+ + + 3 BRANDNEW NewsTickers for your Website! + + + easy configurable in less than 1 Minute + + + GET'EM NOW! + + +

   Home | Join | Submit News | MyShortNews | HighScores | FAQ'S | Forums 0 Users Online   
                 01/22/2018 03:35 AM  
  ShortNews Search
search all Channels
RSS feeds
  ShortNews User Poll
Are you excited about the holiday season?
  Latest Events
  90.365 Visits   4 Assessments  Show users who Rated this:
Quality:Very Good
Back to Overview  
12/21/2009 10:36 AM ID: 82161 Permalink   

Uganda Outlaws Female Circumcision


The African country of Uganda has outlawed female genital mutilation after parliament unanimously voted in favour of the legislation. The bill gives anyone who performs the procedure 10 years in prison.

Anyone who uses force to make a woman undergo the procedure faces a sentence of life in prison. Uganda's shadow health minister said: "This operation is so painful, so cruel, and these so-called surgeons are paid to do it."

He added that while he's on the opposition party, "I supported the bill with all my strength and heart." According to the United Nations, 100-140 million women worldwide have been victims of the procedure.

    WebReporter: Lois_Lane Show Calling Card      
ASSESS this news: BLOCK this news. Reason:
  Lois, bless you  
It is ABOUT TIME! I am so happy to see that this passed.

Uganda, I applaud all of the politicians there that worked TOGETHER to pass this(Did you see that you ignorant politicians here in the US? They worked TOGETHER for the best interest of their citizens, try it!) Wait one more time here "parliament unanimously voted in favour" yes I did read it correctly.

Fellow American´s pay attention because that is how it should work, demand it from the people you put in office, if they can´t work together then they need to hit the road and find another career.

This is such a fantastic thing to read about and hopefully anyone one else that even thinks about performing this procedure prepare to be jailed.

Havoc-I know you will reply here about male circumcision since you explained to me before that you are against it. I understand your concerns and can even agree with you that it should be left up to the individual, if not banned outright. I don´t see it ever being banned but it is a hot topic with many people.

The differences are of course that the females are being forced to mutilate themselves and not at birth or shortly after when they say is the safest. This is what it looks like as a 4-year-old reacts about having it done(not graphic) and that is why I wouldn´t suggest a male or female undergo cicumcision at an older age. In addition depending on what sort of mutilation was done to a young girl she could suffer horribly though the mutilation and then again when she has her virginity lost.
  by: TaraB     12/21/2009 12:04 PM     
million women are too many, if that circumcision is so painful then why those women couldn´t do anyting against it though i know many of them can be a prostitute without it.
  by: vizhatlan     12/21/2009 03:25 PM     
  This is  
One of the most terrible things to inflict upon a human being. I´m personally in favor of execution for anyone who forces this procedure on another. Another thing, I´ve always wondered why a man would not want a woman to enjoy themselves in sex. It makes no sense to me. I hope this is banned and enforced in full effect not just in Uganda, but everywhere in the world.
  by: DoubleTake   12/21/2009 05:33 PM     
  Praise be.  
I´m against all circumcision, by golly! Even my own!

I mean. What.
  by: Dayron   12/21/2009 05:37 PM     
  This is good news...  
let us hope this will be followed on nearby countries too.
  by: captainJane     12/21/2009 06:38 PM     
I have no feeling in the tip half of my tool, because of nerve damage suffered during routine circumcision. My parents were christians, I am not. Yet I will be circumcised my entire life, something which was done to me without my consent, against my will.

There is no medical reason, and no hygienic reason. It began as a way to stop masturbation, and for religious reasons. There is no good reason for males to have to undergo something so painful and unnecessary.

I hope I´ve got this message through in a calm and rational manner. I don´t mean to blame anyone or say that their beliefs are misguided, please do not take it that way. ^_^
  by: jbloodthorn   12/21/2009 10:28 PM     
  How sexist  
of Uganda.
  by: H. W. Hutchins   12/21/2009 10:50 PM     
there´s no need to do that in a calm and rational manner. Scream, yell, pound the idea into everyone´s heads that ALL circumcision is wrong.

people who commit crimes against humanity via circumcision MUST be punished (especially in developed countries regarding male circumcision!)

It frustrates me to no end to see the sexism regarding how people view circumcision here in America. What... because I´m a man I should just "tough it out"?

