tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-548248685729133691.post7425652857856725640..comments2024-01-17T13:16:10.378-08:00Comments on Joseph4GI: Self-Serving FGM Myths That PersistJosephhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14190648498809795551noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-548248685729133691.post-14578124996154347242018-04-09T11:24:13.137-07:002018-04-09T11:24:13.137-07:00Hi, Joseph,
Do you have a source for the "20...Hi, Joseph,<br /><br />Do you have a source for the "20,000" nerves claim? I've seen MGM supporters try to discredit intactivists who cite this figure. <br /><br />Terrific article, thanks for your efforts. josh mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04848655097338733861noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-548248685729133691.post-6289373817194920872017-09-06T09:56:37.968-07:002017-09-06T09:56:37.968-07:00Cees,
Intactivism is the fight for genital integr...Cees,<br /><br />Intactivism is the fight for genital integrity, self-autonomy and choice for healthy, non-consenting individuals.<br /><br />True intactivists recognize that coercion cannot be "voluntary." This is the problem with the "mass circumcision campaigns" in Africa being carried out by American organizations. They call it "Voluntary Male Medical Circumcision" (VMMC) but then target underage children, or try to coerce parents into "volunteering" for their children.<br /><br />I'm not sure where you are getting this idea about Brian D. Earp, that he is some sort of "strategist trying to reduce the age of informed consent down to 15 or 12," but this sounds completely out of character.<br /><br />I know of the case in Chicago, and I have read the paper you reference, and I'm afraid none of this supports your accusation that Brian D. Earp is trying to attempt some kind of "trick."<br /><br />An adult man or woman choosing to undergo surgery for cosmetic reasons has never been an ethical problem for most, if not all intactivists.<br /><br />There are *some* intactivists who are extremists and who believe circumcisions should not be ever be carried out, even if an adult person requests it, but they are few and far between, and most level-headed intactivists break with such extremists.<br /><br />We have always argued that a person should be able to choose what he or she wants for him or herself, and we have always recognized that children are too young to make this decision. Additionally we speak out against coercion and feeding men and parents deliberate misinformation to get them to agree to circumcision for their children.<br /><br />As far as I am aware, Brian D. Earp opposes the forced genital cutting of healthy, non-consenting individuals of any age or sex, and it would be unlike him to argue that a child of 12 or 15 should be considered capable of making an informed decision about this.<br /><br />If, as you say, he is trying to argue that a "self determined child under 18" should be considered capable of agreeing to circumcision, I'm ready to break with him, as he would be no better than those pushing so-called "VMMC" in Africa.<br /><br />I am with you; only an adult person over the age of 18 should be asked for his or her consent. And even still, coercion, either by society or religion is not "voluntary" or "consent."<br /><br />Softening FGM standards to allow a "pinprick" or a "ritual nick" would only lead to the eventual allowing of all other forms of FGM.<br /><br />I am sure that Brian D. Earp opposes both lowering the age of consent and allowing mild forms of FGM, and is trying his best to warn of the consequences with his papers.<br /><br />There must be some confusion.<br /><br />Thank you for reading my blog and for voicing your concerns.<br /><br />Joseph4GIJosephhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14190648498809795551noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-548248685729133691.post-73253380791985659412017-09-04T18:36:59.361-07:002017-09-04T18:36:59.361-07:00Thank you very much, Joseph, for your answers.
_...Thank you very much, Joseph, for your answers. <br /><br />__ <br /><br />The challenge for intactivism <br /><br />Intactivism is infiltrated by strategists, who want to reduce the age of "informed consent" down to 15 or 12 years (or younger). <br /><br />The high pressure of conformity, for instance, in the Xhosa tribe, but also among many Muslims for example in Turkey, Iraq, Indonesia, will not allow the (f. e. 12 or 15 years old) boy or the Sunni-Shafiite girl, or Shia-Dawoodi-Bohra girl, to say no to circumcision (MGM or FGM). <br /><br />Brian D. Earp, professionally active as a kind of philosopher and medical ethicist, obviously works on a change in public awareness as well as the subsequent amendment to criminal law. His goal seems to be (see case Jumana Nagarwala), to implement the so-called "mild sunna" resp. Khatna (FGM type I or IV) into the Law (in the US, in GB, etc.), if the surgery is a desire of the "Gillick competent" child. <br /><br />His trick is the use of that so-called Gillick competence. The "gillick-competent" child, 15 or 12 years old or perhaps even younger, can supposedly agree in any medical surgery (even without the parents' knowledge), can (consequently) consent to the FGM or MGM. And a "voluntary" FGM or circumcision is, unfortunately, no longer an ethical problem for Brian Earp. This idea must be stopped. Everyone has a right to reach her or his 18th birthday with intact genitalia - and FGM is FGM, be it unvoluntary or "voluntary". <br /><br />__ <br /><br />Brian D. Earp, Rebecca Steinfeld (Gender and Genital Cutting: A New Paradigm), April 2017 <br /><br />Fully informed, Gillick-competent[vi] individuals (male, female, or intersex) should be allowed to choose NGC for themselves, if they wish, under conditions