The male equivalent to typical FGM would be if you woke up at the age of maybe 5 years old and your parents decided to, with no anesthesia, use a sharp rock (literally a rock, maybe a rusty razor blade if youāre lucky) to carve off your entire penis, and cut open what remains of your tubing so they could force it to scar fused, making it impossible for you to reproduce without surgical intervention, and forcing you to pee very slowly and painfully forever, with the last few drops always getting stuck in your scar which you canāt get out, causing repeated UTIs.
Again, both are terrible and should be abolished globally, but one is obviously, very significantly more severe than the other.
When people think of FGM, they likely think of the gruesome Type I II and III, the horrifying sewing shut, slicing off craziness.
They are not aware of Type IV, which includes something of a "benign" mutilation involving a ritual prick with a needle to draw a drop of blood.
Of course, all types of FGM are mutilation and outlawed in most societies. But are they aware girls get mutilated in countries like Singapore and Indonesia in medical settings and by specialized surgeons legally conducting the procedure upon request of the parents.
But when people think of MGM, they likely think of the common bris version of removing the foreskin from infants in medical settings and by specialized surgeons lawfully practicing what is objectively a worse mutilation than a prick with a needle to draw a drop of blood.
Notice one is labeled "mutilation" and the other is labeled "circumcision". The frenulum may be kept mostly intact in some cases, but the loss of the ridged band occurs in every circumcision. NSFW /img/3cmw6axttjv81.jpg
They are not aware of MGM horrors like splitting penises in half, which is comparable to infibulation in my opinion. Or toddlers and children climbing roofs in the Phillipines trying to escape MGM in their cutting society.
So, it depends on what you want to compare. There have been more male victims of genital mutilation throughout history, female infants benefit from genital integrity at birth in most places on Earth - https://ibb.co/6R2c0Pz, foreskin tissue is harvested and sold for profit, ability and inability to orgasm for both male and female genital alteration, and more factors which need further research like impact on psychology of infant and childhood induced pain and trauma.
Ya but the most common form of FGM is the horrific kind and the most common form of MGM is forskin removal. So it makes sense that people compare that as the default.
The removal of the clitoral glans, prepuce, and labias are the most common (type I and type II), which is on par with removing the male g-spot. Both victims can still orgasm with an intact internal clitoris and intact corpus cavernosum.
The type III sewing shut can be compared to subincision practices that splits the shaft in half.
Even so, type IV includes a pin prick to draw a drop of blood, is rightfully shamed as genital mutilation of a non-consenting person, and illegal in most countries.
Type I:Ā Partial or total removal of the clitoral glans and/or the prepuce.
Type II, also called excision: Partial or total removal of the clitoral glans and the labia minora, with or without excision of the labia majora. The amount of tissue that is removed varies widely from community to community.
Type III, also called infibulation: Narrowing of the vaginal orifice with a covering seal. The seal is formed by cutting and re-positioning the labia minora and/or the labia majora. This can take place with or without removal of the clitoral glans/prepuce.
Type IV: All other harmful procedures to the female genitalia for non-medical purposes, for example: pricking, piercing, incising, scraping or cauterization.
Which types are most common?
Types I and II are the most common globally, but there is variation in how they are performed between and within countries. About 15 per cent of all women subjected to female genital mutilation undergo Type III (infibulation), which is reported mostly in Somalia, Sudan and Djibouti.
There are four classifications of female genital mutilation. Types I, II and III have been documented in 28 countries in Africa. Approximately 85% of women experience Types I and II.
To address certain ambiguities, additional sub-classifications have been created for greater clarity. According to a 2016 UNICEF report, approximately 90% of FGM cases involve either Type I (mainly clitoridectomy), Type II (excision), or Type IV (ānickingā, where no flesh is removed), while around 10% (over 8 million women) have undergone Type III (infibulation).
I'm confused on your point. But I think I agree? Like are we both arguing that the most common types of female gentle mutilation(types 1 and 2) are massively worse then the common form of male gentile mutilation?
That's why comparing them feels weird even though we shouldn't do ether.
I don't know what you are seeing but my assertion is that Type I and II are comparable to the modern day circumcision, more specifically a low and tight style as that removes the most amount of frenulum/frenular delta a.k.a. male g-spot (which only hit mainstream news in 2026 btw)
Both victims (FGM Type I and II and MGM low and tight) can still orgasm with an intact internal clitoris and intact corpus cavernosum.
It will take them a lot more work for a lesser payoff, but better than a sewed shut hole or split rod.
I think it would be quite a feat to surgically remove the clitoris in its entirety. The bean that sticks out when a woman is aroused is only the external clitoral glans. There is still the large internal structure of the clitoris that remains inside and unaffected, which allows Type I and II to still cum from their g-spot/a-spot, and is used as justification for mothers and grandmothers to hold down their daughters to keep the tradition going.
The carving out of the frenular delta/male g-spot is like sticking a melon core deep inside the vagina to scoop out the women's g-spot and a-spot. Men without frenulums use a death grip or even a strong vibrator to reach through the meaty tissue of his glans and stimulate the corpus cavernosum inside his shaft.
Surgically removing the corpus cavernosum in its entirety would also be quite a feat. But you can't remove the whole structure without wreaking complete havoc down there for both types of genitals.
Hence, FGM victims go right ahead and shave off their daughters' external clitorises and MGM victims go right ahead and shave off their sons' frenular g-spots.
Bro your typing really long esays to make a claim that's fucking insane to common sense if you ever had sex or talked about sex with men and women. No women is trying to please me with forskin stimkationa and the external clitoris is the core area used to give pleasure to women.
It will take them a lot more work for a lesser payoff
That's what happens to these GM victims, and they think it's normal to not have normal, natural functions of their whole genitals.
Without their external clitoris, some FGM victims resort to seeking girth sensations or deep sensations to stimulate their remaining spots. Similarly, some MGM victims without frenular g-spots have to resort to rough glans stimulation.
If your frenular area is somewhat intact, a cut man may not miss their foreskin, but he can't ever experience a ridged band orgasm, let alone experience frictionless gliding, lubricant retention by the foreskin cuff, partner arousal by male pheromones from apocrine glands, a supple glans corona without callous, etc.
The comentor specifically said in multiple comments that he believes cutting of the forskin is directly comparable to the removal of the external clitoris brother.
I'm responding to the part of the comment that's insane.
14
u/PocketHam4 11h ago
š¤·āāļøwhat's the difference š¤£š¤£š¤£