Breast Ironing Targeted in Cameroon

Exactly!

Children are not property. By birth, parents become legal guardians unless they otherwise turn over control to an agency or other third party. In the US we have laws protecting the rights of children.

We don't have the right to judge other cultures regardless of what we feel is right. It's up to that culture to decide what is right and wrong. What a parent does in another country is that country's business. If they move to the US then they fall under American law.

But as a HUMAN BEING -- without damn borders -- I feel it IS my right, even responsibility, to care and think of this as my/our business. This has nothing to do with U.S. law -- it has everything to do with human rights.

What if I determined it was my right to care and think of you being a vegan as wrong... and what if i thought it was a travesty for you to prevent yourself from getting your 'necessary' nutrition... Could I then force you to use and eat animal products? For your safety, and well-being of course. It is after all, my responsibility as a HUMAN BEING, without damn borders... I feel it's my right to make sure you eat meat!

Simply put, no, you could not "FORCE" me to eat my animal friends. I'd rather die.

And besides, I'm talking about ALL living beings, no matter the number of legs, or eyes, or wings, or scales, whatever. Mutilation (meaning harming another being without that being's consent) in any form is, for me, absolutely and unquestionably wrong, unless I were to choose to mutilate only myself. But that's ridiculous, really.

Actually, there are quite a number of ways, but that's not the point. You should not be CONTROLLED because someone else "Knows better". We do not have the time nor the resources to really care about some other culture that thinks differently as we do. We have our problems first, which is why i think it's asinine so many people are concerned over this. No one nominated us to police the world, yet for some reason our government and apparently a majority of the populace think it's ok because we 'know better'. Clearly we do not, as most of our 'peace' operations and interventions end in hundreds of thousands of deaths, the removal of civil liberties, and perpetual turmoil... Are any of us really in a position to keep doing these things? On any level? For any reason?

I think not. You think so. I don't know where you derive the self-righteousness... It must stem from some religious thing or code... I never understood how it arrives to a human internally...

Though I do agree this practice is harmful (I even think veganism is a bit harmful, it's simply not natural)... BUT The maximum intervention we can rightfully make is through information only... and that's ONLY if they choose to listen. Otherwise sure, you can make fun of them, yell at them, hoot and hollar, and be condescending but nothing physical... That just isn't our place.

Arguments from cultural relativism never work, because cultures aren't even cohesive units.

Morality is informed by, but ultimately separate from, culture.

The dumbest thing about these kinds of arguments is that this practice is done by a *minority* of the population, so can the larger culture not judge the smaller one? Where does this argument actually end?

We have to respect other cultures, yes, we don't have to respect their shitty behavior though. That goes for us too, I have zero problem with other people pointing our problems in our culture.

that's disgusting, just because its another country that doesn't stop people from having human rights.

As a "white person," sigh, I am offended by ANY form of mutilation to ANY living being, be that being a human, an animal, a bird, a fish. And there's plenty of mutilation going on amongst the white race, which is equally offensive. For me, this has absolutely NOTHING to do with the hue of a human being's skin.

I understand your point. I think that this practice is based in superstition, but the mother clearly wishes good things for her daughter.

But, can you see how this story is being spun to elicit specific emotions from First World couch-activists?

What is your definition of "mutilation?"

Haha good one! I agree that this is totally outrageous and wrong, but I'm not going to start a campaign about it or anything.

1) It's a practice that makes for healthier genitalia
2) if, Zeus Forbid, he get's Diabetes, an early complication for some males has been excessive swelling of the glans which can only be alleviated by circumcision. I know that the men I know who have had to have this done wished, with all their mind, body, and soul that their parents had had this simple procedure done FOR them when they were babies and it wouldn't have been so traumatic.

All those practices are wrong, period.

Circumcision is fucked up here and breast ironing is fucked up over there.

Morality is not a matter of "cultural practice," it's merely informed by it. This same argument could be used for anything a culture currently does, it makes no god damn sense.

