When people compare female genital mutilation (which is undoubtedly barbaric and cruel) to male circumcision...pic.twitter.com/rdHqxjvk2B
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @Gregory_Malchuk @MoralNecessity
From a student of human anatomy, I can assure you that your claims about the anatomical differences in FGM and male circumcision are demonstrably false.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @Gregory_Malchuk @MoralNecessity
With FGM the entire clitoris is removed; equivalent to removing the male glans penis. That's the difference buddy!
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @Gregory_Malchuk @MoralNecessity
You're an idiot buddy. Sorry to inform you.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @Gregory_Malchuk @MoralNecessity
The clitoris can be cut out of the body. FGM serves no purpose medically. Male circumcision reduces the risk of urinary infection later in life and all the important penile structures are left completely intact and functional.
4 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Most intact men would tell you their foreskin also consists of important penile structures. Being able to get by without it doesn't mean it's not important.
#i23 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
If FGM had health benefits, would it matter? Prophylactic health benefits can't justify taking away a child's right to decide for herself (or himself) which of her/his body parts are "important" enough to warrant preservation. #i2 For more detail see this: http://quillette.com/2017/08/15/female-genital-mutilation-health-benefits-problem-medicalizing-morality/ …
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.