Maybe I have to move to a new country... because America seems less developed every day.
  by: Trevelyan   12/22/2009 02:12 AM     
  @ DoubleTake  
Because in their culture and belief system, if they believe a woman enjoys sex, she will stray. He wouldn´t be able to guarantee any progeny she bore as being his alone. It´s a territorial thing-- and instead of pissing on a tree or shrub, they mutilate girls and women.

I am glad that one country has taken a definite step towards coherency.
  by: Clea   12/22/2009 03:05 AM     
as far as i know this is found out for if the woman gives birth to any babies then she has to live with them and her family and not to commit any adultery.
  by: vizhatlan     12/22/2009 12:01 PM     
jblood-"I hope I´ve got this message through in a calm and rational manner. I don´t mean to blame anyone or say that their beliefs are misguided, please do not take it that way. ^_^"

I do not have a problem with anything you said jbloodthorn. I didn´t take anything as angry or anything other than honesty in what you wrote and your feelings about male circumcision. I mentioned Havoc and male circumcision because last time this came up it got a tad heated. The problem that faces male circumcision is more difficult to get any religious groups to give it up along with young women that do not research for themselves and only listen to gossip, rumors and religious doctrine.

I know Trevelyn thinks I was being sexist in my comment and that was not the intention at all, I simply wanted Havoc to know I had not forgotten his concern over male circumcision. Like I told him I don´t see a problem with it even being banned. I will reply to him next.

With all that I said and I have meant, I think most of us can admit that what they are doing to those girls is not acceptable in anyway and is done simply for the ´fear´ that they would enjoy sex at an older age and be promiscuous. What they do by removing different areas depending on who and where it ´s done with most of these girls having the actual structure changed and sewn back in such ways that they not only will never be able to enjoy sex, it will even more painful and when she eventually gives birth it will have to be ripped or torn if a Dr. isn´t there to perform a episiotomy. Again, not taking away what has been done to many men in the name of religion and accepted society, even though both sexes have circumcisions I am (I don´t want to say happy) less upset with those who preform male circumcisions in a safe and sterile environment. I am not saying it makes it right and I want to stress that as much as I can.
  by: TaraB     12/22/2009 01:15 PM     
  Good post..  
I remember years ago when this got media attention, I remember being so disturbed. I´m glad to see this has finally gotten some attention where it´s actually needed. Thanks for the good news Ms. Lane :)
  by: tuogh     12/22/2009 08:36 PM     
  Trying to understand your post tara  
but being less upset over male circumcision?? how can that not be sexist?

no matter how "clean" it is, ANY circumcision regardless of gender is wrong. A male circumcision in a hospital should upset people JUST AS MUCH as female one done in a dirt pit in Africa!

We´re all human beings, no matter what gender you are blessed with!!!!! but what does my opinion matter? it sure didn´t when I was a infant.

I respect your opinion tara, I don´t assume you support this kind of brutality or think you truly are a sexist person. just the wording of your post stabbed my eyes in the wrong way and I felt the need to post once more. sorry if I upset you.
  by: Trevelyan   12/22/2009 11:51 PM     
Trevelyan- I am sorry if you took my post to mean anything other than to point out some of the differences that are facing male and female mutilation. I knew that part of my reply was going to be difficcult no matter how I worded it and I tried to go with one that didn´t sound offensive. I would like to try and explain what I meant, but I do wonder if it isnt better to let the summary die instead..
  by: TaraB     12/23/2009 07:22 AM     
  @ Trev  
I´m circumcised and doing just fine... no complaints here. Just uh, going about my day to day business... circumcised, and enjoying it.

When I have a son, he´ll be circumcised too. Shame on me.
  by: C.O.G.   12/23/2009 06:41 PM     
I had it done (male version) when I was a baby. I have been most grateful for it, as has my sex partners over the years. I don´t really understand the opposition to male circumcision, but to each his on. I´ve heard the arguments against, and none of they have applied to me.
I´m opposed to female circumcision because it has no useful purpose and is extremely painful and mutilating.
  by: Lurker     12/23/2009 07:34 PM     
(no edit button)
  by: Lurker     12/23/2009 07:35 PM     
  genital mutilation  
the things that pisses me off most about female circumcision is that its held to be worse than male circumcism merely because one males its uaually done before they are articulate anything... and i guess the days of crying aren´t a hint enough for these multilation supporting morons... and yet if i want to cut off parts of people´s genitals i´d be in jail (and rightly so).

