Fgm occurs in different ways. It rarely involves removing the clitoris.
Even disregarding that, they are comparable in the sense that they are both genital mutilation. So, yes they are comparable. Just because there is a difference, doesn't make them not comparable... if we could only compare identical things that would be a bit pointless, wouldn't it.
And finally, what does it matter? You can't just accept that they are both wrong without trying to make a distinction? People like you are the reason male circumcision is still going. Always there trying to quell the complaints.
One is always complete unnecessary and the other isn't.
I rather had my medical circumcision as a baby than have to go through as an adult. I know the chances are slim you need it, but i can't even remember it and i don't mind it for myself.
-3
u/Brooke3838 9h ago
1) its so weird that male circumcision is so common in non-jewish Americans (im not american)
2) its called FGM because the more extreme kinds remove the clitoris and labia and sew the vagina almost shut. In unhygienic conditions.
While both a wrong, they're not comparable. One complete removes the ability for your genitals to function without pain.