of valid consent." (...) <br /><br />[vi] Gillick-competence refers to an ability to give valid consent prior to an age of legal majority <br /><br />http://euromind.global/en/brian-d-earp-and-rebecca-steinfeld/ <br /><br />_ <br /><br />Children (child is a human being under 18 years of age) must be absolutely protected by us adults before any medically unnecessary surgery. <br /><br />Earp talks about the self-determined child, the child with his own opinion, etc., <br />but the most important thing is missing in his texts: <br />the girl or boy must be (at least) 18 years old. <br />Earp always says "children", and this is not 18, but younger. <br /><br />Any softening of the FGM standards should be prevented, also a "de minimis" FGM (FGM type Ia, or FGM type IV as ritual nick, pinprick etc.) must not be allowed. <br /><br />So, in short, I emphasize the value of the age limit 18 years. <br /><br />I would like to wish Joseph4GI a lot of success in the future as well. <br /><br />Best regards, <br />Cees van der Duin <br /> <br /> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-548248685729133691.post-51037265511139708732017-09-04T18:01:55.756-07:002017-09-04T18:01:55.756-07:00I have read Brian D. Earp's paper. In it he su...I have read Brian D. Earp's paper. In it he suggests that "children should be free to grow up with their genitals intact—no nicks, cuts, or removal of tissue." Not at all what you claim in your comment.<br /><br />The paper is excellent and better articulates what I've stated all along, that making "pain," "severity" and "medical benefits" the basis of the argument for or in favor of genital cutting is going to backfire.<br /><br />Intactivists need to stick to the crux of our argument which has been, is and always will be choice, self-autonomy and individual human rights.Josephhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14190648498809795551noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-548248685729133691.post-38125686912300411952017-09-04T17:11:29.013-07:002017-09-04T17:11:29.013-07:00Look, I'm not sure about you, but as for me, m...Look, I'm not sure about you, but as for me, myself, I oppose the forced genital cutting of either sex.<br /><br />I believe if a person wants to get circumcised, given the facts, it is his or her right to do so, of course, when that person is of age and is fully informed.<br /><br />What I have a problem with is forcibly taking a person and forcibly cutting off part of their genitals against their express wishes.<br /><br />Coercion is not consent either.<br /><br />I believe the first step in ending forced circumcision, as well as the non-therapeutic circumcision of any sex, is holding doctors responsible.<br /><br />Under any other circumstance, reaping profit from performing non-medical surgery on a healthy, non-consenting individual already constitutes medical fraud.<br /><br />Ideally, men or women of age who want non-therapeutic cosmetic genital surgery should have this done by a plastic surgeon who specializes in this, and not a medical doctor who is supposed to be practicing medicine.<br /><br />Perhaps you think all genital cutting is mutilation in all cases, and men and women shouldn't even have the option for genital cosmetic surgery, but, in my opinion, this argument is beyond the scope of my blog, which focuses on forced, non-therapeutic surgery in healthy, non-consenting minors.<br /><br />I believe whatever alterations a person wants for their body is their business.<br /><br />"My body, my choice."<br /><br />This should apply to both sexes.<br /><br />I read Brian Earp when I can, and I'm sure there must be a misunderstanding, as it doesn't sound like him to suggest children be asked about "voluntary circumcision." He would argue the opposite; that coercion is not "voluntary."<br /><br />I shall read the paper you reference.Josephhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14190648498809795551noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-548248685729133691.post-63324666953157117422017-09-04T11:00:27.858-07:002017-09-04T11:00:27.858-07:00Dear Joseph,
it is always worth reading joseph4gi...Dear Joseph, <br />it is always worth reading joseph4gi, <br /><br />our fight is not about <br />the forced circumcision of males, <br />but about a world-wide ban of the <br />the non-therapeutic circumcision of males. <br /><br />Intactivists are not fighting against <br />forced circumcision of females, <br />but against <br />FGM - i. e. Female genital Mutilation (see the WHO classification: FGM type I, II, III IV). <br /><br />Please think about <br />"Ngaitana – I will circumcise myself" = FGM. <br /><br />Think about the <br />Ndiyindoda! I`m a man!, yelled f. e. by the Xhosa boy Nelson Mandela. <br /><br />Let us stop <br />non-therapeutic circumcision of girls or boys under the age of 18 years. <br /><br />Joseph, please say NO <br />to the lates suggestion of Brian D. Earp (Does Female Genital Mutilation Have Health Benefits? The Problem with Medicalizing Morality), <br />who wants children (child = human being below 18 years of age) be asked about a "voluntary" circumcision. <br /><br />"A girl or boy below 18 years of age is not able to consent in her FGM / his MGM. <br /><br />Best regards, <br />Cees van der Duin <br /><br />__ <br />__ <br /><br />Kindeswunsch auf Beschnittenwerden auch für Mädchen bald Gesetz? <br /><br />Britischer Medizinethiker fordert das verstaatlichte Befragen des männlichen oder weiblichen Kindes nach dessen baldiger Genitalverstümmelung (MGM oder FGM) <br /><br />https://schariagegner.wordpress.com/2017/08/28/minderjaehrige-maedchen-oder-jungen-koennen-ihrer-beschneidung-nicht-rechtswirksam-zustimmen-weil-sie-nicht-einwilligungsfaehig-sind/ <br /> <br /> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com