More for y'all to dicker over

[elfs]

In case anyone wants to get serious, here is the text of Georgia's HB 1477.

(1) Such person circumcises, excises, or infibulates, in whole or in part, the labia majora, labia minora, or clitoris of a female;

(2) Such person is a parent, guardian, or has immediate custody or control of a female child under 18 years of age and causes or permits the circumcision, excision, or infibulation, in whole or in part, of the labia majora, labia minora, or clitoris of the child; or

(3) Such person removes or causes or permits removal of a female child under 18 years of age from this state, for the purpose of circumcising, excising, or infibulating, in whole or in part, the labia majora, labia minora, or clitoris of the child.

I think fallenpegasus is right. It never occurred to the sponsors that an adult would want such a thing done to him or herself. When told that some might, one said he'd never heard of it but "I don't think that's something people ought to be doing to themselves."

Comments

I want to see that EXACT language about circumcision

[shunra.livejournal.com]

...and then have the compromise be a clause about it being ok for an adult to have any of these procedures done by an adult, at the age of majority (21, isn't it?)

Body art is fine (for people who've reached their adult size; younger than that and the risk of being pressured into it outweighs the grief of waiting for it).

And it *can* wait.

Jews practice genital mutilation (unanesthetized) on every 8-day old male infant. And *this* practice has GOT to be stopped.

Re: I want to see that EXACT language about circumcision

[shadowfey.livejournal.com]

Actually, circumcision is these days commonly done in hospitals, on infants of most religions in the United States.

It's not a Jewish thing only, or even predominantly.

Re: I want to see that EXACT language about circumcision

[shunra.livejournal.com]

The ***unanesthetized*** ritual variety is the one that *truly* bugs me. And that is entirely in the province of Jewish practice.

I don't mind anesthetized ones nearly as much (although I think it does count as genital mutilation inflicted on an infant).

Re: I want to see that EXACT language about circumcision

[shadowfey.livejournal.com]

Traditionally, a small amount of wine is given to the infant before the circumcision is done. I haven't attended any, but part of the purpose of this part of the ritual was anesthetic in nature; Jewish custom prohibits anything which might be deemed 'unnecessary pain'.

It's for that reason that different kinds of beasts are not legally permitted to be harnessed together, because it would create a strain and hardship on one of the animals if not both (which has been taken as supporting evidence in forms of Christianity against mixed race or religion marriages), and for that reason that animals are not permitted to be muzzled during threshing or other purposes (since that would be deemed to be torturous to the animal, to see and smell food and not be able to eat during its work).

While I'm not going to go into my own views on circumcision here, I will note that there is anesthetic given in the form of the wine.

Re: I want to see that EXACT language about circumcision

[shunra.livejournal.com]

Wine as an anesthetic?

Are you trying to make some sort of joke?

I am painfully familiar with the traditions of Judaism. Including the ruse of wine-before-cutting-off-the-foreskin. Rabbis have, in my hearing, told me that "it doesn't hurt the kid a bit". On other occasions, they have said that "it's as bad as the pain of circumcision" which they used to describe as a willing sacrifice.

Orthodox Judaism is a pox on the face of the earth. Let's not even START talking about the treatment of animals (kosher slaughter of cattle is probably the cruelest thing done wholesale).

You may have some other ideas about Judaism, but if you read about the practice (or know it first hand) you'd be hard pressed to maintain it simultaneously with any kind of compassion towards animals. Or humans.

Re: I want to see that EXACT language about circumcision

[http://users.livejournal.com/dominic-m-/]

Woah woah. No need for sarcasm people.this is going fine as a debate,quite heated but entertaining. Lets just agree that circumcision is painfull and barbaric yet continues to happen. Simple enough?

Re: I want to see that EXACT language about circumcision

[shunra.livejournal.com]

anyone who uses "a drop of wine on a pacifier" as equivalent to anesthetic has got to have some other agenda - not "discussion of situation".

barbaric. painful. - yeah. nonconsensual (at 8 days old) - yeah. defensible? no way.

