Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

3

Dumai wrote (edited )

oh my god are you serious

please do not compare penile circumcision to flower bowl shoes, i can't think of an easier way to trivialise foot-binding and erase its nature as a form of gendered violence

anyhow even if you do oppose circumcision that's not an excuse to echo colonial tropes that portray africans and arabs as barbaric and perpetual victims of their own cultures

4

____deleted____ wrote (edited )

I stated it was lesser; 'almost' was certainly wrong to say entirely. Flower bowl shoes are another tier and a bad comparison to make. The intent was only to highlight it's nature as permanent shaping of the body.

I live in America. I was circumcized. All my male partners have been circumcized. I speak not of other continents.

1

Dumai wrote

if youre talking about a practice that has a loooong cultural history in africa and the middle east then you are speaking of other continents

5

____deleted____ wrote (edited )

Bloodletting had a long cultural history in Europe, circumcision still has extended history in America. And regardless of which culture, I point no fingers at them, only of the practice. Papua New Guinea; rape capital of the world statistically. Some cultures have aspects that are dirty, but I do not wish to portray any culture entirely this way.

1

Dumai wrote

i'm not arguing it's morally justified because it has a cultural history, you could justify literally anything with that kind of argument. what i am saying is that its particular cultural history is morally complex and this means naming this practice as abusive could open the door to some worrying power dynamics.

2

____deleted____ wrote

I suppose I started the argument on a misinterpretation then tripped on my words and made bad comparisons multiple time. Looks like you've won this debate.