No, circumcision is retarded and carries no medical purpose to it whatsoever.

It was initiated in the United States to prevent masturbation and it continues only because people are so grossly misinformed about its purpose.

Even the AMA recommends you don't do it.

And it's wrong, wherever it is.

Why should one human being think she/he has the RIGHT to mutilate ANOTHER human being?

My point is that we're ALL crazy.

An Emerson quote comes to mind: "Thy love afar is spite at home."

Male circumcism was not started in the US. It goes back to ancient Egypt.

No, it goes back to the Torah and the deal God made with the Israelites not to flood the Earth again.
Probably before then, but that's the earliest we can prove in written records.

"Circumcision is one of the earliest known forms of elective surgery. It is believed to have originated in Egypt approximately 15,000 years ago and to have spread to nearby regions through population migration.

Circumcision has been a commandment in Jewish law for over 3000 years and is one of the rules of cleanliness in Islamic law. But circumcision has also been known in other cultures; for example, when Columbus landed in North America, he discovered that males were circumcised."

http://www.healthcommunities.com/circumcision/children/circumcision-overview.sht...

"Over the last two decades, opinions have changed regarding the necessity or benefits of infant circumcision. None of the major medical societies in the United States recommends infant circumcision as a routine procedure. However, none of these organizations advise against it, either. In all cases, parents are urged to seek information from their doctor and to weigh the benefits and risks.

The American Association of Pediatricians (AAP) issued a statement in 1999 saying that the benefits of circumcision are not significant, that it is not medically necessary, and that the AAP no longer recommends it as a routine procedure.

The American Academy of Family Physicians has described the medical literature on infant circumcision as "controversial and conflicting." It advises parents to discuss the procedure with their doctor before making a decision. The American Medical Association supports the findings of the AAP."

http://www.healthcommunities.com/circumcision/children/circumcision-overview.sht...

Circumcision reduces the risk of HIV infection in heterosexual populations that are at high risk.[12] Evidence among heterosexual men in sub-Saharan Africa shows a decreased risk of between 38 and 66% over 2 years[13] and in this population it appears cost effective.[14] Evidence of benefit for women is controversial[15][16] and evidence of benefit in developed countries and among men who have sex with men is yet to be determined.[17][18] The WHO currently recommends circumcision as part of a program for prevention of HIV transmission in areas with high endemic rates of HIV.[19] Ethical concerns remain regarding the implementation of campaigns to promote circumcision.[20]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision

I said initiated here, that implies nothing about its origins. I didn't say or imply that we were the first culture to ever start the practice here, simply the reason why *we* started doing it.

Right, because those circumcisions really prevented the spread of AIDS everywhere else right?

It's astounding to me how completely uncritical people are of this argument. Do you seriously think a slightly lowered contraction rate of HIV in circumcised males could possibly justify the practice?

How about this, just get tested and don't have unprotected sex. Because being circumcised does NOT prevent you from getting HIV.

.

Scars ARE permanent, almost always, especially on delicate breast tissue.

EMOTIONAL scarring most definitely is permanent.

As I understand it, the idea is also to stunt the breast growth, not just punish the girl, but disrupt healthy growth (at best, since many are also afflicted with more serious and permanent effects as well.) This is not only abusive toward the young women and girls, blaming them for any and all early sexual activity, but it also reinforces the notion that men and boys have no responsibility for self-control and indeed no ability to exercise self control when faced with a healthy developing female. It is demeaning to both sexes, but as is often the case the woman bears the brunt of it.

Absolutely!

"Let us not forget how many of us westerners mutilate our sons' genitalia through the medically unnecessary and torturous practice of circumcision."

1) It's a practice that makes for healthier genitalia
2) if, Zeus Forbid, he get's Diabetes, an early complication for some males has been excessive swelling of the glans which can only be alleviated by circumcision. I know that the men I know who have had to have this done wished, with all their mind, body, and soul that their parents had had this simple procedure done FOR them when they were babies and it wouldn't have been so traumatic.

