Why is female circumcision referred to as mutilation but male circumcision isn't?

why is female circumcision referred to as mutilation but male circumcision isn't?

starts with a j

the nose knows

I have a dumb question and I honestly don't know the answer..is fgm called for in a religious book? I know circumcision is.
Doesn't make either one right, just wondering if Islam instructs to perform female gen mutilation.

Ohh goy, there is so much you don't know about the various scriptures that Jews and Muslims follow, weather it be from Imam or Rabbinical law. Doesn't really matter if it's in scripture or not. If a religious authority states something and has an argument to back it up according to their laws and customs then its not heretical to them.

I understand that. I was asking a legitimate question, as I have never read the Quran.
I was asking if that was a written instruction, or just a practice.
My beliefs or non-beliefs are not part of my question.
I will research.

Religion, you literal retard

Both are done for religious reasons tho

Google was my friend. I thought OP was trying to start a conversation/discussion. I learn a lot on these boards.

Because male circumcision just makes your penis not look gross.

>be uncut
>lost sensitivity from jacking it 5 times a day since puberty started

J U S T

because male circumcision is generally less brutal. still a pointless maiming but just a removal of a skin ring. the term female circumcision really glosses over just how fucking HORRIFIC of a procedure it is. they remove the entire clit (making it IMPOSSIBLE TO ORGASM) and the labia which help to keep it clean. so basically you're just left with a bald hole with SEVERE nerve damage like a burn victim.

Female circumcision is almost the equivalent of cutting your whole dick off. They remove the entire clit and not just the skin around it. They're both a form of mutilation, though.

>just a removal of a skin ring

....that just happens to contain a large number of nerve endings

because i look like james deen and its awesome

>inb4 haters, im not supporting it, or saying you should go get it done

>mfw cut fags run circles around me so desperately doing mental gymnastics to justify their parents being stupid enough to cut off their own childs foreskin

literally jews

>people say cuts need to use lube
>never used lube in my life
>forced laugh "haha i get u man"

American males don't want to think there's something wrong with their penis.

i'd encourage you to read this. part of what my liberal college forced me to read in intro to africa.

The WHO report identifies four types of FGM. Some of them don't even remove any tissue but are still illegal.

fgm is way worse for a womans body than male circumcision (which may actually be beneficial)

Because a cut dick, while slightly damaged and less sensistive can still get the job done. Cut men can still cum, sex still feels good despite the loses making it less so.

Female circumcision is removal of the entire clit. retarded anatomy or not the clit is needed to derive pleasure from sex in women.

This makes it pretty damn severe compared to male circumcision. I mean it's still mutilation and is pointless but the penis is still fully functional and thus it's not on par with female circumcision

Beyond that, massive Abrahamic denial.

>male circumcision may be beneficial
There have been studies saying that it might have a partial protective effect against HIV for men who have sex with women, but it's only considered a public health measure as such in areas were HIV is literally in huge parts of the population and presumably heterosexual males are at a high risk. Even then it's only done on consenting adults.

The equivalent would be to cut off a dudes entire glans.

Which is basically a botched circumcision which is taken very seriously, and obviously incredibly illegal if done on purpose. Even in those backwards shitholes.

Because the (((matriarchy))) says so

i do not understand why this thread continued beyond this point

Female circumcision is done to remove the sensitive part of the vagina. The equivalent thing would be cutting off about 2/3 of your penis. It isn't just a little snip at the end, FemCirc is brutal.

Some forms of FGM remove the clitoral hood, which is analogous to the male foreskin but isn't as nerve-dense AFAIK.

ITT: Burgers trying to defend their jew dicks

still counts as a health benefit, also makes your dick cleaner and more presentable to the ladies. circumcision lowers the risk of STD's that aren't HIV/AIDS as well, such as genital herpes/HPV, it's not a huge percentage difference, but it's enough.
also, im kinda glad that my parents did it while my junk was little and pre-pubescent (like a week old) and the skin just kinda shrivels up and healed perfectly.

r u me?

It's because the virus doesn't remain on as much of the skin, and dickcheese can't accumulate.

Keeping your pubic hair and not trimming your nosehairs hold similar effects as far as keeping you warm and preventing incubation of viruses.

Because male circumcision is practically a cultural norm in USA.
And no savage will admit of him being a savage.

>dickcheese can't accumulate
fucking gross

The thing is that most STDs can be prevented 99.9% of the time by using condoms and having safe sex. What's more, saying that circumcised males are less likely to get HIV gives the impression that they're somehow partially immune and thus might lead to some men not practicing safe sex.

Because it's a double standard. Unless if more people talk about it, it's not going to change.

Jesus fucking Christ how is the shit in the bottom left corner legal?