Frogtown, USA–I never really thought about the topic of circumcision much, especially in relation to change or making change within–I think my fate is sealed, was sealed before my brain could function enough to say perhaps “no, sounds painful”.
Maybe once in high school though I thought about it being a private matter. The idea of male circumcision and what it meant. I still don’t understand much about it, however many males in America are circumcised. I think the act could be because of religion or because of hygiene, it could be.
You see, I won’t research that. I don’t care if it is because of “religion” or “hygiene”, they why doesn’t matter.
The matter at hand is that male “genital mutilations” or “circumcisions” happen and there are limited media reports of them in comparison to female “genital mutilation” stories. I find it odd that a prevalent practice performed on one gender (male) is considered normal while a similar practice performed on another gender (female) is considered a news worthy, and possible criminal charge. And, as a self-identified male, I find this a bit unfair. (But that doesn’t fit into the Narrative.)
I do not believe female “genital mutilation” or “circumcisions” should make the news if, at the same time, a majority of male “genital mutilations” or “circumcisions” do not make the news in an equal capacity.
And yet, why is there little concern that “most adult men are circumcised“. Does this not concern the media or the activists that wish to protect human rights. Also, why is male “circumcision” not considered ubiquitously as male “genital mutilation”?
Recent news stories focused on female “genital mutilation” prompted me to delve back into the topic of “circumcision” in males, that, and the experience of having a baby boy.
As a parent I have to decided the fate of my child’s physical dimensions. There is no cry from protesters or the pundits when it comes to this private and personal decision at the hospital, not view as damage or irreversible harm but rather as an “option” to think about before birth.
So, think about this, as from above most American males are “circumcised”, or have experience “genital mutilation”. In recent years, however, male circumcisions in America are on the decline. Why is this? Perhaps because male circumcision is actually male “genital mutilation”, period, and the mainstream media doesn’t care.
They play with terminology when it works with their ideology, but cutting flesh from one person is the same as cutting from another, no matter race, creed, or gender.
In conclusion, the decision to “circumcise” or to “mutilate” not is a highly personal decision, and a final one. Accordingly, I believe that not only do we need to reconsider how we change our bodies but how we change the bodies of the future.
Moreover, I believe we need to understand and keep meanings and definitions in relation to words and genders equal, especially within news media language and context; we observe male “circumcisions” or “mutilations” as somehow not as equally alarming as female genital mutilation. Perhaps the lack of concern shown to one gender over another by mainstream news is the actual shocking news story that everyone wants but no one wants to hear.
As a self-identified male, I haven’t heard of any bills being made to save our (fore)skins, pun intended, in relation to “circumcisions” or actual male “genital mutilation”. Alike, I think all “genital mutilation”, in relation to all genders, is mutilation, destruction, and potentially a crime which disfigures the human body. Reconsider this when the idea arises in local reports or national breaking news.
Language is the key to this matter. You call something “circumcision” and then you call something “genital mutilation”, on the grounds of gender, and you assume a bias in the language you use to describe an action. Which is which?
That is the crux of this biscuit, the matter at hand. If we use the somewhat necessary innocuous and accepted language to describe an horrendous act, is that act then acceptable, and should that act be called something different depending on who it is done to? Because that happens now, today, on the topic put forth above.
I am no advocate, activist, or professional on the topic “genital mutilation”. I am merely stating concern over the potential bias within the media coverage of one agenda over another, one gender over another, through language and terminology.
These are my views. I am open to free discussion and open dialogue on the topic of circumcision/genital mutilation, please comment as necessary. Thank you for reading. No hate please, I try to stay positive.