Egypt outlaws all female circumcision

[Wanderer]

Took long enough

2 hours, 16 minutes ago

CAIRO (AFP) - Egypt on Thursday finally banned all female circumcision, the widely-practised removal of the clitoris which just days ago cost the life of a 12-year-old girl.

Officially the practice, which affects both Muslim and Christian women in Egypt and goes back to the time of the pharoahs, was banned in 1997 but doctors were allowed to operate "in exceptional cases".

On Thursday, Health Minister Hatem al-Gabali decided to ban every doctor and member of the medical profession, in public or private establishments, from carrying out a clitoridectomy, a ministry press official told AFP.

Any circumcision "will be viewed as a violation of the law and all contraventions will be punished," said the official, adding that it was a "permanent ban".

A survey in 2000 said the practice was carried out on 97 percent of the country's women.

In the latest fatality, 12-year-old Bedur Ahmed Shaker was taken by her mother to a private clinic in Minya, a town on the Nile south of Cairo, for the operation. She died before she could be transferred to hospital.

Her mother accused the woman doctor of negligence, charging that her daughter's death was linked to the anaesthetic and not the removal of the clitoris, for which she had paid 50 pounds (nearly nine dollars). Police have arrested both women.

[Molyneux]

1) Fuck's sake, I must remember never, ever to sleep with any woman from Egypt. 97% is a simply horrifying figure.

2) Kudos to the Egyptian government for, in a region of the world where every country's head is shoved up its metaphorical ass, at least making an attempt to free theirs with a crowbar.

3) First outlaw female circumcision, then let's see about banning male circumcision too...

[Cairber]

This is the third announcement like this in as many months. Unfortunatly, the other two were followed by a series of horrible editorials and public statements downplaying the whole issue and spouting on about "cultural rights" and "pain managment."

YOu can read some of these here:

http://www.newvision.co.ug/D/8/459/558695

http://www.eritreadaily.net/News0207/article0407101.htm

[Tribun]

Take three guesses how many will ignore this law, as they blindly follow "tradition" and nothing else. So this will change nothing at all.

[K. A. Pital]

First outlaw female circumcision, then let's see about banning male circumcision too...

Why are some people asking to ban male circumsition of all things? Only if that's sarcasm.

[General Zod]

First outlaw female circumcision, then let's see about banning male circumcision too...

Why are some people asking to ban male circumsition of all things? Only if that's sarcasm.

Do we seriously need to do yet another thread as to why male circumcision is bad? Or have you not been paying attention to the last ten or twenty threads where idiots make the same arguments in favor of circumcision and they all get shot down?

[K. A. Pital]

Do we seriously need to do yet another thread as to why male circumcision is bad?

When an asshole government incidentally bans the only treatment for phimosis, I'd be cautious. You can ban male circumcision all you want, but not for medical reasons.

[General Zod]

Do we seriously need to do yet another thread as to why male circumcision is bad?

When an asshole government incidentally bans the only treatment for phimosis, I'd be cautious. You can ban male circumcision all you want, but not for medical reasons.

Where did I advocate banning it for medical reasons? Oh wait, I didn't. Methinks you're overreacting here considering that the few medical complications that can only be solved by circumcision are rather on the rare side.

[K. A. Pital]

Methinks you're overreacting here considering that the few medical complications that can only be solved by circumcision are rather on the rare side.

Full phimosis occurs for around 1-2%, while relative phimosis (which can also be commonly cured by circumcision as the most effective means) occurs for around 8-10% of uncircumcised men, IIRC. So technically there's a sizeable fraction of the population which need the procedure. Clinics should be offering that.

I'm not saying that it should be encouraged, or anything, but one should be careful with making the service unavailable.

[General Zod]

Methinks you're overreacting here considering that the few medical complications that can only be solved by circumcision are rather on the rare side.

Full phimosis occurs for around 1-2%, while relative phimosis (which can also be commonly cured by circumcision as the most effective means) occurs for around 8-10% of uncircumcised men, IIRC. So technically there's a sizeable fraction of the population which need the procedure. Clinics should be offering that.

