taxman Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 so a woman can CHOOSEto wear the burka butCANT CHOOSEto be mutilated? Any evidence for girls choosing to be mutilated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 Happy slapping killers They'll end up doing another 18 months before continuing with their mayhem because they are only young boys and didn't mean to kill the guy. Had they been White boys they would have been condemned as racist murderers never to see the light of day again. Did they circumcise the victim? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritPat Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 Did they circumcise the victim? Being a muslim the victim was almost certainly circumcised pre-assault. Had they circumcised him would you have considered that an aggravating or mitigating feature? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 Being a muslim the victim was almost certainly circumcised pre-assault. Had they circumcised him would you have considered that an aggravating or mitigating feature? It would no doubt have aggravated it, but I'm still not sure why you introduced 'white boys' to the discussion. No doubt gamezone07 will be along shortly to chastise you for gratuitously playing the race card Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritPat Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 It would no doubt have aggravated it, but I'm still not sure why you introduced 'white boys' to the discussion. No doubt gamezone07 will be along shortly to chastise for you gratuitously playing the race card Because I answered a post making the point that different views on the law are taken when dealing with different communities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boyfriday Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 Because I answered a post making the point that different views on the law are taken when dealing with different communities. The different communities may have a different view of the law, but the law doesn't take a different view of the communities. By it's very nature female circumcision will be a difficult thing to prosecute, it's often carried out abroad, and it's not something these people will be shouting about afterwards. I guess the only realistic opportunity for apprehending those responsible is when a girl attends a British doctor or hospital for an unrelated matter and is examined, questions can then be asked, but it may well be years after the event, and no doubt the woman will have been coached to say little or nothing. It's one of those difficult issues, clearly the police cannot go on raids to intimately examine girls returning from countries where these procedures are carried out, and whilst ever there exists a conspiracy of silence it makes the prospects of bringing a successful prosecution very low. However I would agree that whenever that evidence is available, the perpetrators are brought in front of a court, it's a shame it can't be a court of feminists brandishing blunt pinking shears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patty1142 Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 http://www.noharmm.org/trivial.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patty1142 Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 sorry found an ace link but keeps getting deleted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoddyHolder Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 I hope not. It has nothing to do with religion before anyone starts It is an awful form of abuse which needs to be stopped. I can't help but think the scarring this must have on the poor girls in life that it is done too Is there a law that protets girls from having this done in the UK? Its nothing to do with religion ?I would lay money that the majority if not all the victims are muslim..can you explain that fact then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted July 27, 2010 Share Posted July 27, 2010 The term ‘circumcision’ when applied to this mutilating and debilitating practice is a complete misnomer as far as I’m concerned, it goes far beyond that and is more akin to castration. Referring to it as ‘circumcision’ (even Type I bears no comparison to male circumcision) is part of the problem as it lends it an undeserving air of wider social acceptance and masks the grim reality. It sickens me that because the disfiguring results of this practice are hidden from public view and associated with ethnicity, the relevant authorities seem to have adopted a laissez-faire attitude as they're terrified of offending cultural sensibilities. Is it not time that we all shed that collective post-colonial guilt and actually tackled this head on? It is as Purdy says, the worst possible form of child abuse which leaves women with lifelong physical and emotional scars and strips them of the very essence of themselves. The creation of castrati and footbinding are no longer tolerated so why should this be? Cultural relativism should never be at the expense of the human rights of anyone, especially not children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.