"I have been most grateful for it, as has my sex partners over the years."

ask those dunces how they feel about female circumcism. my bet is they wont be nearly as enthusiastic about the idea of being circumsized themselves as they are about their partners being so. i´ve heard some of the reaction from women about circumcism their comments are enough to make me want to slap them upside the back of their back heads and say "you want circumcision, YOU get one".

"I´m opposed to female circumcision because it has no useful purpose and is extremely painful and mutilating."

and you support male circumcism why?, it hase no useful purpose (other than deadening nerves; same as female circumcism), its extremely painful (the crying for days should make that obvious) and OBVIOUSLY mutilating compare a natural penis to circumcised one and tell me a circumsized penis isn´t mulitilated.


in my opinion if people are willing to let their kids be mulitated, they shouldn´t be allowed to have them, and/or SHOULD have their genitals multilated themselves so they can understand what they are about to put their kids through... after they cry for a few days like baby they might have an understanding of the pain and mutilation they are actually supporting.


always looking out for me...LOL

saved me some typing.


most people know how horrible female circumicision is... but most people OBVIOUSLY don´t know the same about male circumcism...

and if they want to understand the genital mutilation that is considered acceptable take a look at this step-by step procedure and see if its any less sickening (and this is a adult circumcision BTW)... WARNING - graphic images:

also would female circumcism be any more acceptable if done in a sterile hospital environment? and if not why would anyone support male circumcism... other than for religious reasons which SHOULD be a PERSONAL choice even on that front, much less the actual act of circumcision which should also be a personal choice.
  by: HAVOC666     12/23/2009 08:33 PM     
  @ Havoc  
Good thing I´m not living based your opinion, right? ;)
  by: C.O.G.   12/23/2009 09:06 PM     
you got that right.

its also my opinion that its wrong to beat kids... but by all means beat yours *rolls eyes*.

and would you extend that same logic of yours to female circumcism that if you wanted to do it to your kid it would be done... if so i rest my case (about my last comment to you), and if not then i expect a reason why this is any different... abuse is abuse... genital mutiliation is genital mutilation, and the pain as a result of such applies irregardless of gender. the only difference in the in the minds of those that actually think its any different... its just as barbaric a procedure as female circumcision, the only difference is that as a result of the women´s rights movements female circumcision is starting to be shown for what it is... a barbaric religiously inspired medical procedure, the same as male circumcision... the biggest actuall difference is that it usually happens to men shortly after birth, before they can ojbect to it... and as a result is considered normal and acceptable.

as usual religion is the catalayst of the backwardness of the human race.
  by: HAVOC666     12/23/2009 10:17 PM     
You said:
I´m opposed to female circumcision because it has no useful purpose and is extremely painful and mutilating.

I say:
I´m opposed to male circumcision because it has no useful purpose and is extremely painful and mutilating.
  by: jbloodthorn   12/24/2009 03:05 AM     
  A few things....  
Female circumcision is not worse than male circumcision because women are morally or religiously different than men. It is worse because of the after affects it brings. It literally removes a very important erogenous area of the female body while not so for males. The female equivalent to the male frenum (the most sexually sensitive and stimulating area on the penis) is the clitoris and because of that, when it´s removed it takes with it the woman´s ability to be properly sexually stimulated. This leads, in addition to Tara´s points, to a woman´s body not being able to invoke the naturally occurring lubrication that is needed for pleasurable intercourse. Male circumcision does not remove that portion of the penis and therefore when properly performed, has a much lessened overall affect on a man´s ability to both correctly perform during sex or actually enjoy the act. Jblood is a rare case.

None of what I´ve said above is to be construed as condoning circumcision on either gender without it being the express will of the patient. Obviously, a child cannot make such a serious decision so that tells me the practice is completely wrong where children are concerned... regardless the flavor of or lack of religion the parent subscribes to.

  by: bbeljefe     12/24/2009 04:23 AM     
  General, Havoc, BB  
General- I have to say that I never had to face the decision of male circumcision because the whole abortion/non viable thing. Hubby had his done at birth and he said to him personally it is a non-issue and I am not about to ask my dad or dad-in-law or even my brothers- in law because I really don´t need to know or have any of those images in my mind, sorry havoc, Jblood and anyone else. I even asked a few girlfriends if they ever paid much attention and either way was fine with them, the only thing that upset one of them was when he hadn´t told her and the reaction that happened sort of ruined the mood. It was the first time she saw a non-circumcised penis. My advice would be to let a new partner know before it becomes playtime. :-)

