FGM/MGM Visual Comparison II

[Joseph]

I've taken the pictures from the recent NY news report:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/20/magazine/20circumcision-t.html?

_r=2&ref=magazine&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

And the blog commentary on the Turkish Circumcision Palace:

http://www.viceland.com/int/v14n9/htdocs/circ.php?country=ca

To create a second visual comparison.

Please visit the following link...

WARNING - Just a little bit graphic.

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=1000579069&blogID=350337158&Mytoken=0F614884-9B6B-4773-976ADC010F006DA9109972863

[cloud7]

looks like myspace took it down

if you need it hosted somewhere I have webspace if you need it

[Joseph]

Actually, no, I was a dumbass and posted the wrong link.

Please scroll back up and click on it...

OR...

Click here. :)

http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=1000579069&blogID=350337158&Mytoken=0F614884-9B6B-4773-976ADC010F006DA9109972863

[likes]

Ah, the hypocrisy:

"Any distinction between injuring the clitoris or the clitoral hood is irrelevant, says Laura Guarenti, an obstetrician and WHO’s medical officer for child and maternal health in Jakarta. “The fact is there is absolutely no medical value in circumcising girls,” she says. “It is 100 percent the wrong thing to be doing.” The circumcision of boys, she adds, has demonstrated health benefits, namely reduced risk of infection and some protection against H.I.V."

Here is a bit more sense from the Dutch Minister for women but I think she is in the vast minority:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NDz99IHHNkg