By implying what this movement terms MGM as being in any way on a par with female genital mutilation is nothing short of grotesque when considering what. FGM entails. It is a misogynistic act of domination by pathetically inadequate men and it is perpetuated by the power it gives to the women who perform it. Beyond the irreparable damage it causes to its female victims, the long-term effects on relationships between mutilated woman and well meaning men in the societies in which it is performed are devastating. It may be argued that male circumcision provides health benefits such as lower incidences of penile and uterine cancers, as well as inhibiting STD transmission. Logical arguments probably exist against male circumcision, too. These can be discussed in non-emotive terms. FGM is all negative, particularly regarding the effects on its victims and their future relationships. Invoking one as an emotive argument against the other is demeaning and counterproductive to FGM victims. Shame on those who try to push the argument this way.
Saudi policeman killed in Mecca after Islamic State raid (Reuters)