So anti-semitism isn't racist?

Why such a cynical and pessimistic view of the law? One frequent outcome of such mutual defences for assorted crimes is BOTH being convicted. I have faith in juries in general to see straight through bogus defences, and I am sure you grossly underestimate how hard it is to mount a fake defence in police questioning without tripping yourself and each other up. Then there are the conspiracy laws. At any rate, none of your comments are even the beginning of a reason not to try to prosecute.





No, I hold FGM to be self-evidently child abuse. Anyone who disagrees I would view as a pervert or a religious zealot.



Oh yes, in the long run far better for them to be raised in a non-religious-nutjob environment, by people who love and respect them, and don't want to get religious nutjobs to mutilate them without anaesthetic. However the main aim in this area must surely be to identify girls at RISK of being subjected to FGM and taking steps to prevent it from happening in the first place. Sadly religion is so prevalent that it is no good advocating removing children from even the most fanatical religionists, as the starting point is the impossibility of any such course. But a child who HAS BEEN mutilated? Yep, the parents do not deserve the child and it needs urgent medical help which clearly the parents have no intention of providing.





It's really not. Performing mutilation to genitals is very clearly abuse, and the whole point of it seems to be because the offending body parts are deemed religiously unacceptable as they are sexual organs.





Easy? I never claimed any such thing. It is obviously difficult. But they should have started the prosecutions many years ago, learned from them, developed their methods and in general made it clear by actions that our society simply will not tolerate FGM. The inaction I am sure has convinced proponents of FGM that it is tolerated. They clearly feel safe.





We have done NOTHING though. Not one prosecution for your claimed 60,000 mutilations. Secondly, it IS a crime, and a serious one at that, and performed against the least empowered in our society, and done in cold blood. Your most ridiculous statement is about "criminalising UK citizens for having different beliefs". They can believe whatever they like, including that it would be great if they could chop bits off their children. As long as they do not actually have bits chopped off their children.. That is the criminal act, not believing it should be done.





No-one else? I'm the only one in the UK? Wow. I didn't know.



Ah, you know all of them too. You sure know a lot of people. You should perhaps have told the NSPCC, they could then have saved themselves all the bother and expense of setting of their [url=http://www.nspcc.org.uk/news-and-views/our-news/child-protection-news/female-genital-mutilation-helpline/fgm-helpline-launched_wda96863.htmlFemale genital mutilation helpline[/urlwhich presumably has therefore yet to receive a call. In fact, these unfortunate young girls, already being born into a repressive and controling jail of religious nutjobbery, are raised as no better than slaves, their spirit is broken and this is but one part - if a major partr -of their brainwashing and having their spirit broken, and their sense of self-worth crushed.



What would you guess then motivates [url=http://www.theguardian.com/end-fgmFahma Mohamed[/url, and the 200,000+ people that have signed her Petition to end FGM?



Do you even know what lies in store for them? Did you know they often have their vaginas sewn up? That once they are married off, it is up to man to whom they are given to decide how to re-open the vagina, and apparently the majority feel that anything less than a grand forced re-opening with a penis would make them less of a man?



And you want to let this all continue "because they have different religious beliefs"? If you do, then you simply disgust me.





Thankfully, I believe no civilised person who understands the issue shares your views on this. Certainly not [url=http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/08/05/fgm-female-genital-mutilation-women-fight_n_1744455.html?utm_hp_ref=uk"Ardo"[/url, whose story you might learn something from.

