Mr Khan said:
Female Genital Mutilation is much different, often taking place in extremly poor conditions and at an older age than when circumcision is usually performed (the kind of age where you can remember that sort of thing like a traumatic experience), and is more immediately, distinctly damaging to the health of the women period and to her sex drive in particular, and is more unequivocally bad than circumcision. We're talking about stitching the labia shut and snipping the clit clean off (and to speak of how that's damaging to sex drive, the female clitoris has more nerve endings in it than the penis does altogether), leaving just enough space for the girl to pee until she's married off at least, then the process is somehow reversed as far as the labial stitching goes... I don't know. I'm circumcised, and it doesn't seem to have bothered me. I'd call this going too far |
the reason I brought up that point, is because if you're going to take a purely asthetic stance on the subject, you're already five feet in the wrong.