Re: I want to see that EXACT language about circumcision

[http://users.livejournal.com/dominic-m-/]

I agree totally. However this country is BASED on people following their own beliefs because this country supposedly offers religios freedom. Now unless you want someone questioning or worse yet banning your religious beliefs/acts I recommend you are as adament as I am in fighting people who would regulate OUR freedoms that are ours to have.

Re: I want to see that EXACT language about circumcision

[shunra.livejournal.com]

I'd put the difference at "age of consent". 8 days old is simply too far below to make it acceptable to me.

Parents (in this country and elsewhere) assume the ownership of their children's bodies, and too often abuse this - and if genital mutilation is outlawed across the board (regardless of age) for one gender and not even discouraged (when inflicted upon minors) for another, I cry foul.

(Yeah, I'm a survivor of pretty extreme Jewish abuse.)

Re: I want to see that EXACT language about circumcision

[ysabel.livejournal.com]

American hospitals commonly don't bother to anaethesize the infant before circumcising him.

Not that I really think that anaesthesia makes it any better.

Re: I want to see that EXACT language about circumcision

[shunra.livejournal.com]

My, uh, reasonably extensive comparative study shows that many (not all, though) circumcized men enjoy sex considerably less than untampered ones.

Not all. The difference is not enough to make a man uninvolved with sex (the main organ of pleasure is stored between the ears, as far as I can see) - but the difference *is* visible, and noticeable, from close up.

In my opinion, a free man in a free society, should get to decide whether or not to forego that dimension of pleasure.

Re: I want to see that EXACT language about circumcision

[ysabel.livejournal.com]

I agree. I'm all for consensual bodymods, but circumcision as it is practiced in this country (secularly and widely, not just religiously) is mutilation.

It may be less severe than infibulation or clitoridectomy, but that doesn't make it okay in my book.

Re: I want to see that EXACT language about circumcision

[http://users.livejournal.com/dominic-m-/]

I have mixed feelings on circumcision. Yea its a little barbaric. But to tell the truth the baby doesent remember it(at least I sure the hell dont). I fell circumcision should be left in the hand of the parents. I DEFINATLY dont approve of the aforementioned acts to the female genitals. They just arent fair to the person later in life. Sure if a guy doesent like his circumcision he only lost a little skin. But infibulation and clitoridectomy can quite adversley affect the person later in their life. I say wait till their 18 and if they are crazy enough to get it done then by all means get it done. But I dont approve on limits on anyone "of age".

Re: I want to see that EXACT language about circumcision

[fallenpegasus]

"Just lost a little skin".

Feel the skin on your lower lip, on the inside, where it's touching your teeth.

That's what the skin of the glans of the penis is *supposed* to be like.

"Just lost a little skin".

Re: I want to see that EXACT language about circumcision

[http://users.livejournal.com/dominic-m-/]

Hahahahaha.Dude whats with the scathing responses. Ok im a guy plain and simple.and this may be to much info but yea im circumcised and you know what.I dont see that much if ANY harm in it besides a baby thats in a decent amount of pain for a meager amount of time and wont even remeber it. I cant say circumcision is preffered by all guys. But if we outlaw it and give guys the option to go choppy choppy at 18 nobody will ever get it done. Some are happy that they are cirumcised and are even more happy knowing they dont remember this event due to their age when it was done. Circumcision should be left in the hands of parents. I dont approve of most other things done with the genitals but I have no right to tell people what they can and cannot do.same with everyone else,nobody has the right to control someone else because they think that person is doing something wrong. Serioussly now what determines somethings "wrongness", leave that in the hands of the parents or their gods if they so believe. Im a total non believer in anything so you cant call me biased. This ban is unfair to public not only because it limits parents but even more so it limits consenting adults ability to choose what THEY do with THEIR bodys. If they changed this law to exclude consenting adults I might be less inclined to fights this bill but they arent. to finish they have NO right to say what people do because of their religious beliefs or otherwise.