Quote Ferocious Aardvark="Ferocious Aardvark"Why such a cynical and pessimistic view of the law? One frequent outcome of such mutual defences for assorted crimes is BOTH being convicted. I have faith in juries in general to see straight through bogus defences, and I am sure you grossly underestimate how hard it is to mount a fake defence in police questioning without tripping yourself and each other up. Then there are the conspiracy laws. At any rate, none of your comments are even the beginning of a reason not to try to prosecute.'" Do you know whether the people who push for FGM are male or female? Do you know whether the new parents go along with this or whether they are pushed into it by their more traditional parents? If you have a good knowledge of the customs in all these countries and can accurately judge who was involved in arranging it then you can begin to determine who is the guilty party. But convicting a mother of arranging the FGM of her daughter when it may have been completely against her wishes, sending her to jail and ripping her family from her is unlikely to catch on as good practice. Quote Ferocious AardvarkNo, I hold FGM to be self-evidently child abuse. Anyone who disagrees I would view as a pervert or a religious zealot.'" Is male circumcision child abuse? Do some people consider male circumcision to be MGM? I honestly don't know. I'm uncircumcised and have never given it much thought. But I've lived in the USA and in that country I believe most men are circumcised. Why the difference between the US and here? It is pretty clear that the UK and the WHO are vehemently against FGM and the choice to label it FGM rather than simply circumcision shows their stance. But labeling the parents of 1.25m children and women as child abusers is utterly ridiculous. Quote Ferocious AardvarkOh yes, in the long run far better for them to be raised in a non-religious-nutjob environment, by people who love and respect them, and don't want to get religious nutjobs to mutilate them without anaesthetic. '" We can't protect young English girls from being forced into prostitution by Pakistani gangs, but we have loving foster parents ready for young immigrant children who have just been stripped from their homes and families? Quote Ferocious AardvarkHowever the main aim in this area must surely be to identify girls at RISK of being subjected to FGM and taking steps to prevent it from happening in the first place. '" How do you propose doing that? Quote Ferocious AardvarkSadly religion is so prevalent that it is no good advocating removing children from even the most fanatical religionists, as the starting point is the impossibility of any such course. But a child who HAS BEEN mutilated? Yep, the parents do not deserve the child and it needs urgent medical help which clearly the parents have no intention of providing.'" So the NHS estimates 60,000 UK females have had this performed on them. So I'd guess that'd amount to roughly 100,000+ children who you want to forcibly remove from their home and assume responsibility for. Good luck with that. Quote Ferocious AardvarkIt's really not. Performing mutilation to genitals is very clearly abuse, and the whole point of it seems to be because the offending body parts are deemed religiously unacceptable as they are sexual organs. '" Seems? If you know why this procedure takes place then you don't need to hide behind [iseems[/i. Quote Ferocious AardvarkEasy? I never claimed any such thing. It is obviously difficult. But they should have started the prosecutions many years ago, learned from them, developed their methods and in general made it clear by actions that our society simply will not tolerate FGM. The inaction I am sure has convinced proponents of FGM that it is tolerated. They clearly feel safe.'" Just reading up on wikipedia about FGM, but from my quick scanning of the page there is no mention whatsoever of any prosecutions anywhere of parents who have had this procedure performed on their children. All the prosecutions are of the doctors or the people who performed it. So you are arguing for something that no country on earth actually does. Quote Ferocious AardvarkWe have done NOTHING though. Not one prosecution for your claimed 60,000 mutilations.'" Not actually true. www.theguardian.com/society/2014 ... rged-court It seems they go to trial in January Quote Ferocious AardvarkNo-one else? I'm the only one in the UK? Wow. I didn't know. '" So who else in the UK is saying that families should be ripped apart over this issue? How many children are prepared to report their parents over this? Quote Ferocious AardvarkAh, you know all of them too. You sure know a lot of people. You should perhaps have told the NSPCC, they could then have saved themselves all the bother and expense of setting of their [url=http://www.nspcc.org.uk/news-and-views/our-news/child-protection-news/female-genital-mutilation-helpline/fgm-helpline-launched_wda96863.htmlFemale genital mutilation helpline[/urlwhich presumably has therefore yet to receive a call. In fact, these unfortunate young girls, already being born into a repressive and controling jail of religious nutjobbery, are raised as no better than slaves, their spirit is broken and this is but one part - if a major partr -of their brainwashing and having their spirit broken, and their sense of self-worth crushed. '" I'm not pro-FGM. I don't understand it and totally accept the UK and WHOs stance on it. I just don't think your ridiculous solution of wrecking immigrant families has any merit to it. Quote Ferocious AardvarkDo you even know what lies in store for them? Did you know they often have their vaginas sewn up? That once they are married off, it is up to man to whom they are given to decide how to re-open the vagina, and apparently the majority feel that anything less than a grand forced re-opening with a penis would make them less of a man? '" What's your source for this? Quote Ferocious AardvarkAnd you want to let this all continue "because they have different religious beliefs"? If you do, then you simply disgust me. '" I don't want this to continue. I just think your solution to the problem is ridiculous. Quote Ferocious AardvarkThankfully, I believe no civilised person who understands the issue shares your views on this.'" Based upon the NHS, WHO and UN viewpoint I am against FGM. But I do think that this is the argument from one side and there seems to be no attempt whatsoever to accept there is any other point of view. I guess they just aren't civilised enough to be listened to and should just accept what we say. But my main view is that it is a massively difficult issue and that your solution is simplistic, stupid and ultimately damaging to the very people you claim to be wanting to defend.

