Talk:Genital modification and mutilation

The distinction between modification and mutilation.

Hi, so sorry for for my first attempt at editing without using this talk page. I would like to help develop this article and bring clarification to this distinction as the article currently lacks. DavidHGrateful (talk) 03:19, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

How can there be two terms in the heading, but no discussion of them independently. DavidHGrateful (talk) 20:23, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

What do reliable sources have to say on the matter? Zad68 02:47, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

A reliable source is anyone who has experienced either. They will tell you what was done to them.

Mutilation or maiming is an act of physical injury that degrades the appearance or function of any living body, sometimes causing death.

Body modification (or body alteration, called body mutilation by detractors) is the deliberate altering of the human anatomy or phenotype. It usually is connotative of an improvement.

These are very different terms. The difference is based on the intentions and consent of the people involved, with the most emphasis on the person whose genitals are being altered.75.140.98.212 (talk) 06:19, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

It's a fair point, something like a piercing does not cause injury like sex reassignment does. It does not have anything to do with the intentions of anyone though — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.207.135.183 (talk) 02:27, 24 September 2015 (UTC)

Change page name to: genital alterations

This page fails to discuss the distinction between modification and mutilation.

Genital alterations is a broader term that encompasses both.

DavidHGrateful (talk) 20:19, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

On Wikipedia, what matters is what wording reliable sources most commonly use. What evidence are you bringing to support a case that "genital alterations" is more common? See WP:TITLE for Wikipedia's policy on this. Zad68 02:47, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

"Male versus female genital alteration: differences in legal, medical, and socioethical responses." Gend Med. 2007 Jun;4(2):89-96.

Solomon LM, Noll RC. Source Proskauer Rose LLP, New York, New York 10036-8299, USA. Lsolomon@proskuaer.com

Abstract: The different legal, social, and medical approaches to ritually based male and female genital circumcision in the United States are highlighted in this article. The religious and historical origins of these practices are briefly examined, as well as the effect of changing policy statements by American medical associations on the number of circumcisions performed. Currently, no state or federal laws single out male circumcision for regulation. The tolerant attitudes toward male circumcision in law, medicine, and societal opinion stand in striking contrast to the attitudes of those disciplines toward even the least invasive form of female genital alteration. US law tacitly condones male circumcision by providing exemptions that are not available for other medical procedures, while criminalizing any similar or even less extensive procedure on females. The increase in immigration, over the past few decades, of people from countries in which female genital alteration is a cultural tradition has brought the issue to the United States. The medical profession's changing approach over time toward male circumcision is primarily responsible for such different legal and societal reactions toward female genital alteration. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17707843 DavidHGrateful (talk) 06:28, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Adding a Male Genital Mutilation Section

I'm not sure why the changes to the Male Genital Mutilation section were rolled back. For the most part they mirrored the text of the Female Genital Mutilation section. As far as I can tell the rollback was performed to protect the opinions of those in favor of Male Genital Mutilation (I assume specifically male circumcision) and therefore represent a non-neutral point of view. No reasoning was given and no arguments were specified, but in good faith I'll address what I think must be the most important points:

1) There needs to a Female Genital Mutilation and Male Genital Mutilation section in this article. There are many forms of genital mutilation performed on males and females.

2) If it's deemed necessary to have a separate subsection addressing male circumcision and its religious and cultural circumstances, that could be added

3) Male circumcision is, like female circumcision, a form of genital mutilation, so the main heading should be Male Genital Mutilation. The foreskin is part of the male genitalia and the definition of 'mutilate' leaves no doubt that the removal of the foreskin, a discrete and identifiable body part, from a person is mutilation:

Merriam-Webster [1]:

1 to cut up or alter radically so as to make imperfect <the child mutilated the book with his scissors>

2 to cut off or permanently destroy a limb or essential part of : cripple

Dictionary.com [2]:

1. to injure, disfigure, or make imperfect by removing or irreparably damaging parts: Vandals mutilated the painting.

2. to deprive (a person or animal) of a limb or other essential part.

4) I agree with other readers that there needs to be a distinction made in the article between fetishist/aesthetic body modification performed by or on request of the person undergoing the procedure; therapeutic treatments for acute medical conditions; and non-therapeutic, involuntary genital mutilation.

5) No major health organization recommends routine infant circumcision. The WHO, for instance, is very specific in recommending male circumcision only on a voluntary basis for adult men in regions with heterosexual HIV epidemics and only by well trained medical personnel in a medical setting -- not for children and never by non-medically trained religious or cultural representatives.

6) The harmful side effects of male circumcision are well documented. The loss of erogenous tissue and nerve endings, loss of mobility, increased keratinization and drying of the glans, as well as the various medical and surgical complications that in any procedure can lead to disfigurement and death.

7) If someone holds the opinion that there are benefits to male circumcision, and that they outweigh the harm done, they may argue to excuse its practice or even encourage it. Its classification as genital mutilation does not change. The presence of negative side-effects is not affected.

Considering these points, the factual, neutral, and appropriate description of male circumcision is as Male Genital Mutilation. The changes were cited and accurate. We should not be in the practice of censoring encyclopedia articles to preserve the feelings of any group(s).

[1] "Mutilate." Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 12 Sept. 2016.

[2] "mutilation". Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. 12 Sep. 2016. <Dictionary.com http://www.dictionary.com/browse/mutilation>.

[3] "Male Circumcision for HIV Prevention." World Health Organization. World Health Organization, n.d. Web. 12 Sept. 2016.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.3.65.94 (talk) 22:52, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

On November 4, I removed the section because it was quite clearly created to mimic the female genital mutilation content and to paint circumcision as genital mutilation, and I removed it because there is already a circumcision section in the article. The wording of the male genital mutilation section literally took the World Health Organization's wording for female genital mutilation and applied it to the notion of male genital mutilation. As has been discussed times before at Talk:Circumcision and at Talk:Female genital mutilation, there are various reasons why circumcision is not considered mutilation or to be on the same par with female genital mutilation.

Moments ago, Edit15817 (talk · contribs) reverted me, stating, "Genital Mutilation is not funny. Discuss wording before deleting sections. MGM covers more than male circumcision", and Ian.thomson reverted him, stating that he should bring the matter to the talk page. It seems that Edit15817 is the IP. I will see if WP:Med is willing to weigh in on this topic. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 00:22, 24 November 2016 (UTC)