PLANNED PARENTHOOD: Mutilated is the New “Normal”

http://joseph4gi.blogspot.nl/2012/02/planned-parenthood-mutilated-is-new.html

Yes! Different is normal!

So I just recently saw a video put out by Planned Parenthood, entitled “Different is Normal.”

It’s an interesting little video, obviously aimed towards teens, and it would probably be a very good message if it weren’t for one, tiny, detail.

Actually, no, it’s actually a rather large detail; it outright tries to call the circumcised penis “normal,” like any other part of the body we’re born with.

The video starts out with a good message…

“As a teenager, you worry about a lot of things: homework, acne, your profile picture. One thing you shouldn’t be worried about is whether or not your breasts, penis, or vulva are normal, but lots of kids do. So, are they normal? Will they be when you’re all grown up? Short answer: yes. Long answer: well, when it comes to our bodies, being different is normal.”

Well, there’s a slightly longer answer, but Planned Parenthood won’t be addressing it here. 

“You already know that our bodies are just like snowflakes, no two are alike. Our faces are all made of the same parts: eyes, ears, nose, mouth, but they all look completely different. If that goes for your face, then why not the rest of your body? The reality is that normal is different. It’s all over the place.”

Do you see where this is going?

They start with the penis.

“Here’s a flaccid, or soft, adult penis. All penises have the same parts: glans, shaft, urethra, and all have testicles hanging below. Here’s one that’s erect, or hard.”

Of course.

But, where’s the foreskin? Is that not a part of the penis? And why are they showing a picture of a circumcised penis, as if it were the way it appeared in nature? Where’s the scar?

They show a second slide:

Only THEN do they decide to add:

“Some have foreskins, some are circumcised and have no foreskin.”

Did the guy with a foreskin get some sort of body modification? Was he born with some sort of genetic variation? Why are penises assumed to be circumcised by default?

“Some are shorter, some are thicker, some are thinner, some curve when they’re erect.”

“All are normal.”

Well. At least they hope to convince insecure teens.

Let’s see how they treat the girls:

“Same goes for girls. Each vulva has an inner labia, outer labia, clitoris, 

pening to the vagina, urethra, and clitoral hood.”

What’s wrong with this picture?

They didn’t seem to forget the labia, nor the clitoral hood, nor the clitoris in this diagram. Furthermore, the girls are actually shown different diagrams of different other vulvas, complete with different shapes and sizes of the clitoris, as well as variations in the lengths of the labia.

A stark difference is that the boys don’t get to see different types of foreskins and/or glans. It appears the only variations among penises is circumcised and not… Absolutely no mention of the frenulum…

“Even with the same parts, each adult vulva looks completely different.

Some have bigger openings in the vagina, some have bigger clitorises that stick out…”

“…some have wide outer labia…”

“…some have bigger inner labia that stick out…”

“…and often the labia in the pair don’t match each other.”

“All are normal”

So much dedication and care for the female vulva. Where are all the variations of the male penis?  Where are all the large prominent glans? The long foreskins? The short foreskins? The uneven foreskins? Are those not “normal?”

But, more than this, where are all the circumcised vulvas? Where are the vulvas with no clitoris? Where are the vulvas that have been sewn up in infibulation? If they’re showing diagrams of circumcised penises, why aren’t they showing diagrams of female circumcision? Why does Planned Parenthood try to pass off the circumcised penis as just another variation of “normal?”

Would Planned Parent hood EVER dare to say that ANY of these things was normal?

Female genital cutting is “normal” for millions of girls in Africa, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore, Brunei and all over South East Asia.

But let’s not talk about THAT.

“So remember, when it comes to our faces, our hands, and yes, our genitals, different is normal. So you can officially stop worrying about your vulva, breasts, or penis.”

Do you hear that, boys? Do you hear that men? You can stop worrying about the fact that someone took a knife and sliced off part of your penis.

Muslim boy becoming “normal.”

This is perfectly “normal” and acceptable.

What about you girls who don’t have a clitoris? Who are missing your labia? Or who have been infibulated?

For millions of girls globally, this is “normal.”

Go sit in a corner and feel sorry for yourself.

Thanks, Planned Parenthood, but NO THANKS.

NOT NORMAL
No, the circumcised penis is NOT normal.

It is a forced, contrived, artificial phenomenon.

It is a subversion of the normal, healthy penis.

No, penises in the world DON’T all have the same parts. (Neither do vulvas in the world for that matter…) Some are missing parts, and it’s because they were deliberately CUT OFF.

But let’s not get into that; this is a feel-good video for teens, right?

SHAME ON PLANNED PARENTHOOD
This video is pure self-serving GARBAGE.

Planned Parenthood ought to be ASHAMED for trying to normalize genital mutilation.

They ought to be ashamed that they are insulting the youth’s intelligence with this crap.

SHAME on you, Planned Parenthood, SHAME on you.

Bottom Line
The foreskin is not a birth defect. Neither is it a congenital deformity or genetic anomaly akin to a 6th finger or a cleft. Neither is it a medical condition like a ruptured appendix or diseased gall bladder. Neither is it a dead part of the body, like the umbilical cord, hair, or fingernails. The foreskin is normal, natural, healthy tissue with which all boys are born.

Unless there is a medical or clinical indication, the circumcision of healthy, non-consenting individuals is a deliberate wound; it is the destruction of normal, healthy tissue, the permanent disfigurement of normal, healthy organs, and by very definition, infant genital mutilation, and a violation of the most basic of human rights.

The presence of the foreskin is normal, and its absence abnormal.