I'm not saying that it should be encouraged, or anything, but one should be careful with making the service unavailable.

Considering that the vast majority of the operations are done for non medical reasons, I have absolutely no problem forbidding it without expressly written doctor's approval verified independently with another doctor. Given all the other problems involved with circumcision bullshit.

[K. A. Pital]

Considering that the vast majority of the operations are done for non medical reasons, I have absolutely no problem forbidding it without expressly written doctor's approval verified independently with another doctor.

That's a lot of complication. In any case, people who want to do it will bribe the doctors to make it if they want to. You make them bribe two doctors. I'd rather have them bribe one and make it easier for them to go on their circumcision with a single doctor's order, since they'd do that anyway.

On the other hand, if the specialist is qualified, one doctor is enough to give proper judgement on an illness of a person who actually seeks real treatment.

So both sides - the assholes and the sick - would be fine with one doctor examination to make the operation.

[General Zod]

On the other hand, if the specialist is qualified, one doctor is enough to give proper judgement on an illness of a person who actually seeks real treatment.

For a "treatment" that's couched in centuries of religious dogma, I'd be far more comfortable having a second opinion with it. Very few people treat circumcision the way it should be treated and seem to think it's almost a necessity to get it done regardless of whether they actually need it.

[Molyneux]

Considering that the vast majority of the operations are done for non medical reasons, I have absolutely no problem forbidding it without expressly written doctor's approval verified independently with another doctor.

That's a lot of complication. In any case, people who want to do it will bribe the doctors to make it if they want to. You make them bribe two doctors. I'd rather have them bribe one and make it easier for them to go on their circumcision with a single doctor's order, since they'd do that anyway.

On the other hand, if the specialist is qualified, one doctor is enough to give proper judgement on an illness of a person who actually seeks real treatment.

So both sides - the assholes and the sick - would be fine with one doctor examination to make the operation.

Let me make myself a little more clear: I would not want circumcision to be banned entirely. You can do with your own dick whatever you want.

A parent having their child circumcised for non-medical reasons, however, SHOULD be illegal. If the kid wants to get cut, let them do it when they reach the age of majority.

[General Trelane (Retired)]

Let me make myself a little more clear: I would not want circumcision to be banned entirely. You can do with your own dick whatever you want.

A parent having their child circumcised for non-medical reasons, however, SHOULD be illegal. If the kid wants to get cut, let them do it when they reach the age of majority.

If you had said that the first time, this thread would have stayed on topic, I think.

[Justforfun000]

Stas Bush Wrote:

That's a lot of complication. In any case, people who want to do it will bribe the doctors to make it if they want to. You make them bribe two doctors. I'd rather have them bribe one and make it easier for them to go on their circumcision with a single doctor's order, since they'd do that anyway.

Since you are Russian I am assuming you yourself are uncut. Would you be ok with your parents making that decision for you and having you lose your foreskin at birth?
Almost everyone here tends to refer to the banning of circumcision in regards to RIC, or Routine Infant Circumcision.

Obviously as an adult you should be able to do whatever you want. Get a fucking Nazi swastika tattooed on your dick if you want, we don't care. But would you ever allow it to be done by parents to their child?

[Cairber]

On Topic:
I'v been reading article about this all day and the one thing that keeps jumping out at me is that none of them clearly speak of the three forms of female circumcision or mention if Egypt has outlawed them all of just one of them.

The articles say "any circumcision" is illegal but then they go on to say, like the OP's article says: "from carrying out a clitoridectomy." So this would seem to only outlaw one of the three forms of FGM.



Off Topic:
I always find the 8% relative phimosis stat to be shakey at best. We see Finland has an adult circumcision rate of about 6 per 100,000, so it would seem to me that correct care of the intact penis in infancy/youth coupled with doctors who know more about foreskins than how to cut them off leads to a much reduced rate of theraputic circumcisions.

[K. A. Pital]

The infant circumcision (RIC) is bullshit of course and should be outlawed.

It's a medical procedure which should be decided on by adults only (I'd put the tag on 16 yo).

If you specified that just a bit earlier, a lot of thread time would've been saved.