“Cultural Bias in the AAP’s 2012 Technical Report and Policy Statement on Male Circumcision”
38 high-ranking medical doctors and professors from 17 western countries outside of the US strongly criticise the AAP stance on male circumcision in new medical article published in AAPs own journal Pediatrics (imagine that going through peer review). Danish medical Professor Morten Frisch is lead author on the paper..
I’m sure you’re eager to read the new article, but although they have promised to make the entire thing free to all readers, Pediatrics have only opened for the abstract. However, I got my hands on the whole thing. Read it here Continue reading →
Now don’t get me wrong, I think Ayaan Hirsi Ali is an incredibly bright and brave woman who makes a true difference in the world and I thoroughly respect her work, but while I completely agree with her opinion on female genital mutilation (FGM) I reserve the right to disagree with her stance on male genital mutilation aka circumcision.
Following the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommendation to allow a nick in the clitoris as a symbolic alternative to more intrusive female genital mutilation rituals (the lesser of two evils argument) Ayaan Hirsi Ali voiced a strong counter argument; allowing any ritual even a nick – which is still genital mutilation by the way – is sending a signal that we as a society accept the basic premise, that women are inferior beings with an evil sexuality that should be harnessed. Of course, any society that considers all humans created equal cannot accept such an attitude; as Ayaan Hirsi Ali has put it on a different occasion ‘Tolerance of intolerance is cowardice‘.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Read Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s response to AAPs FGM recommendations here
But as right and just Ali is on the stance against FGM, she is wrong – both factually and morally – when claiming that male genital mutilation is less invasive.