Also, I have mentioned age and a sterile environment in my own discussions on the differences and on their own they might be true, if weak, but there is much more physical damage done by female mutilation. When you look at it side by side as to the process and what is mutiliated it is clear to even you men who I think are pretty brave to tell your story on here that while both forms are criminal and should be legally criminal that these young girls physical mutiliations are far worse at least physically even if the mentally equals the male form. They are taking away the clitoris and in many cases the labia minora and majora, and of course the last which I had to look up the amount done and wikipedia(yes I know) says it is around 10%. They have all of the types including what it should look like here

always looking out for me...LOL
saved me some typing."

Yeah I know that some people were a tad confused over this, but I have learned quite a bit since the last summary that this is a big issue and very much debated in the males world.

BB-"This leads, in addition to Tara´s points, "
"None of what I´ve said above is to be construed as condoning circumcision on either gender without it being the express will of the patient. Obviously, a child cannot make such a serious decision so that tells me the practice is completely wrong where children are concerned... regardless the flavor of or lack of religion the parent subscribes to."

Thank you and your comment was great.
  by: TaraB     12/24/2009 08:13 AM     
Would I put my daughters through circumcision? No! My justification behind it is because... No!

I was circumcised and I´m loving it! My son will be circumcised, and I´m sure he´ll love it!

Also, if my kids get out of line and they need the belt put to their tail... guess what´s going to happen?
  by: C.O.G.   12/24/2009 10:23 AM     
I had to laugh at this "Would I put my daughters through circumcision? No! My justification behind it is because... No!"

Not only would you say this, but any man that had a daughter would say something very similar. Reading that gave me the picture of my husband saying the same thing.

I won´t have the decision to make for getting a male circumcised and honestly I had glad about that now that I have been enlightened to these discussions. I have thought about a saying my friend told me long ago and that was "A boy has to look like his daddy under the hood" and it is something I thought was how most people saw it, after all I´m dealing with girls.
  by: TaraB     12/24/2009 10:57 AM     
Regardless of how circumcision started, it´s proven to be much cleaner for the male to have it done... These days it´s all about the medical standpoint. Lowers the chance of a UTI, lessens the chance of putting a smelly wiener in your girl, etc. You know, the usual. The benefits go both ways, most males these days would probably prefer having it done, if not just to feel more "normal". But that´s neither here nor there, right or wrong.
  by: Dayron   12/24/2009 02:16 PM     
Thank you for taking the time to explain that to me. It seems some people never evolved with the human race and decided to stay somewhere between us and the primate family.
  by: DoubleTake   12/24/2009 03:05 PM     
It is not more hygenic, and does not prevent UTI´s. I´ll look the numbers up for you after we do the rounds with the family today.

Cut off some of your skin, about the area of a 3x5 index card (for realism, you can only use a topical anesthetic). Now wrap a wet or dirty diaper around the wounded area. How is that hygenic?
  by: jbloodthorn   12/24/2009 04:59 PM     
Ah, well, that´s cool. Do the numbers, I guess. And then get back at me. Make sure to do all of the research first though, then I´ll hear you out for sure.
  by: Dayron   12/25/2009 02:59 AM     
  My research so far.  
This is not all the research. I first tried to find as many good points about Circ as I could. Finding bad points is easy, but I wanted to have a ´devils advocate´ here too. I put the 2 points I found at the bottom. Since I only found the 2 points, I limited my search for bad points to only 2 sources.

Circumcision is extremely painful - and traumatic - for a baby. Just being strapped down is frightening for a baby. The often repeated statement that babies can´t feel pain is not true. Babies are as sensitive to pain as anyone else. Most babies scream frantically when their foreskin is cut off. Some defecate. Some lapse into a coma. The reason some babies don´t cry when they are circumcised, is that they can´t cry because they are in a state of shock. Most babies are circumcised without anesthesia. Anesthetics injected into the penis don´t always work. Being stuck with a needle in the penis is itself painful for a baby, just as if would be for anyone else. Babies are rarely given pain medicatiion right after they are circumcised or during the week to ten days it takes for the wound to heal. Pain medication is not always effective and is never 100% effective.

Random factoids:
Currently the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) does not recommend non-medical circumcision except for religious circumcisions.

