"... avoidance of the ‘circumcision’ debate for anti-FGM campaigns is increasingly untenable"

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • "... avoidance of the ‘circumcision’ debate for anti-FGM campaigns is increasingly untenable"

      Although the aims of clitoridectomy and removal of the foreskin are incomparable, the belief in their equivalence plays a role in the longevity of the former. And given that human and children’s rights are increasingly influential in the discussion of both customs, avoidance of the ‘circumcision’ debate for anti-FGM campaigns is increasingly untenable.Therefore, contributions are invited to explore issues surrounding circumcision; consider circumcision in comparison to FGM; analyse efforts to sustain and abolish both;
      Gleich im ersten Halbsatz die ersten beiden Fehler

      And given that human and children’s rights are increasingly influential in the discussion of both customs, avoidance of the ‘circumcision’ debate for anti-FGM campaigns is increasingly untenable
      Das ist allerdings richtig. Die Frage ist - wie man diese Debatte führt, geschlechtsneutral, oder mit rosa Spin.

      Dieser Satz lässt letzteres befürchten:


      examine circumcision/FGM as enhancements/ detriments to sexual development or fulfilment
      man beachte die Reihenfolge:

      circumcision - enhancement

      FGM - detriment

      Wenn man sich die Liste der Vortragenden anschaut ist diese Interpretation zu befürchten.


      kcl.ac.uk/events/circumcision-…-the-man-maketh-the-woman
      Schafft endlich die Todesstrafe für die Jungenvorhaut ab!
      Sie ist genauso unschuldig wie die Genitalien von Mädchen.