nehal3m

34 ms·

1. 571.▲
   by nehal3m 4y ago

   I don't think the age of an article invalidates it's findings by default, but of course I'd expect new insights with the passage of time. I'm doubting myself as ever in light of your comment, but the fact that there are
2. 572.▲
   by nehal3m 4y ago

   One, how do you know I am a dude? I am, but you're assuming. Two, I did not compare them, I explicitly said they are NOT equivalent, even accounting for the type of female genital mutilation where the clitoris is merely nicked.
3. 573.▲
   by nehal3m 4y ago

   Except a few results down the page there's an article that links a bunch of studies that claim the studies your article quotes are faulty: https://intaction.org/circumcision-hiv-a-dangerous-mistake/ https:/&
4. 574.▲
   by nehal3m 4y ago

   They're not equivalent in most cases (not all female genital mutilation is performed the same way and I cannot fathom a medical reason for any sort). But that doesn't mean they aren't in the same general category when defined
5. 575.▲
   by nehal3m 4y ago

   To your point, assuming you're a Westerner, I quote you: "female circumcision wouldn't be questioned as the mutilation that it is" Maybe your traditions are blinding you to the fact that male circumcision falls in the sa