Quote Ferocious Aardvark="Ferocious Aardvark"Why such a cynical and pessimistic view of the law? One frequent outcome of such mutual defences for assorted crimes is BOTH being convicted. I have faith in juries in general to see straight through bogus defences, and I am sure you grossly underestimate how hard it is to mount a fake defence in police questioning without tripping yourself and each other up. Then there are the conspiracy laws. At any rate, none of your comments are even the beginning of a reason not to try to prosecute.'" Do you know whether the people who push for FGM are male or female? Do you know whether the new parents go along with this or whether they are pushed into it by their more traditional parents? If you have a good knowledge of the customs in all these countries and can accurately judge who was involved in arranging it then you can begin to determine who is the guilty party. But convicting a mother of arranging the FGM of her daughter when it may have been completely against her wishes, sending her to jail and ripping her family from her is unlikely to catch on as good practice. Quote Ferocious AardvarkNo, I hold FGM to be self-evidently child abuse. Anyone who disagrees I would view as a pervert or a religious zealot.'" Is male circumcision child abuse? Do some people consider male circumcision to be MGM? I honestly don't know. I'm uncircumcised and have never given it much thought. But I've lived in the USA and in that country I believe most men are circumcised. Why the difference between the US and here? It is pretty clear that the UK and the WHO are vehemently against FGM and the choice to label it FGM rather than simply circumcision shows their stance. But labeling the parents of 1.25m children and women as child abusers is utterly ridiculous. Quote Ferocious AardvarkOh yes, in the long run far better for them to be raised in a non-religious-nutjob environment, by people who love and respect them, and don't want to get religious nutjobs to mutilate them without anaesthetic. '" We can't protect young English girls from being forced into prostitution by Pakistani gangs, but we have loving foster parents ready for young immigrant children who have just been stripped from their homes and families? Quote Ferocious AardvarkHowever the main aim in this area must surely be to identify girls at RISK of being subjected to FGM and taking steps to prevent it from happening in the first place. '" How do you propose doing that? Quote Ferocious AardvarkSadly religion is so prevalent that it is no good advocating removing children from even the most fanatical religionists, as the starting point is the impossibility of any such course. But a child who HAS BEEN mutilated? Yep, the parents do not deserve the child and it needs urgent medical help which clearly the parents have no intention of providing.'" So the NHS estimates 60,000 UK females have had this performed on them. So I'd guess that'd amount to roughly 100,000+ children who you want to forcibly remove from their home and assume responsibility for. Good luck with that. Quote Ferocious AardvarkIt's really not. Performing mutilation to genitals is very clearly abuse, and the whole point of it seems to be because the offending body parts are deemed religiously unacceptable as they are sexual organs. '" Seems? If you know why this procedure takes place then you don't need to hide behind [iseems[/i. Quote Ferocious AardvarkEasy? I never claimed any such thing. It is obviously difficult. But they should have started the prosecutions many years ago, learned from them, developed their methods and in general made it clear by actions that our society simply will not tolerate FGM. The inaction I am sure has convinced proponents of FGM that it is tolerated. They clearly feel safe.'" Just reading up on wikipedia about FGM, but from my quick scanning of the page there is no mention whatsoever of any prosecutions anywhere of parents who have had this procedure performed on their children. All the prosecutions are of the doctors or the people who performed it. So you are arguing for something that no country on earth actually does. Quote Ferocious AardvarkWe have done NOTHING though. Not one prosecution for your claimed 60,000 mutilations.'" Not actually true. www.theguardian.com/society/2014 ... rged-court It seems they go to trial in January Quote Ferocious AardvarkNo-one else? I'm the only one in the UK? Wow. I didn't know. '" So who else in the UK is saying that families should be ripped apart over this issue? How many children are prepared to report their parents over this? Quote Ferocious AardvarkAh, you know all of them too. You sure know a lot of people. You should perhaps have told the NSPCC, they could then have saved themselves all the bother and expense of setting of their [url=http://www.nspcc.org.uk/news-and-views/our-news/child-protection-news/female-genital-mutilation-helpline/fgm-helpline-launched_wda96863.htmlFemale genital mutilation helpline[/urlwhich presumably has therefore yet to receive a call. In fact, these unfortunate young girls, already being born into a repressive and controling jail of religious nutjobbery, are raised as no better than slaves, their spirit is broken and this is but one part - if a major partr -of their brainwashing and having their spirit broken, and their sense of self-worth crushed. '" I'm not pro-FGM. I don't understand it and totally accept the UK and WHOs stance on it. I just don't think your ridiculous solution of wrecking immigrant families has any merit to it. Quote Ferocious AardvarkDo you even know what lies in store for them? Did you know they often have their vaginas sewn up? That once they are married off, it is up to man to whom they are given to decide how to re-open the vagina, and apparently the majority feel that anything less than a grand forced re-opening with a penis would make them less of a man? '" What's your source for this? Quote Ferocious AardvarkAnd you want to let this all continue "because they have different religious beliefs"? If you do, then you simply disgust me. '" I don't want this to continue. I just think your solution to the problem is ridiculous. Quote Ferocious AardvarkThankfully, I believe no civilised person who understands the issue shares your views on this.'" Based upon the NHS, WHO and UN viewpoint I am against FGM. But I do think that this is the argument from one side and there seems to be no attempt whatsoever to accept there is any other point of view. I guess they just aren't civilised enough to be listened to and should just accept what we say. But my main view is that it is a massively difficult issue and that your solution is simplistic, stupid and ultimately damaging to the very people you claim to be wanting to defend.

