Islam’s Hatred of the Clitoris

FrontPage Magazine ^ | Jamie Glazov

[VinnyTex]

Islam’s Hatred of the Clitoris

FrontPageMagazine.com | October 19, 2001

Editor’s Note: The following article contains graphic descriptions of female genital mutilation, which some sensitive readers may wish to avoid.

IF YOU HATE WOMEN, and you hate their sexuality, and you are terrified that you cannot control it, the most effective thing you can do is to mutilate female sexual pleasure. This can be done by a sexual lobotomy, which will destroy an essential and sacred part of a woman’s natural makeup. In achieving this feat on all women, you will become able to ruthlessly dominate them.

	Make Comments
	View Comments
	Printable Article
	Email Article

That’s what female circumcision is all about.

It’s about obliterating the clitoris, or the entire outer vagina. It is the barbarity that exists where misogyny festers most: in the Muslim and African world.

The Muslims are the principal religious group that practice female circumcision. In Egypt, for instance, 97 percent of women are circumcised. Their clitorises are amputated. In countries like Sudan, meanwhile, the women-haters are not so kind: all the women’s external genital organs are completely removed. In a savagery called infibulation, the clitoris, the two major outer lips (labia majora) and the two minor inner lips (labia minora) are amputated.

Nawal El Saadawi has documented these horrifying realities in The Hidden Face of Eve: Women in the Arab World. She demonstrates how the violence of female circumcision is performed on girls anywhere from the ages of one month to puberty. Usually, it is done around the age of seven or eight. Anesthetics are never used. The child is pinned down by several women, while one of them attacks.

After infibulation, the small outer opening of the vagina is the only portion left intact. A tiny piece of wood or reed is inserted to allow urine and menstrual blood to seep out. Extra narrowing of the opening is carried out with stitches, which remain until marriage. The victim’s legs are often bound together from hip to ankle and she is immobile for about a month or two.

This violence has to occur because, in much of the Islamic world, the female’s genital area is considered dirty and unacceptable. For example, in Egypt the uncircumcised girl is called nigsa (unclean). Thus, it has to be made "clean."

Many of the victims lose their lives during this torture – which is often inflicted with broken glass. Many other victims are afflicted with acute and chronic infections for the rest of their lives.

With serious and disabling lifelong consequences, the mutilation robs women of their equilibrium. It deprives them from enjoying the fullness of their sexuality and the completeness of their lives. In terms of sexual pleasure, for instance, we know that approximately 75 percent of women cannot achieve orgasm without clitoral stimulation. In other words, the possibility of orgasm has been obliterated for tens of millions of women in the Muslim world. So what does it mean if the psychic, mental and physical health of women cannot be complete if they do not experience sexual pleasure?

The terror of the circumcision itself tracks its traumatized victims down like a nightmare. Most, if not all, of these poor women end up suffering from serious sexual and/or mental distortions. The mutilation of their sexual being becomes the epicenter where sex and violence meet constantly in their lives – with them as victims.

Wedding night is often quite eventful. In some parts of the Arab and African world, the husband assaults the wife after the wedding. In Somalia, for instance, the groom beats the bride with a leather whip. After this romantic apex, he cuts the sealed vagina with a sharp scalpel or razor in order to have intercourse. He then has prolonged repeated intercourse with her for a week – to prevent the scarring from closing the vaginal opening again. During this time the wife must lie still and not move. Meanwhile, the husband takes the bloody sharp object, which represents the virginity of his wife, and makes rounds around the community – showing it off for approval. Scholars such as Raphael Patai and Vincent Crapanzano have documented these phenomena.

After this honeymoon period, the woman is now, for the first time in her life, actually recognized as a person – because she has become the extension of her husband. Her status might even improve if she has a child (a boy). She will be humiliated and shamed, however, if she has a non-child (a girl).

And if a little innocent girl enters this world, it will only be a short time before her genitals share the same fate as that of her mother’s. When the torturers and soul-destroyers begin to slice, who will hear her cries?