No professional medical association in the U.S. or anywhere else in the world recommends routine circumcision as medically necessary.

There is NO link between circumcision and better health. In fact, cutting a baby boy's genitals creates immediate health risks. The foreskin is actually an important and functional body part, protecting the head of the penis from injury and providing moisture and lubrication. Circumcision also diminishes sexual pleasure later in life.

Not remembering trauma does not equate to it actually being less traumatic. Surgical removal of the foreskin involves immobilizing the baby by strapping him face-up onto a molded plastic board. In one common method, the doctor then inserts a metal instrument under the foreskin to forcibly separate it from the glans, slits the foreskin, and inserts a circumcision device. The foreskin is crushed and then cut off.

Fact is, circumcision stems from the primitive religious belief that masturbation is evil and that circumcising boys would discourage masturbation.

I reiterate: It is ignorance that motivates these things.

Mutilation of any being is wrong, and I do believe that most definitely includes circumcision (both male and female).

It IS ignorance. And there are many of us (myself included) who, at one time, took circumcision at face value -- trust "THE DOCTOR"... or trust "THE CUSTOM"...

It is ignorance, pure and simple.

My eldest son was circumcised, but the other two were not. My eldest son is much older than the younger two and so I was much more informed by the time the younger two were born. I am circumcised, but I wish I was not. When my youngest son was born, the Dr asked if we were going to circumcise him and when we said no, the Dr actually said, "Good, it isn't necessary". That was good to hear because some of our family criticized us for our decision not to circumcise.

Many people would argue with your use of mutilate. Like the case in the story presented it's about the culture and not for others outside the culture to decide. There have been studies showing male circumcism reduces the chance of HIV.

Please share with us some of those studies, including the dates, if you don't mind.

This is something near and dear to my heart because, when my son was born, I just "KNEW" that circumcision was the right thing to do. Now I live with that deserved guilt every day.

My son began doing research on it by the time he was about 11 or 12, and we've had to have many talks about my mistake.

World Journal of Urology (2011 May 18). "Male circumcision and HIV infection risk".

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2009 Apr 15) "Male circumcision for prevention of heterosexual acquisition of HIV in men".

When you use the word "our," are you referring to humankind?

No, the united states.

So you think that only the people who live in the United States are concerned about this atrocity (and others like it)? And if that is, in fact, what you're saying, how can you even use "Budda" as part of your i.d.?

Then again, you're putting up borders where there should be none. You're assuming that ONLY people in the United States care, and that those who live in the United States should NOT care. That's very, very sad.

So -- and assuming you're a citizen of the United States (and not the world) -- if it's not in your backyard, to HELL with them?

No, not to hell with them... but to each their own. The US did the study, and as a citizen, I really wish we'd stop messing in foreign affairs... especially when so many of our own practices could be seen in just such a horrid way...

It's VERY hypocritical of us.

No, I don't think that I'm in the least bit hypocritical. Then again, I don't think with an us-and-them mentality, much less an us-OR-them mentality, and I certainly don't put borderlines around countries. Humans are humans, wherever they may be.

No one's saying there aren't atrocities going on in your country. These abuses happen everywhere in the world, and it's absolutely against my being to NOT give a damn.

As am ethical human being, I cannot NOT care about the girls being subjected to this.

But what on earth are YOU going to do about it?

Inform people... That's maybe the first step... Sure. But seriously, I don't think anyone is going to go there with a big stick and tell them NO.

Thanks!

Okay....... but why are breasts referred to as such? The topic name sort of takes away from the seriousness of this cruelty to children.

Its just a group,.....mostly a humorous group,.....but when things "breast" related of merit show up on c u r r e n t ,...( and I find them ), I post them there.

Oh, okay. Got it.