I think they want to end FGM. I support them in that.



But what I doubt that there's many, if any, other crackpot loons who want parents jailed and families ripped apart over FGM.

I think you've answered my point very succinctly there, thank you - and unless any further evidence emerges over the following months you'll also probably find that charges of racist crimes do not appear in any court cases linked to this matter as indeed they never have done in similar cases.

In your straw man, the mother would clearly under UK law not be convicted, but don’t let that stop your ranting.





If done for purely religious reasons then, as a statement of fact not law, I would say yes, though for obvious (to most) reasons, it is a much less significant procedure medically and isn’t aimed at sexually crippling the child. You can’t sensibly compare it to the evils of FGM. It does create the risk of totally unnecessary infections and other problems but equally is a medical procedure that can be done on legitimate health grounds too, and basically the child can often get on with his life pretty much unaffected. It’s not a parallel, and the medical opinions on the outcome are[url=http://jme.bmj.com/content/30/3/259.fullequivocal[/url. There are many cases where children suffer unnecessarily or even die as a result, for example the case Goodluck Caubergs which led to the conviction for manslaughter by gross negligence of nurse Grace Adeleye who carried out the circumcision. The court heard that up to three children a month are admitted to the Royal Manchester Children's Hospital because of bleeding after home-based circumcisions. However, the POINT is, as the Law Commission found maybe 20 years ago, male circumcision for non-medical reasons is not unlawful in the UK even though it felt a law should be passed to make the position crystal clear, and as the practice is therefore not against the law, unlike FGM which is so plainly against the law, there is no sensible comparison to be drawn. As a statement of law, male circumcision is NOT child abuse as UK law presently stands and so I accept that position.





No, it shows that they know what is involved and that you clearly don’t.





It is child abuse but my concern is not with labels, just with preventing the abuse, and if too late for that, bringing those responsible to justice.





Of course we can, and are. Hopefully many lessons have been learned from the failures and inactions of the past, and increasing number of cases where the law has dealt with offenders, and there are dozens of initiatives which a second on Google would educate you about. However the fact that other types of child abuse go on seems to be a very weird argument against action to stop FGM.





Look, if a girl is at genuine risk of FGM then it follows as a civilized country and if there is no alternative, then we should and must remove her from harm’s way. If the risk goes away she can go back. I entirely reject any shortage of foster carers or care home places, if there were one, as any sort of justification for allowing girls to be mutilated.





There are many and sensible proposals and initiatives some of which I already linked to. Those who know about the subject seem to have very good ideas how to tackle it. All that is needed is the government to back and actively support them for a decent start to be made. If you can’t be bothered to read the links then a fair summary would be identifying children and communities at risk, educating them, and at the same time ensuring they also realize the criminality of these practices.





Leaving aside that very many of these are adult females of a range of ages, I don’t get your argument. Is it really that because there are lots of victims, we should just leave them to it?





Great. About time a start was made, and identifying and prosecuting the (alleged) butchers is an excellent place to begin.





I have heard this from several places. Here’s one: [urlhttp://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/yvonne-ossei/female-genital-mutilation_1_b_1822156.html[/url





As if I claimed I “have the solution”! Your conclusion that the numbers are too high so we should just leave them to it is the laissez faire equivalent of wanting it to continue, though. Your “solution” (“Well, I’m against it of course but lots do it so what can we do”) I find just totally unacceptable and alarmingly defeatist.





They, like everyone else, should obey the law of the land.





No, that is just an utterly banal stating of the obvious. As for the rest - I challenge you to answer one single question, then:



Read this, from one of my links:



Just before the procedure starts, your task is to articulate to this 7 year old girl the “other side of the argument”, and the “other point of view”, as to why you feel there is a case to be made for the procedure to go ahead.



Go on. The floor is yours.

Here's what you wrote earlier:



[iIf a girl is found on medical examination to have suffered FGM, a prosecution shuld be brought. You do not get sexually mutilated by accident and no jury would believe that it happened without the knowledge of the parents. [/i



[iOne frequent outcome of such mutual defences for assorted crimes is BOTH being convicted. I have faith in juries in general to see straight through bogus defences, and I am sure you grossly underestimate how hard it is to mount a fake defence in police questioning without tripping yourself and each other up.[/i



You have faith that the juries, and before them the police and CPS, have the ability and knowledge of these countries to be able to determine who performed this operations, when they did it and who organised them. I don't have faith that they can do that. And that's mainly why the CPS will always struggle with putting forward a prosecution, even if they were willing to prosecute the parents. Which I'm not sure they are and suspect they aren't.







And they have made the case very well in English to an English speaking audience. But is this case being made to African immigrants with limited, if any, knowledge of English?



One of the links you posted had a woman who talked with other women. They had had the procedure performed on them and suffered no ill effects and didn't understand the problem, they said that their mothers and grandmothers had also had it done. They didn't understand what the issue was.



