Here is my problem. How do they respond to this:
Old Mo said “If a woman climaxes first, then they kid will look like her”
If she CANNOT climax, how now do you explain this lunacy in the koran?

Well, on the flip side, if you were a woman who was going to be stuck having to sleep with one of these nasty, evil, jihadi freaks, you might actually welcome a medical procedure that would deaden the sensation.

morganfrost on May 31, 2007 at 12:21 PM

Finally, somebody drops a nuke on these devils. That’s gotta hurt.

*crickets*

Oh. Right. That would be passing a moral judgment on another culture. Damn.

The little girls where she grew up (either Kenya or Somalia.. I think she was in Kenya at this point) would tease each other by calling each other “clitoreen”. or something like that. It was with horror when it dawned on her what that meant and by what means one was no longer called that.

I am a mother of a son and daughter and I could never imagine letting someone do this to my little girl.

I am very thankful to be an American.

Well, that’s just it, isn’t it? Leave it to a thugish and heretical religion to miss the whole point of transcendence and spirit when it comes to sex. Desire is surely expressed in the physical, but it resides in the spiritual.

Why not chop off a women’s arms so as to kill her desire to embrace a man?

Idiots.

I was appreciating that dual perspective.

smellthecoffee on May 31, 2007 at 11:16 AM

That’s what I figured.

If controlling desire was the real agenda, they’d perform a hysterectomy.

Except that they want children.

Removing the clitoris, which does not always sever the intended nerve, merely perverts the natural desires of a woman . Desire stays in-tact despite the mutilation, only it gets expressed in other ways that are undoubtedly less desirable than a simple drive for sex. I wonder how many of these woman end up cutting themselves or wanting women instead of men. Imagine what horrors THAT result brings in such a society…

Talk about ‘stuck on stupid’.

And it’s not that I like what they’re doing.

Of course, not, heaven forbid. We agree totally on this. I just noted that in your first post especially, you were looking at it from the perspective of the women, even as you were undoubtedly disgusted by what their opinions inevitably lead to, and I was appreciating that dual perspective.

smellthecoffee on May 31, 2007 at 10:53 AM

And it’s not that I like what they’re doing. Because of what it takes from women, I wish it was stopped. But these women were the first victims, and they’re only passing on what was done to them.

You know what though, it makes a little sense. For a woman who has been circumsized to then say it is wrong and harmful is to admit what’s been done to her, something that cannot be undone. But if they believe in it, the pain of their own mutilation can be softened as “tradition” or something that was “good for her.”

Esthier, I like the way you’re looking at it. One can appreciate that another culture has a diffent way of looking at things, and that it may make some kind of sense, in an internal way, without condoning it by any means. I actually was trained as a mohel, and have done some circumcisions, so I’m familiar with the debate that rages around that custom. I honestly couldn’t make a rational argument as to why I believe female circumcision is barbaric, while male circumcision is not–because even the most obvious difference, which is that male circumcision doesn’t essentially sexually cripple the one who receives it, would get you an argument from the anti-circ crowd–except to say, like more than one woman in the video, that it’s our custom. I’m not saying, “It’s all relative; who am I to pass judgement on another culture?” which is how lefties would excuse their silence on this, but, to be intellectually honest, I have to admit I’m familiar, and not in a good way, with the feeling of having a custom that you value being under attack by people who don’t look at the same way you do. 3 2 1. . .

Except it’s the women who do it to other women. I think it really is about preventing enjoyment in sex. The women who are doing it to their children have had bad sex all their lives and don’t know what their doing to their daughters. And really, I think they don’t want to know.

Esthier on May 31, 2007 at 10:32 AM

True. Its a form of female jealous also. Older women force the younger women to do it so the Younger women dont steal their men away.

But again it goes back to the fact that Islam is a poligamistic sect. Older women have to fear a younger wife taking the attentions of their man. Hence the need for women to control other women.

Remove the poligamy and women wouldnt do this to each other.

As many of you have said: control begins from within.

Because its not about preventing sex its about controlling women. You cant have women thinking or driving cars or talking to their betters

spit.

William Amos on May 31, 2007 at 10:04 AM

Except it’s the women who do it to other women. I think it really is about preventing enjoyment in sex. The women who are doing it to their children have had bad sex all their lives and don’t know what their doing to their daughters. And really, I think they don’t want to know.