Jamie Glazov holds a Ph.D. in History with a specialty in Soviet Studies. He is the author of 15 Tips on How to be a Good Leftist.. His father, Yuri Glazov, was a Soviet dissident during the Brezhnev era, who signed the Letter of Twelve, denouncing Soviet human rights abuses. His mother, Marina Glazov, also participated in the dissident movement in the Soviet Union, actively typing and circulating Samizdat - the underground political literature. To avoid imprisonment, Yuri Glazov took his family out of the USSR in 1972 and settled in Canada in 1975, when Jamie was 9. Today Jamie battles socialism from his high-tech warroom in Toronto. He writes the Dr. Progressive advice column for angst-ridden leftists at EnterStageRight.com. E-mail him at jglazov@home.com.

[PJ-Comix]

Doc can look it up the next time he steals a Gideon Bible from a motel room.

[Sci Fi Guy]

Uuuuummmm - there's a huge difference. Male circumcision doesn't prevent him from having sexual pleasure.

actually female circumcision is a misleading term, castration is far more accurate.

[Sci Fi Guy]

Actually, the feminists have been outspoken about this issue.

yes but when the UN had their conferences on(for) Women the leading issues were abortion and gay rights. So I guess that since this does not affect them(american/european fems) personally, it's not their number one issue.

[Doc On The Bay]

Abraham was a Man--acting on what he believed were "Divine Instructions!"

THINK!!--Would a "Loving God" DELIBERATELY "GELD" a "Creation" he made "Out of a Father's Love??"

WHY NOT simply create "MAN" WITHOUT a Foreskin??

What kind of "Father" would require his Children to Sexually mutilate their Infants??

There is SOMETHING WRONG HERE___

Doc

[disclaimer]

No but He made the original Rx

The Catholic church does not require circumcision - now you're saying that you know better than the Catholic church on this matter.

[PJ-Comix]

There is SOMETHING WRONG HERE___

So why don't you take it upon yourself to rewrite the Bible?

[PJ-Comix]

The Catholic church does not require circumcision.

Doesn't REQUIRE it but also does NOT PROHIBIT it. Or are you saying there was something wrong in the fact that Jesus was circumcised?

[PJ-Comix]

THINK!!--Would a "Loving God" DELIBERATELY "GELD" a "Creation" he made "Out of a Father's Love??"

Oh, and Doc, after you read that Gideon Bible, try reading a Webster's DICTIONARY. "GELD" is completely DIFFERENT than "CIRCUMCISE."

[Consort]

The American Clitorati has selective outrage.

[crystalk]

As a doctor, you should be aware that to circumcize a man does not "geld" = castrate and thus sterilize, him. It does not even do what a vasectomy would, that is, sterilize him without making him impotent or feminized. It only has esthetic and hygienic advantages, unless one be of such religion(s) including Islam by the way, which require it...

But your post had the effect of saying that this was merely a human folly, while my post says that, to a believer, God himself may have mandated or even performed, the operation on occasion.

[disclaimer]

Doesn't REQUIRE it but also does NOT PROHIBIT it. Or are you saying there was something wrong in the fact that Jesus was circumcised?

If Jesus was circumcised yet didn't REQUIRE the proceedure of his followers, then God DOES NOT REQUIRE it either. That is my point. If circumcision was necessary then it would have been required those following Jesus.

Since it is clearly not required, then it should be at the option of the person having the proceedure. Got that?!

[PJ-Comix]

Since it is clearly not required, then it should be at the option of the person having the proceedure. Got that?!

Thanx for agreeing with me. Bottom line: God did NOT condemn circumcision. If it was the HORRIBLE practice that Doc claims, at NO POINT would it have been recommended. Got that?

[disclaimer]

Thanx for agreeing with me. Bottom line: God did NOT condemn circumcision. If it was the HORRIBLE practice that Doc claims, at NO POINT would it have been recommended. Got that?

The point is that circumcision is NOT REQUIRED and is OPTIONAL. The person subjected to circumcision MUST have a choice of accepting it or not.

You make the mistake of thinking that the Old Testament style of circumcision is the same as the modern method using a specially designed clamp. In the old days, a SYMBOLIC portion of skin was removed, now almost the complete foreskin is taken away. What was called circumcision in the Old Testament is not the same as circumcision is today - today the practice is much more destructive.

[Doc On The Bay]

GEEZ, PJ, Unless you're an UTTERLY insensitive Female, you NEED to talk (Frankly & Honestly) with some Males who have been Circumcised AFTER they became "Sexually Active!!"