You want to castigate them as evil child abusers because they have performed FGM on their children. But it is an English label and an English crime outlawing a practice that mainly occurs in Africa. I know that in Britain ignorance of the law is no defence, but anyone with any sense must accept that there are difficulties with educating immigrants to our country that their customs are illegal and outlawed here.







How do you determine that a girl is at risk of FGM? Unless you are proposing a ban of children returning back to their home country from England then you clearly can't.







That I don't have a problem with.



What I have a problem with is your suggesting of criminalising parents for this and taking children away from their families over this. Have you got a link of anyone else suggesting this?







No, my argument is that this is a massive difference between the cultures of the western world and the cultures of poor African and Middle East countries. IMO you're arguing that we need to go to war with these people, by throwing these child abusers in jail and taking their kids away. I'm arguing for diplomacy, for educating them and convincing them that they should abandon their practices.







See, I think this is really good education for huffpost readers, I'm sure it will play really well with readers of the Guardian as well.



But it is very much written from a British perspective for a British audience. I'm not sure there's any attempt whatsoever to even begin to address the situation from an African perspective.







I think your "solution" would be rejected by even members of the BNP as too extreme. They'd probably like your solution, but they wouldn't be brave enough to endorse it.







Which is fine if you know about the law and understand it. A little more difficult if you know three words of English and have no comprehension of what FGM is.







I've never once said that I support FGM or understand why it's performed, so I reject your ridiculous task just like I reject your ridiculous solution.



I would ask you to explain to a 7 year old girl why her loving parents are in jail for supposedly abusing her when she has no knowledge or any ill effects from a procedure that was performed when she was a baby.

FGM is not performed on babies. It is performed on young girls.



While no ill effects may result initially once a woman starts to have sex or gets pregnant is when problems occur, particularly during child birth.

Quote dr_feelgood="dr_feelgood"FGM is not performed on babies. It is performed on young girls.'" Type IV: Type IV includes the introduction of corrosive substances into the vagina. This form is practiced to a much lesser extent than the other forms in Nigeria. These procedures can take place anytime from a few days after birth to a few days after death. In Edo State, for example, the procedure is performed within a few days after birth. www.asylumlaw.org/docs/nigeria/u ... igeria.pdf Page 2

Quote dr_feelgood="dr_feelgood"FGM is not performed on babies. It is performed on young girls.'" Type IV: Type IV includes the introduction of corrosive substances into the vagina. This form is practiced to a much lesser extent than the other forms in Nigeria. These procedures can take place anytime from a few days after birth to a few days after death. In Edo State, for example, the procedure is performed within a few days after birth. www.asylumlaw.org/docs/nigeria/u ... igeria.pdf Page 2

Quote Lord God Jose Mourinho="Lord God Jose Mourinho"Type IV: Type IV includes the introduction of corrosive substances into the vagina. This form is practiced to a much lesser extent than the other forms in Nigeria. These procedures can take place anytime from a few days after birth to a few days after death. In Edo State, for example, the procedure is performed within a few days after birth. www.asylumlaw.org/docs/nigeria/u ... igeria.pdf Page 2'" I stand corrected. You accept my second point though?

Quote Lord God Jose Mourinho="Lord God Jose Mourinho"Type IV: Type IV includes the introduction of corrosive substances into the vagina. This form is practiced to a much lesser extent than the other forms in Nigeria. These procedures can take place anytime from a few days after birth to a few days after death. In Edo State, for example, the procedure is performed within a few days after birth. www.asylumlaw.org/docs/nigeria/u ... igeria.pdf Page 2'" I stand corrected. You accept my second point though?

Of course. I'm not arguing in favour of FGM. From everything I've read I am against it and strongly doubt that there is any reason that the practitioners will come up with which will suit us in the west. And as Africa is a mainly poor continent with poor medical services any unnecessary medical procedure would be better off not done.



It's just his FGM = child abuse = prosecute parents and take away kids solution that I completely object to.

I hope you watched the Panorama programme on Monday night. Then you may have at least a clue as to just how abjectly wrong you are.

You are confusing different things. If a child was mutilated in the past before coming to this country then no crime has been committed in this country and no prosecution can be brought.



A whole different kettle of fish is the practice of taking young girls abroad for the purpose of FGM. Everything possible must be done to prevent this.



We have a decent enough judicial system, warts and all. If only its wheels could be set in motion on FGM crimes, I’m sure it would produce in the main just outcomes.





And so you cite that as making it all OK, or at least tolerable?





I’m the one supporting a serious and effective effort to educate, and to inform that in the country in which they now live, FGM is a serious crime.





There is a whole literature on just this subject. In many ways it is no more and no less difficult than identifying children at risk of any other form of sexual abuse, in any section of the community. It is a shiit and demanding job, but that should never prevent us from doing it. In another of your naïve posts you cited the Rotherham case – that is what you get when the authorities neglect their duties.





That is exactly such a thing as I propose, in a case where there are grounds to suspect that the purpose of an intended trip is for FGM.





I have never made this suggestion, though. I have suggested that people in the UK who commit serious crimes under UK law should be prosecuted under UK law. Parents of children are no exception. I do not advocate ignoring crime due to cultural or religious differences, which is what I understand you do.



If a parent is guilty of a crime then they should be dealt with by the criminal law. I am not “advocating” jailing them, I have faith in the criminal courts to, in the main, impose the correct sentences on convicted people, and if the COURT decides that jail is inevitable then so be it.



I am not “advocating” taking children from their families or putting them in care. I am saying that if a child is found to be at serious risk of FGM then social services need to do their job to protect the child, which may indeed involve removing them from the family. Or may not. I advocate the enquiries being diligently made, and if the evidence is there, then the required steps to be taken, not shirked from for fear of upsetting some section of a community or other or some religious or cultural sensibilities or whatever.





A similar argument to mine, except I would tell them that their practices are absolutely and unequivocally forbidden, whether they are “convinced” is not my concern. They need to know that desisting is not optional.





We’re not in Africa.





I’m glad you have clearly therefore got the point, even if you have a weird way of admitting it..





I am assuming that the swear filter changed your original adjective for the parents to “loving”?

If your absurd scenario ever happened, including the strange case of a bay FGM, with “no ill effects” (how can having had your clitoris cut off constitute “no ill effects”, even to your way of thinking?) then I would explain that they were in jail because UK justice had considered all relevant facts and evidence and rules that this was the most just outcome. The court decided they deserved it.



I really don’t know why you would propose a weird scenario where somehow the passage of time mitigates the evil of the act. What if a baby girl’s father has repeatedly raped and buggered her some years ago? She may be less likely to have ill effects as serious as those from FGM and she may be more likely to remember FGM than rape or buggery as a toddler. Once his offending eventually comes to light, should he escape prosecution when she has no knowledge or any ill effects from a procedure that was performed when she was a baby?

Obviously not, so why would it be any different if the crime was FGM rather than any other serious crime?

I'm in the middle of watching a film right now, but I'll watch it on iPlayer later.

What should be done to prevent this? By whom?







No, I'm not citing that as saying that it makes it all ok. I'm saying that immigrant women are being questioned in the street about a practice that has been performed on them, their mothers and grandmothers. If they also happened to have a young daughter who they performed this traditional ritual on in the last decade they have probably unwittingly committed a crime that you are insisting is worthy of sending them to jail and having all their children taken from them.



If a mother knows all about the laws and says "screw you, she's my daughter and I'll do what I want to her" then you have a case that she's guilty of child abuse. But if she hasn't been reading the Guardian articles you have and doesn't know that she's even committed a crime then treating her as a child abuser is barbaric treatment for both her and her family.







A campaign that mainly involves investigating them, convicting them and taking their children away from them.







Unless a family is known to social services or reported by a teacher or doctor then most kids will go through life without being "protected" from sexual abuse. You are pretty much wanting every African immigrant to be automatically flagged as a potential child abuser simply because they have a daughter.







Time will tell whether the Rotherham report was an accurate representation of facts or an attention seeking report to shake the system up.



It also has to be said that while social services have a duty to protect children under their care, they don't have unlimited powers or resources. And just because a white English girl in care had an older Asian boyfriend, it doesn't mean he was pimping her out all the time.







Like I said, you're too extreme for the BNP. They admire you and will probably want to share fund raising ideas, but they can't risk being linked too closely with you.



Who are you wanting to put in charge of banning orders for African families who say they want to take their daughters to visit their grandparents?







You've made this suggestion many times in this thread.







You have argued clearly that FGM is child abuse and that the child abusers should be jailed and have their children taken from them.







Are you doing this by an ad campaign, or are you employing a team of enforcers to go and speak directly to nearly every African immigrant? Do you have the authority to spend all that money?







But it is a problem with mainly African immigrants, with the procedures performed in Africa. The Guardian readers will probably be 100% against this, and they'll have been roughly 99% against it before their campaign against it. But the campaigns against this, the plays that a British African woman performs in London, they're not much use if the immigrants aren't Guardian readers and aren't going to see her play.







The point is to not to engage with the 7 year old girl who is having the procedure on her and convince her why it's needed, because very few people here ever thought it was needed. The point is that we need to engage with African parents and the African villagers who are arranging these procedures and persuade them to stop.







Well you're assuming wrong.







If you read your links, there are plenty of girls who have had FGM performed on them and didn't actually know. There are British doctors and nurses who perform check ups on children and they don't know what to look for.







I wouldn't convict her if she stabbed you to death. If your car was blown up in an attempt on your life I wouldn't consider them terrorists, I'd consider them freedom fighters.







You consider it to be an evil act. Many African women don't. I personally believe that African women's viewpoint on African women's vagina's are actually worth more than yours.



I think that many Papua New Guinean tribes have screwed up traditions with their boys (and probably girls) which would definitely be considered child abuse in the west. I implore you to go and educate them about their abuse of their children and I will mourn your death when they kill you and eat you.







Virtually 100% of the UK are united in their disgust of child abusers. If public opinion was followed by the government then the punishment for child abuse would probably be slow death.



The same clearly cannot be said for FGM in Africa. There are millions of people who are for FGM, have had it performed on them and want it performed on their children.



They are clearly not the same issues, and I think you are in a very small minority of people who think they are.

Obviously, they should not be permitted to leave the country, and equally obviously, by the only people able to prevent them, the government. As they indicate they plan to do.





Please desist from making up opinions and attributing them to me. I will repeat once more that IF a crime has potentially been committed then it SHOULD be investigated and a decision taken on what if any action follows, in the time honoured way that our judicial process has worked for centuries. I am saying that IF a child is at risk (for example if one child in the past had FGM and there are young girls therefore at risk) Social Services SHOULD investigate and take whatever steps their investigations lead them to take.



The caveat is that neither the police, CPS or Social Services should hold back from doing their duty through either improper political pressure, or fear of upsetting vested interests, or being accused wrongly of racism or whatever. Like the statue, Justice should be blind, and applied equally to all. That includes their personal mitigation explanations and circumstances.



Now for fcsk sake stop parroting this ludicrous misrepresentation of my views, as it is getting boring.





I entirely disagree, and am quite shocked you would suggest this. You seem to have done a U-turn as weren’t you suggesting basically laissez faire before, or have I missed something?





Your most ridiculous straw man to date! How do you make this stuff up?





Because until you pointed this out, the world thought Social Services had unlimited money and manpower. What would we do without your insight?





How crass and how insulting to the girls so badly let down in the Rotherham and other cases. No person has made such an outrageous suggestion. If we are looking at Rotherham then we have very young teenage girls and even pre-teens being systematically groomed and then being led captive into a lengthy period of sexual abuse and degradation very often by older men, even being transported around different cities to be used for sex. And you have th disgusting nerve to talk of “a white English girl in care had an older Asian boyfriend” when that is not remotely the issue at all.





What an utter asshole comment, I will not dignify such bilge with a response.





Your straw men are becoming increasingly embarrassing for you.







Well spotted, It is. I remain in the dark as to whether you agree. Some of the time you seem to suggest that while you are not in favour of it, we should let it go as it’s only being done by ignorant immigrants who don’t get it’s wrong. Where we differ is that I would not allow or condone it in the UK under any circumstances. Not for any child. Not in any community.





You are really on form for your straw men today, aren’t you? Are you involved in some sort of competition, like the Oxenhope Straw Race? I mean, they just keep on coming. I have made my view crystal clear, and it is not hard to understand, but don’t let that stop you. I will repeat it for your convenience, but don’t let me stop you from continuingto claim you know what I think better than I do:







I have even highlighted a couple of key points. Are they too hard for you to grasp the distinctions? Or are you just trolling?





I’m not reducing my arguments to your puerile level of absurdity. Grow up and debate like an adult, FFS.





That is nonsense. Time may have erased the memory but only you could suggest that a human could be genitally mutilated without extreme pain and suffering. However I would be against the practice even if performed under general anaesthetic with full pain relief afterwards, it would be less barbaric, that’s all.





And there was me thinking this was a forum for relatively civilized debate. But, I note that you are in favour of violent death for stating opinions that differ from your own. I think you are losing the plot, but won’t be going down your rather bizarre ad hominem route.





But you keep making conflicting claims. One minute you are against FGM, then you are back to saying the mutilators know best. Anyway to be clear, you have now confirmed that in your view, the viewpoint of certain African women that it is reasonable to have their daughter's clitoris and labia cut off and her vagina sewn up is worth more than my opinion that it is not reasonable, because I am not an African woman. So, for this paragraph at least, you ARE in favour of FGM, or at least you defer to the viewpojnt of those African women who are in favour? It is confusing but I hope I am following it.





Whereas you would presumably be delighted to jump into their cooking pot, as a respecter of cannibalistic tribes’ traditions, right? I mean, “screwed up traditions”, it is I who would describe FGM as a “screwed up tradition” – you argue it is their choice. yet in throwing in the random example of unspecified PNG tribes’ traditions, you feel able to refer to these as “screwed up”. Where’s your consistency?



PS it would probably calm you down to stop imagining the violent demise of those you can’t win an argument against.





So what? The fact that the tens of thousand of children being sexually abused are only a miniscule proportion of all children isn’t the point either. The overwhelming majority would I expect be united in their disgust of all or most crimes. What does that nugget add?



