American medical group facilitates barbaric practice of 'female circumcision'

By Warner Todd Huston

The barbaric Muslim practice of mutilating the genitals of little girls apparently is A'OK with the American Academy of Pediatrics, at least just a little bit, anyway. In an act of political correctness gone mad the AAP has announced that it thinks it's a good idea to mollify Muslims and gloss over their barbaric practice by instituting what they are calling a "ritual nick" on little girl's genitals.

It's the veritable camel's nose under the tent flaps. After all, by what logic does one refuse to accept this disgusting attack on womanhood when you agree that any part of the practice is justifiable? Today it will be a "ritual nick," then it becomes a "ceremonial slash," graduating to excuse the removal of some ever growing amount of flesh, and before you know it we have full-blown mutilation of little girls just like many Muslims want.

In the AAP's statement on such mutilation a "concern" over the supposed harm to the culture of these immigrant Muslims is treated as a legitimate worry.

Some physicians, including pediatricians who work closely with immigrant populations in which FGC is the norm, have voiced concern about the adverse effects of criminalization of the practice on educational efforts. These physicians emphasize the significance of a ceremonial ritual in the initiation of the girl or adolescent as a community member and advocate only pricking or incising the clitoral skin as sufficient to satisfy cultural requirements. This is no more of an alteration than ear piercing.

Ask a woman whose sexual organs have been laid waste if she thinks it is no different than an ear piercing.

The AAP then goes on to approve of the "ritual nicking" in order to mollify the Muslim immigrant's putrid practices.

However, the ritual nick suggested by some pediatricians is not physically harmful and is much less extensive than routine newborn male genital cutting. There is reason to believe that offering such a compromise may build trust between hospitals and immigrant communities, save some girls from undergoing disfiguring and life-threatening procedures in their native countries, and play a role in the eventual eradication of FGC.

First of all, whether you agree with male circumcision or not — and there is great passion about the practice — it cannot be said that men have their sexual gratification utterly eliminated by the procedure as women do when Muslims heartlessly cut them to pieces in the most extreme examples of the practice of female circumcision. And if American doctors begin to approve of this barbarism at any level they will, indeed, "play a role" in "FGC." They will be playing a role in the eventual full acceptance of female genital mutilation in this country as Muslims continue to push for its acceptance and concessions continue to be made to mollify them.

In America we do not take knives to tear apart the sexual organs of little girls, AAP. There is no more excuse for a "ritual nick" as there is for the full monstrous Muslim practice of slicing little girls to pieces. This disgusting practice should be outlawed in all its forms from the tiniest cut to the worst a Muslim can do to their defenseless children.

Euphemistically called a "female circumcision," the procedure is nothing less than just another way to enslave women to Muslim men. When a woman's pleasure centers are summarily mutilated many things result. When women do not get any pleasure from sex and this fact, goes the backwards Muslim thinking, will prevent them from being interested in men other than their husbands. This hatred for women is a piece with veils, Burqas and other coverings and complies with the Muslim practice of keeping their women suppressed.

It is emblematic of the fact that Muslim beliefs are a man's beliefs. Sex is only pleasurable for men, women are faceless non-entities that deserve no pleasure, they are allowed no lives other than raising children, allowed no self-expression, and if they don't like it they get beaten into submission by their "loving" husbands. This barbarism is precisely what the AAP would open the door to spreading in the United States by allowing even a little recognition of their horrid practice of female mutilation.

Lastly, the AAP's appeasement policies are Chamberlain-like in that they show why the west could possibly lose this fight of a cultural onslaught forced upon us by invading Muslim radicals. As we bend over backwards to be "reasonable" with the unreasonable, they push, prod, and use our own system against us to get eventual complete acceptance of any old barbarism they want to push upon the world.

Sure the AAP made all sorts of noises about how it stands against female mutilation, but that it backed off a total ban on this hatred toward women by allowing the nose-under-the-tent "ritual nick" shows that it really doesn't have the courage of its convictions nor does it have the welfare of women at heart.

So, a tiny bit of mutilation of innocent, helpless little girls is OK with the AAP today. But how long will it be before it is allowing greater and greater amounts of mutilation in order to appease Islamic sensibilities? Likely not long.

© Warner Todd Huston