Su suggerimento di @uqbal

Sulla circoncisione maschile e quella femminile vengono espressi giudizi assai diversi, e diverso è anche l’atteggiamento della legge non solo nei Paesi  di origine di tali pratiche, ma anche in Occidente. Ma c’è davvero una differenza sostanziale? Ne parla un articolo su Aeon.

You often hear that genital mutilation and male circumcision are very different. FGM is barbaric and crippling (always torture, as the Guardian columnist Tanya Gold wrote recently), whereas male circumcision is comparatively inconsequential. Male circumcision is a ‘minor’ intervention that might even confer health benefits, whereas FGM is a drastic intervention with no health benefits, and only causes harm. The prime motive for FGM is to control women’s sexuality; it is inherently sexist and discriminatory and is an expression of male power and domination. That’s just not true for male circumcision. Unfortunately, there’s a problem with these claims.

 

Immagine da Wikimedia Commons