"Circumcision" IS NOT a "Harmless Procedure!!"

I Make this recommendation in Good Faith--I have the UTMOST RESPECT for your opinion!!

Doc

[Doc On The Bay]

"Circumcision" is a Surgical Procedure involving the removal of a SEXUALLY SENSITIVE portion of the Male Reproductive Anatomy.

The Anatomy & Neurophysiology is INDISPUTABLE!!

The Psychological & Sociological consequences are debatable!

However: DON'T tell ME that "Circumcision" is HARMLESS & INCONSEQUENTIAL!!

YOU CANNOT MUTILATE a child & expect NO CONSEQUENCES!!

"Circumcision" IS TRAUMATIC!!

Doc

[PJ-Comix]

Unless you're an UTTERLY insensitive Female, you NEED to talk (Frankly & Honestly) with some Males who have been Circumcised AFTER they became "Sexually Active!!"

I have and they were all pissed off that their parents were too clueless to have them circumcised after birth when there would be a lot less pain involved. However, after a few weeks of some pain, they were back to normal again except they were a lot cleaner.

[PJ-Comix]

The Anatomy & Neurophysiology is INDISPUTABLE!!

The Psychological & Sociological consequences are debatable!

However: DON'T tell ME that "Circumcision" is HARMLESS & INCONSEQUENTIAL!!

YOU CANNOT MUTILATE a child & expect NO CONSEQUENCES!!

"Circumcision" IS TRAUMATIC!!

Speaking of psychological...Aw, never mind.

[Doc On The Bay]

WELL, "PJ," i doubt I could EVER influence your "Preconceived Understanding" of the actual Trauma & Sexual Damage of Circumcision==(Male OR Female)!

As a Trained Surgeon, I Tell you that ANY "Surgical Procedure" performed on the Human Body is TRAUMATIC!

ANY "Surgical Procedure" performed on a "Reproductively Capable" Human is HUGHLY TRAUMATIC!!

The "Works" DON'T "WORK RIGHT!!!!!"

"Circumcision" is an UTTER, NON-Medical assault on a person's Genitals!!

"Circumcision,"--in the absense of a CLEAR Medical "Indication" for the Surgery,--is Malpractice!!

Doc

[Doc On The Bay]

DAMN!!

"PJ," I have ENORMOUS RESPECT for you!!

I have followed & Read your 'Posts for YEARS!!

I regard you to be one of the "Brightest, Most Articulate" FReepers on this extraordinary Website!!

I've NEVER checked your background; BUT, your comments & assertions about Male Circumcision are indicative of a HIGH DEGREE of "Misinformation!!"

I am a FULLY TRAINED & HIGHLY EXPERIENCED General Surgeon. I have a VAST Field of experience in Medicine, (& I LOVE what I Do!!)

While I would NEVER claim to "Speak For" ANY "Group" of my Patients, I can report to you a "Strong Sense" of the "Thoughts & Beliefs & Feelings" of the Many Thousands of patients I have "Dealt With!!"

I can Honestly Report that I have "Treated" about 1/4 Million "Patients" over the past 30 years!!

I'm Simply trying to say that "Circumcision" is NOT like "Cutting a Toenail!!"

The "Victim" of this "Procedure" is PERMANENTLY TRAUMATIZED!!=="Infant or Not"!!!

Take IT from an "Expert,"-----"Circumcision" is NOT "Benign!!"

"Circumcision" IS NOT EQUIVALENT to "Cutting One's Toenails!!!!"

I SAY THIS as One who has a CREDIBLE level of "Expertise!!"

Doc

[PJ-Comix]

I can Honestly Report that I have "Treated" about 1/4 Million "Patients" over the past 30 years!!

You've worked on 250,000 broken Talleywhackers????!!! Dude, you need a break. Take a vacation (but not to the Washington Monument) and get your mind off that topic.

I'm Simply trying to say that "Circumcision" is NOT like "Cutting a Toenail!!"

But you did say is was like being Gelded. Let's compromise. Circumcision is somewhere between getting your fingernails clipped and getting Gelded....with it being WAY CLOSER to having your fingernails clipped.

The "Victim" of this "Procedure" is PERMANENTLY TRAUMATIZED!!=="Infant or Not"!!!

YUP! It's pretty much destroyed my life....Yawn!