Many of the girls at risk of FGM are under the age of 5, the UN says. Around 230 million women and girls around the world are survivors of the practice.

Many of the girls at risk of FGM are under the age of 5, the UN says. Around 230 million women and girls around the world are survivors of the practice.

  • HazardousBanjo@lemmy.worldEnglish
    2316·
    2 days ago

    Whataboutism.

    Both are bad and should be illegal. However FGM is by far typically more brutal, invasive, unsanitary and deadly.

    • amniotic druid@lemmy.worldEnglish
      193·
      2 days ago

      It’s not “whatabout” it’s “this too.” That circumcision isn’t brutal, invasive, unsanitary, and deadly just shows how fucked things get when genital mutilation is normalized

    • poopkins@lemmy.worldEnglish
      77·
      23 hours ago

      What are you suggesting? That female genial mutilation be made less brutal, less invasive, less unsanitary or less lethal?

      The point is that we should ban any kind of mutilation.

        • poopkins@lemmy.worldEnglish
          45·
          19 hours ago

          You’ve claimed we should ignore other forms of mutilation because “whataboutism.” I think it’s reasonable to argue that any kind of mutilation should be prohibited, instead of carving out exceptions. By that logic, my question remains: do you disagree, or should we instead just try to make female genital mutilation less bad?

          • HazardousBanjo@lemmy.worldEnglish
            43·
            18 hours ago

            You’ve claimed we should ignore other forms of mutilation because “whataboutism.”

            Wrong, bitch.

            I told that other user that they were doing a whataboutism… because they were fucking doing a whataboutism. They were effectively delegitimizing FGM because “well what about MGM???”.

            Just because there’s an effort and focus on FGM doesn’t mean there is none for MGM. Yet that user was suggesting otherwise.

            Its the same incel logic that states the existence of feminism and women’s empowerment takes away from and harms men. It doesn’t.

            I think it’s reasonable to argue that any kind of mutilation should be prohibited,

            Except that isn’t what that user was saying. It wasn’t “and we should also combat MGM”. It was “OH YEAH? WELL WHAT ABOUT MGM HUH?!?! WHY ARENT YOU FOCUSING ON THAT RIGHT NOW?!?!”

            instead of carving out exceptions. By that logic, my question remains: do you disagree, or should we instead just try to make female genital mutilation less bad?

            No, your question is still suprememly fucking stupid and your interpretation is exceptionally moronic.

            FGM and MGM should both be banned, and any suggestion that my stance was otherwise is you yourself being incredibly dense.

            • poopkins@lemmy.worldEnglish
              32·
              17 hours ago

              [email protected] wrote:

              Wrong, bitch.

              You seem terribly upset, but there’s no need for name-calling. Nobody is “delegitimizing” anything here except what you are making of others inputs to the discourse.

              For what it’s worth, we both agree mutilation is wrong and should be prohibited, so there’s really no reason to be so angry and childish in the first place.

          • HazardousBanjo@lemmy.worldEnglish
            23·
            18 hours ago

            Here’s a bonus since you can’t seem to get simple facta through your skull.

            FGM is estimated to cause around 44.3k deaths of young girls annually

            https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10432559/

            On the other hand:

            Severe to catastrophic complications, including death, are so rare that they are reported only as individual case reports.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision?wprov=sfla1

            Which again, goes back to my fucking point that you’re somehow too dense to understand.

            The reason there’s a greater concern over FGM, is because it actually has significantly higher rates of adverse effects, including death

            • poopkins@lemmy.worldEnglish
              32·
              17 hours ago

              You have for some reason decided that I disagree with you, but I’ve not. I’ve only tried to point out the escape hatch for proponents of mutilation to argue for, and why the comment that you originally replied to is not “whataboutism.”