Nay, it is a deliberate disfigurement.

Genital mutilation, whither it be wrapped in culture, religion or “research” is still genital mutilation.

The same video touting the same bullshit can be seen here in Spanish.

The New York Times has actually published a very informative article concerning female genital cutting as it occurs in South East Asia and can be accessed here.

Comment: Among many people, Planned Parenthood has a very shady reputation. Again, as I stressed many times, lowering the birthrate by whatever means requires the acceptance of euthanasia. Hell is eternal.

STDs and sensitivity

STDs are mainly found among the poor, because malnutrition weakens the immune system. Poor people in the USA are less likely to be circumcised, poor people in the EU are more likely to be circumcised (Hispanic v.s. Muslim immigrants). So STD statistics can be misleading.

Common sense tells us that both reduction of STDs and loss of sensation are likely if thin, moist, but highly enervated skin is removed. So both sides tweak science if they deny either.

Note: Many adherents of Dual Seedline Christian Identity also believe in ritual circumcision.

Chastity belts against FGM

http://www.my-steel.de/en/story-65-circumcision-new-approaches-to-an-old-subject.php

The prevention of circumcision of children and adolescents is more relevant than ever. Although it too much with religion and faith has that opinions differ widely in Western society. Louder is the question of a way to prevent the circumcision, but how can you avoid this fate without the belief of a large number of people hurt, a right straight in the German Basic Law has a very high priority.

 

Enem with chastity belt made of steel – prevention of circumcision? Fate prevent new unconventional methods? Prevention of circumcision, yet with faith and religion in harmony? Chastity create and wear them in public? Protected, yet invisible? Could this possibly be the solution to the problems? The search for alternatives to prevent circumcision is still open, but the faith that moves mountains. Faith is the most important to be able to avoid this fate. Certainly also it was a smile or other, to record on listening to this idea, and yet it seems to be a possibility. The chastity belt keeps the institution or institutions / to have sex in front of it and is fully lockable with a padlock. This may especially for parents to be very tempting to have the certainty to be able to keep their children from premature sexual immorality. And yet there seems to be an obstacle that prevents children at a healthy sexual development eventually include their own experiences and mistakes add to adulthood.

Another question would be, how can you add children to move the chastity belt and wear than normal compared to other classmates or friends to feel, which belong to a different religion? How can you make clear to them that they only way to avoid this fate and create the chastity belt and wear with increasing routine easier. As much as a chastity belt might be promising for a Pleasurable SM relationship in the Middle Ages or earlier, so it was assumed to be doubtful that these people would be considered. Questions in order to clarify why this is so, it must first be where the custom of circumcision comes from and what are the reasons why. Especially in the SM area chastity belt now play the biggest role. Especially in this area often faith and religion play only a minor role. In Judaism, circumcision is about her joining a community and is a mandatory mark for the membership of children and young people to this religion. Although the trimming of children and adolescents is not explicitly mentioned in the Qur’an, this custom counts as an important part of the religion and is also performed as a ritual of.

 

Male circumcision is a minor issue, as the genital mutilation of women and girls, which the women the freedom of sexual pleasure and is thus prohibited in the entire Western world. Prevention of circumcision is just appropriate for girls and women. But how is it possible that these people do not restrict their faith and their religion to avoid this fate? Is the prevention of circumcision by a chastity belt wearing of this was the way to find a compromise against circumcision? Create and wear chastity belt against circumcision? And again, talk: “With a chastity belt made of steel – prevention of circumcision -!” Who knows maybe it is possible to give children and young people to a healthy youth without circumcision, in which you get them to wear chastity belts to create and bring into fashion and go in as a trendsetter by example. Prefer to feel in control of the parents of the pleasure, as perhaps never the possibility of these children and adolescents because of the circumcision pleasure.

A variety of people working on the faith and the religion of these people to preserve and yet can avoid this fate and effect the prevention of circumcision of children and adolescents. To avoid this fate, one should also bear on the thinking and create a chastity belt open. Perhaps add the chastity belt and carry on as normal as soon as wearing a bra. Unwanted pregnancy of children and young people could be prevented.C

 

Onan the Anti-Feminist

 

http://puahate.com/showthread.php?p=1321140

 

03-06-2012, 09:07 AM

Ssandro Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: writing phd Posts: 2,381

I’m sure the popularity of circumcision shows how much mothers dominate their sons in some cultures. It became fashionable because women prefer it. Some need it for medical reasons, but it’s only 2-1σ. And then, we can hypothesise, the preference of some fashionable and powerful women, who would bribe the tribal doctors to do it to their sons, became the norm, through their sons, who would take the highest positions in the tribes, which were often religious positions. And the sons would create retroactive justifications for the norm which were ridiculous insofar as they did everything to avoid mentioning women, because being dominated by your mother is not something you want to admit. The main effect of having a foreskin is that it makes masturbation better than sex. Masturbation feels better than sex (and far better than sex with a condom) to me, because the sensation from the nerves on the inner side of the foreskin. Therefore, circumcision increases women’s sexual power, and it increases the importance of intercourse. The impact is an inversion of the effect of us (men) passing a law banning vibrators. In ancient greece, where the idealised relationship is homosexuality (particularly in athens, where women are really under control: women are rarely allowed to leave the house, usually for their all-female religious festivals – and they’re not even allowed to be in most parts of the house), not being circumcised is one of the markers of hellenistic commonality between the states, in opposition to ancient egypt and semitic tribes, where women could leave the house and the idealised relationship is heterosexual Share

Comment: Captain Obvious, anyone? Sexual Trade Union!