In fact, no medical organization in the world recommends newborn circumcision because the risks of the procedure may not outweigh the risks to the infant.

Many insurances no longer cover the costs of circumcision. Their reasoning is that, unless there are medical reasons, it is a cosmetic surgery.

Some parents wonder about news articles stating that a circumcision can prevent all sorts of aliments. The AAP found these studies to be medically flawed.

Medicalized circumcision began during the 1800s to prevent masturbation, which was believed to cause disease.

Only the USA circumcises the majority of newborn boys without medical or religious reason.

As for hygene:
In infancy and usually during childhood, the inner surface of a male´s foreskin and the surface of his glans are one continuous structure. The narrow opening of the non-retractable (normal) foreskin protects the urinary opening (meatus) from ammonia, feces, foreign matter, friction, irritation, ulceration, and infection. The foreskin becomes free from the head and is able to be pulled back within a few years, allowing simple cleaning. Making this part of a boy’s bath or shower usually prevents any problems.

Other problems that circumcision can cause:
Local infection
Injury to penis
Curvature of the penis
Poor cosmetic appearance due to too little or too much skin removed

The good points:
Circumcision reduces the incidence in infants boys by up to 10-fold, but it is only a reduction of 1 percent to 0.1 percent. The resulting benefit is not thought to continue at older ages.

Mostly prevents penile cancer. Essentially only uncircumcised men develop this cancer but it is exceeding rare with only 1,500 new cases yearly in the U.S.
  by: jbloodthorn   12/26/2009 02:55 AM     
actually no its not... and thats not why its done either... thats just the modern justification for continuing it... they can say the exact same thing for female circumcism if people are ignorant enough to believe it... infact the hygiene aren´t would actually be stronger for female circumcism... so if you believbe that bullshit you ought to also be supporting female circumcism...

my guess is you support it because you have it and were told those reasons, rather than actually research them.

"lessens the chance of putting a smelly wiener in your girl,"

try washing your weiner and you wont have those problems.

"most males these days would probably prefer having it done, if not just to feel more "normal"."

thats explains many things... including religion... wouldn´t want to be an indpendent thinker and make your own choices... nope can´t have that... LMAO

if all your friends jumpped off a cliff would you do it too?, just to fit in?

if they all castratrated themselves would you follow suite...

thats the most stupid logic in the world "do it to fit in" that just shows how sheepish many people are.

also contrary to popular beleif MOST people aren´t circumcised.. it comes down to religious practice mostly... many places in the wont cover it either anymore, nor perform it as a default as they used to; they stopped that in my province a few month before i was born... damn good thing, otherwise i´d seriously be contemptling a lawsuit for it
  by: HAVOC666     12/26/2009 05:54 AM     
  @ Doubletake  
I´d say they evolved, but not in the same manner as the rest of the world. What they view as tradition (I hate that word and all the sadistic crap done in it´s name) and custom is viewed as nothing short of barbarism by outsiders. It´s sad, and I hope Uganda sets a precedent for the rest of the world that encourages such acts of cruelty.

On the topic of male circumcision:

As the mother of a son, I opted to leave him intact. Here´s my list of why: A) why inflict pain upon a tiny being dependent upon you? B) Open wound in dirty diaper isn´t exactly hygienic, and babies don´t have strong immune systems. C) wouldn´t have the tip of my daughter´s clitoris cut off, why would I do the equivalent to my son? D) not all circumcisions are happy-ever after stories (and I dated 2 such cases, I´ve seen the lasting scar tissue and anger at parents that opted to have them damaged) and most importantly, E) if it ain´t broke, why "fix" it?

  by: Clea   12/26/2009 07:32 AM     
  Havoc makes a good point....  
somebody make a mark on the wall. ;)

If hygiene were actually an issue, consider how utterly nasty a "cooter" can get. Yeast infections, pee p*ssy and a few other things come to mind... yet most women are able to keep things pretty damn fun down there. Not to mention.... how the hell is she gonna bitch about some skin that disappears when he gets happy? Has she seen the shit she has going on?

Don´t get me wrong ladies, yours is a hell of a lot better looking than mine and nothing (well, one thing) I can do with mine can make it look anywhere near as nice as yours. ;)

  by: bbeljefe     12/28/2009 04:23 AM     
Copyright ©2018 ShortNews GmbH & Co. KG, Contact: