FGM stands for Female Genital Mutilation.
The Christians used to engage in this practice; many Muslims still do.
Where even one case is one too many, thousands of immigrants to Europe and North America from the predominantly Muslim countries of the Middle-East and Africa, and from countries like Indonesia, engage in this brutal act or seek it through certain pediatric associations that offer more humane means of accomplishing FGM. (A 1997 survey placed about 500,000 women in the European Union either having had FGM or awaiting it).
Hymen is a big deal in many cultures, especially among the Arab Muslims and many traditional societies such as those in India. Women are expected to be virgins at the time of their marriage. While this expectation has turned out to be a financial boon to the practitioners of hymen reconstructive procedures, the socio-cultural underpinnings of this expectation, tethered to some Godly tenet of asexual virtue, appear to be grotesquely skewed. How else would one explain the void of the demand for this virtue - a fragile proof at best - in men?
If women had to be targeted in this regard, why did the God of Creationism find no folly in making women as they are? Isn't Free Will - another feature eagerly attributed to God - an even greater threat to those who seek to be God's guardians on Earth? Okay, this explains the two points that these two religions most obsess about: sex and Free Will. Deny both, and these guardians feel that all's well! The Mullahs in Rome and Mecca with their lobotomized brains work with great ardency to protect a weak-willed God who can only propose through the appendages he has created, the disposition (of the same) being the sole prerogative of his earthly agents!
I am sure there are those waiting in the wings to put forth the "harm" argument: women get pregnant, men don't, and therefore the "consequences" being different for either gender! Well then, my question is, if we can use the necessary precautions against pregnancy, would you accept the hymen as a non-issue? In many communities fathers initiate their sons to sex at an early enough age almost as a rite of passage. And the more experienced the men are, the better lovers they make! Good lovers are legendary, but it is no secret that practice makes perfect! Women are encouraged to admire this prowess in men. Why could then women not seek to become good lovers themselves? After all wouldn't most men fantasize a sexually healthy girl - where brain is 2/3rd the sexual organ - as opposed to one who has been fostered in the notion of sex as a depraved act under the syllabus of the Mullahs, only to find Dr.Freud join the couple in a menage a trois to explain frigidity!
And, further on that "harm" theory: since pregnancy does not occur from a girl merely thinking about sex, and the male component being inevitable, would a temporary procedure of castration be acceptable on men? This is a legitimately performed procedure on those men who have been involved in violent sexual crimes. Castration dampens sexual desire just as much FGM. I would think this is only fair!
Ayaan Hirsi Ali, author of the books Infidel and Nomad, and a crusader of women's rights especially those held hostage by the Mullahs of Islam, mused that the only recourse for women in Islamic cultures is to go out and have sex (much like the women in the liberal societies) so that "virginity" is no more an option for men! Well, these women may run the risk of being "honour killed", the other man-god notion. But then, the final outcome is the same: instead of no more virgins, there will be no more women left for men to marry! The silver lining of this predicament could be that, perhaps, homosexuality may gain respectable acceptability as an alternative for these men!
After all, God is only a helpless little elf in some Santa's fantasy land busy making all these fantastic creations, only for the impetuous boy-men to throw tantrums over and break them, or seek modifications never approved in the blueprint or the original specifications!
No comments:
Post a Comment