim that I want to address, is very common.
FGM has the women sewn up and must be cut open to have sex, and sometimes they are sewn back up, and this is repeated each time she has sex.

This is called infibulation and is an extremely rare form of FGM. Again, it should be noted that this is argument is an attempt to compare the rarest and one of the worst types of FGM with a more common and less severe form of MGM. Again, this is unfair to do.

If, however, you read type IIII of the MGM you will notice something. There is a male equivalent listed when it says, “Cutting and suturing of the prepuce over the glans (infibulation)” Although, I don’t know of any tribe, or any place on Earth that still does this with boys or men, other then some men who voluntarily do it to them self as a form of body modification. This was done to men and boys.

In the Victorian era, Both in the US and UK male infibulation was practiced almost as much as circumcision had been. And if you had been born in Ancient Rome, not only was it forced on boys, but if you could do it to yourself, it was considered a sign of masculinity.

Now, despite it no longer being forced on men boys (At least as far as I know). There still is a male equivalent to compare it to.

Now on to the next excuse. It is MGM (Circumcision) has health benefits FGM does not.

The first thing that must be addressed is if there are any actual benefits, so is there any truth to there being benefits? With the probability of Urinary Tract Infections (UTI) which can be treated with antibiotics (And usually, there are 8 infections due to circumcision for every 1 UTI it may prevent) The answer seems most likely there are no benefits at all. At lest in western countries.

By now someone is going to bring up how the Amrican Pedatric Asosation (AAP) said, the benefits out way the risks. Yes, it is true, they did say this. They also said they did not even know what the risks are. It makes you wonder how they then could say the benefits out weigh the risks, when they do not know what the risks are.

With that being said, the AAP was widely and heavily criticized around the world by other pediatric organizations and by doctors for this. Criticized for many different reasons, such as using faulty studies. Like the African, AIDs study and then applying it to the US. They were criticized far more so for their Cultural Bias. It was so bad, that there even were critiques of the AAP own documents within the AAPs own peer review journal about their Cultural Bias.

Simply put, the AAPs views are in opposition to almost all other pediatric organizations around the world who came to a completely different conclusion. Especially those in western countries.

I was thinking of going over each claim for the supposed benefits here, but this post is already are longer than I had intended. So I will just provide a link to a site that goes over the claims.  Also feel free to read this on the AAPs documents, The AAP report on circumcision: Bad science + bad ethics = bad medicine.

The idea, however, that, there are no benefits for FGM, but there are for MGM stems mainly from cultural sexism. Where people are looking for reasons to justify mutilating and disfiguring a boys penis, while protecting girls.

It should be noted that because it is both illegal and taboo to do any helpful and trustworthy studies on FGM that would show benefits, few will try to show how it would be good for girls and women. So, no one can claim that there are no benefits because we do not really know do to the lack of information.

However, the male and female structures develop while in the womb from the same parts. So there would be a good reason to believe that, what affects one gender, could affect the other gender much in the same way, or at least a similar way.

We do know of some studies that report benefits of FGM. For example, its claimed that circumcising boys could reduce their chance getting AIDS. Well, there are also studies that say the same about FGM such as Stallings RY, Karugendo E. Female circumcision and HIV infection in Tanzania: for better or for worse? Third International AIDS Society Conference on HIV Pathogenesis and Treatment. Rio de Janeiro, 25-27 July 2005
However, just like with MGM, such studies are highly criticized often for being flawed. However, people are quick to accept the benefits of MGM as being true, while completely ignoring the same claimed benefits for FGM.

One last thing here. There will be people who will argue that is that MGM cannot be compared to FGM because it is done to girls in non sterile huts with glass, rocks or any other object that can be found. And this is true and completely horrible.

This, however, is to ignore that it is also done in clinics that specialize in FGM, just like its done to boys. It should be noted that just as FGM is done to girls and women in unsanitary conditions. The same people (well tribe at lest) cutting girls in this way is being done to boys, usually in the very same tribes. This is one reason why there have been a lot of boys who died in 2015 in Africa alone. Again, here we see it is comparable. Not exactly by the same numbers, but it does happen to both.

Now, with all that I have said in this overly long post. I think I have adequately demonstrated my point that both MGM and FGM are indeed comparable on so many levels. This is not to say that, there are areas where they cannot be compared. Indeed, I believe there are some areas where they can’t. Like how one thing may affect one gender more than the other, yet both still are affected. However, when it comes to the claim that FGM cannot be compared, I believe I have shown that it can within the context of the areas of the claim that it cannot be.

I do not want people to think I am downplaying what women and girls go through and live with. That is not my intention. What I do want to show is that they are very much comparable and raise MGM up to the level of FGM in the hopes that people who make they claim they cannot be, will stop and put as much effort into the fight ageist MGM as they do with FGM and end the sexism.