Police fear British girls at risk of genital mutilation

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by armchair_jihad, Oct 23, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. celebrated as a sign of multicultural Britain

  2. stopped and the parents deported after a good shoeing

  3. encouraged as a way of understanding other cultures

    0 vote(s)
  4. should be applied to the men as well as the girls

  1. Parents fly in African village elders to circumcise their young daughters

    Police and health authorities fear that 25,000 British girls are at risk of genital mutilation

    Hundreds of young girls in Britain are suffering genital mutilation at the hands of women paid to come to Britain by their families.

    African immigrants are clubbing together to pay for practitioners to fly to Britain and circumcise their daughters in highly secretive rituals.

    Police believe that the trend has developed among parents who do not have passports or cannot afford to return to their home countries to have their daughters circumcised, a brutal practice that remains commonplace throughout Africa.

    The procedure is generally performed by elderly women, in unsterilised conditions with no anaesthetic. Children as young as five have parts or all of their clitoris or labia removed. Some have their vaginas sewn up or the flesh shrunk with corrosives

    Despite the dangers, many African Muslim communities prize the ritual and ostracise women who are not circumcised.

    One health worker who helps the Somali community in Sheffield said: “At 12 or 13, some girls are pressured by their peer group if they haven’t had it done. They will be ostracised or seen as unclean.”

    In full

  2. You can understand it's a cultural thing and their beliefs are that of woman should not be able to enjoy sexual relationships and should be there just for the pleasure of a man and be made in such a way that maximum pleasure of a man is of primary importance.

    But I would personally like to get hold of one of these aul girls that come over here and repeated kick the crap out of them until the couldn't tell if they too had been mutilated or not. These women know what they are inflicting on an innocent child and are doing for financial benefit.

    There are some really simple procedures to see if this is being done to young BRITISH citizens who live in a country where mutilation is not an essential. Things such as passport control, full vetting, intelligence from the community etc.

    It needs to be stopped. Bottom line - it's abuse. Culturally based or not.


    But this government will probably deal with it by maybe giving the community a sterile room in a doctor's somewhere to carry it out under clean condidtions or something equally as lily livered.

    After all this government is only good at sorting the sorting out of violations of other countries citizens rights, we that live here just have to whistle.

    I am now going to get off the soap box.....Before I fall off in rage.
  3. I can remember watching a programme on the T.V some years back about it. It was sickeningly horrifying. Little girls as young as 3 years old being held down by several adults and mutilated ( i can't think of any other word for it)
    One of the mothers refused to have her daughter mutilated and she was beaten almost do death by her own family and ostracised. The little girl was still mutilated in the end.
    It was supposed to set the ball rolling for an outright ban then, but practices and beliefs aint something that can be changed overnight...as this report shows.
  4. Please don't misunderstand me, I too feel this practise is sickening and neanderthal.

    But, ask yourself this, why do you find this so sickening? Is it because:
    - it's something that you personally consider improper,
    - because it is often performed at such a young age,
    - because it is often performed without the 'victims' consent, or,
    - because it is often performed under such dodgy conditions?

    I mean, if it was only performed on consenting adults by accredited medical practitioners, would it be OK?

    Now, ask around the jewish community and find out how many men were circumcised at a young age and essentially under conditions of peer and religious pressure? Should we give the jewish community a good shoeing too before deporting them? Now that would cause a stir, wouldn't it!!!!! :)
  5. I was very suprised that it was only outlawed in 1985!!!!
    I think that the UK should take a very strong stand against this, it will not be that hard to find out who is the assisting parties in the UK. Lets hope that we see a lot of 14 year sentences being handed out.
    I was in a good mood this morning until I read that, now I have my angry hat on!!!
  6. Not just Jews babies boys get circumcised, a lot of baby boys get the snip when they are born. The big difference is that the head of the penis is not removed too stop men enjoying sex.
  7. There's a significant difference between male and female circumcision; the male only loses a piece of skin, while the female loses her clitoris (at least, this is the way it was done in the tribes round my way some years ago). I was present at the Maasai cermony once when the boys were given the good news, and their fortitude was impressive. Immediately following the ceremony, they had to go out and live off the land for a month. The girls had been sliced up the week before, when a (Swedish?) priest tried to intervene but nearly found himself dickless for his trouble.
    The Maasai women certainly accepted the procedure as part of their way of life, but I suppose that if you've never really had one of those, you never miss it.
  8. So if the procedure did not stop these girls from enjoying sex, then it would be okay? 8O
  9. All the four Mekator. After the mutilation, the females are often left horribly scarred for life physically, with recurring infections.
    When men are circumcised its very rare that they will have scarring or recurring infections. Can you imagine having the equivelent of battery acid poured all over your little man? Or subjecting your children to the same? Often the mutilated women go on to have further problems with such as childbirth in later years as they have been so shrunk down below the baby cannot pass through.
    Its not just the immediate problems and health risks it poses, but all the implications in latter years as well.
  10. OldSnowy

    OldSnowy LE Moderator Book Reviewer

    To try and compare this to circumcision is naive and simply wrong. FGM is carried out purely to oppress women. There is no other reason fro it whatsoever.
  11. So which part of it is not there to stop the women enjoying sex and for genuine medical reasons? The removel of the clit or the sowing up/ shrinking?
  12. No you don't, answer my question! If FGM did not stop women from enjoying sex would it be ok?
  13. Castlereagh wrote

    In short NO, it wouldn't be ok. Simply for the reasons listed above.
  14. Old Snowy and LordVonHarley,

    As I pointed out initially, I too am against the practice - partly for the very same reasons as you are. But, it seems, only Castlereagh has grasped my point.

    Would it be an acceptable practice if a consenting adult presented herself at a registered Harley Street clinic (or an NHS doctor) and asked for the procedure to be performed? Whether she wants it done for cometic, psychological, sexual, religious or social reasons is irrelevant. If not, why?
  15. Ok, it would not be ok as it also effects giving birth (not mentioned when I was comparing with beheading the little general as men can't give birth).

    However how does this compare to vaginal plastic surgery, big in the USA, where woman (of consenting age) allow a fully trained surgeons operate on them.