Women with vagina piercings to be classed as suffering from FGM


Hundreds of women in London with vagina piercings will be recorded as victims of potentially illegal female genital mutilation under new NHS rules to be introduced next month.

The mandatory reporting regulations, sent to medical staff by the Department of Health, say that any woman whose labia or clitoris has been pierced must be classed as suffering FGM.

The rules will apply even when women have consented to the piercing and had the procedure in the belief that it will improve their sex lives and enhance their attractiveness.

It means that each of the women will also be classed as a potential crime victim and that those responsible for carrying out the piercing could be deemed guilty of an offence under legislation banning FGM.

The new edict forms part of an expansion of NHS rules on recording FGM and will fuel the debate about how cosmetic genital surgery and other procedures to create “designer vaginas” should be treated by police and prosecutors.

Under existing legislation, any action to cut or otherwise damage a female’s genitals is illegal unless there is a genuine medical or psychological reason to justify the procedure.

The Commons Home Affairs Committee has warned, however, that a lack of clarity in the law means that potentially unlawful surgery is being carried out in Harley Street and elsewhere as women undergo procedures such as labia reduction for cosmetic reasons.

The new NHS regulations make clear that piercings are also a form of mutilation and should be recorded as part on an “enhanced FGM dataset” that is designed to establish the number of victims in this country.

A Department of Health spokesman confirmed the move and said that piercings were a form of FGM even when performed on consenting adult women.

He added: “While there are challenges in this area and adult women may have genital piercings, in some communities girls are forced to have them.

“The World Health Organisation has quite rightly defined this as a form of FGM. We are taking every precaution to record genital piercings that have been done within an abusive context.”

Comment: Like?

PLANNED PARENTHOOD: Mutilated is the New “Normal”


PLANNED PARENTHOOD: Mutilated is the New “Normal”

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.

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?

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.

Cut the crap: Confusion around circumcision



Columnist zei…

It is very easy. When you fight Islam, you ban their RITUAL slaughter. That is, throat-cutting animals is still legal, but it is forbidden to pray to Allah. By openly opposing halal slaughter because of its cultural and religious implications, instead of hypocritically invoking animal rights enables you to retain kosher slaughter.
An analogy can be found in circumcision.

Sonja zei…

So, female genital mutilation based on archaic religious beliefs-bad. We all understand this. Male child( without consent) genital mutilation based on archaic religious beliefs-good, in fact- the religion Cannot EXIST without it? I sense some hypocrisy here.
If you’ve ever seen a circumcision of a boy child which is done without any anesthetic, the LIE that this does not cause undo pain is evident -by the intense screaming. In fact, a mother commented once that she felt like shooting the doctor in the head when he did this to her child.
Religious beliefs can be used to do all kinds of horrid, unthinking and barbaric Acts which must be rethought over time, such as cruelty to animals, rape, murder for stupid infractions and certainly, male circumcision is one of these. If it is so important to the survival of the religion (insanity) at least the procedure could wait until the boy is of age to consent. Chopping off a little boys foreskin really is not any more a pact with god than any other of these barbaric practices. It’s ancient religious hocus pocus, just like the Islamic barbarities we criticize regularly.

Comment: I am Columnist. As you can see, I am far more tolerant of circumcision than many, many Dutch Atheists and Agnostics. Dhimmitude, after all, encompasses religious freedom. Especially the freedom to practice ritual circumcision and ritual slaughter. The protection I  am willing to afford goes so far that Atheist/Agnostic criticism of circumcision can be punished with death. After all, under Shari’a, in Caliphate, people who insult Jesus, Mary or Moses will be put to death. This means Atheist/Agnostic parents can circumcize their baby boys at will. Of course, religious freedom also means e.g. Sikhs can have religious objections to circumcision.

Internalized Anti-Semitism?


Genital mutilation

Steinem wrote the definitive article on female genital mutilation that brought the practice into the American public’s consciousness.[9]:292[77] The article reports on the “75 million women suffering with the results of genital mutilation.” According to Steinem, “The real reasons for genital mutilation can only be understood in the context of the patriarchy: men must control women’s bodies as the means of production, and thus repress the independent power of women’s sexuality.” Steinem’s article contains the basic arguments that would be developed by philosopher Martha Nussbaum.[78]

On male circumcision, she commented, “These patriarchal controls limit men’s sexuality too… That’s why men are asked symbolically to submit the sexual part of themselves and their sons to patriarchal authority, which seems to be the origin of male circumcision, a practice that, even as advocates admit, is medically unnecessary 90% of the time. Speaking for myself, I stand with many brothers in eliminating that practice too.[79]

Comment: Needless to say, rabbis would call this Hellenism. Is Gloria Steinem still Jewish? Or is this shit-testing?