Or, if you think this is a valid point, then I will turn it on its head for you and say that virtually 100% of the UK who know what FGM is would equally be united in their disgust of FGM child abusers.





I disagree. I reckon the number in favour of the death penalty generally is gradually reducing and even if still a majority, I don’t think it is a substantial majority. Of those, I would expect the majority would only support a (relatively) humane form of death penalty.





So let me get this straight; is that a perfectly reasonable parenting choice for them to make, or is it a “screwed up tradition”? Maybe you could emigrate and get yourself a job as a FGM practitioner over there, to show your support for freedom of choice, and to spare us from any more of your nonsense.

I'm not going to go through each point in your post again because it's clearly going nowhere.



IMO you are clearly in favour of prosecuting parents, jailing them labeling them as child abusers and having their children taken off them. I think this is blatantly clear in many of your posts, no matter how much you choose to deny it. This is what you think should happen and you are blaming the British authorities for not making it happen.



I do not believe that any other country prosecutes parents for this, all of the prosecutions that I've read about have been of people who either perform the procedures or arrange them. I do not believe anti-FGM campaigners would support the prosecution of parents. If you know of people who are, by all means post links to them.



Based on everything I've read about FGM I am against it. I do not believe I have ever made any arguments in favour of FGM. My arguments are against what I consider to be your crackpot solutions.

Don't need an opinion, I have put it in writing. You should read it instead of trying to invent stuff.





Hypothetical scenario for you:



1. Family X has a girl at suspected risk of FGM



2. Authorities engage with the family, and do what they can to explain both why we do not permit FGM, and that if they were to go ahead they would be committing child abuse which could have serious consequences.



3. Despite the above, the girl shortly afterwards is smuggled abroad, and subjected to FGM, and in exactly the manner described in the blood-curdling account I linked to earlier, causing serious physical and psychological harm to the girl. This comes to light when she is admitted to hospital seriously ill with complications and infection.



Do you think the parents should face any form of investigation and potential prosecution for this, or is it your argument that they should be exempt?



The mutilated girl has 2 younger sisters. Do you think despite what has happened, Social Services and all other authorities should just leave the family alone, and let the same fate befall these girls?

I've read it. You clearly classify FGM as child abuse and argue for prosecuting and jailing parents.







Which pretty much amounts to African immigrants have daughter.







I don't agree with the period of austerity we're going through. I think it's stupid to massively cut public budgets, which mean more people are out of work and services are cut. It seems utterly screwed up to me.



But anyway, I commend you in a period of austerity in being able to work the budget to put these massively expensive programs in place. You're clearly committed to the cause and are willing to spend a lot of money to further that cause.



I hope your agents are given very good training though, because pretty much accusing black immigrants of being possible future child abusers could be construed by people as being quite racist and offensive.







By smuggled abroad do you mean boarding a plane at Heathrow, or are they jumping in the back of containers? I assume by mentioning smuggling it's because you've banned Africans from returning to Africa at least until their daughters are 18. Personally I think that law is a bit risk of coming across as all racisty as well.







You do realise that was pretty much a worst case scenario and not all FGMs are like that?



But okay, this is a horrific example of FGMs going wrong.







Given that you've risen to power so quickly and put in place such blatantly strong measures the parents are never going to set foot in the UK again.



I think that the measures that you've put in place will paint the UK as pretty much as friendly towards Africans as Russia is to homosexuals. I think you will be a BNP hero and UKIP will be opening any seat for you whenever you want it.







I don't think there's anything the British can do, because I think the family has fled to Africa. I think some girls will decide they want to stay in the UK and we will be left to provide for them, and I support that.



I'll ask you a straight, simple question AGAIN.



Do you know of any country, or any person, who wishes the parents of females subjected to FGM to be prosecuted for it?

You're the one that said 60,000 females in the UK have suffered FGM. Unless they were all deserted by their families this means 60,000 families that practised FGM are still here. Why do you think that is? Maybe because the State has hitherto turned an almost totally blind eye?







I reject your question. I've no interest in investigating the hypothetical wishes of hypothetical people in other countries, nor do I "wish" for parents of females in this country to be prosecuted for it. As I've vainly explained several times but you're stuck on "transmit". IF THEY ARE FOUND TO HAVE COMMITTED OFFENCES then the law should apply to them like it applies to me. That is all.



You think even if they commit an offence they should be let off because they are parents. I think that decision is neither mine nor yours to make. The authorities need to make it, and whatever it was, fine, if due process has taken place. My problem is that we have been doing practically NOTHING, seemingly on the unacceptable grounds of how undoubtedly hard it is to do something, and the equally or more unacceptable grounds that we should act, but are scared to, as we don't want to cause upset.



What I "wish" for is the prevention of FGM to female residents of the UK and if FGM crime / abuse [idoes[/i take place then the UK to deal with it under due process, and not turn a blind eye.

The fact that FGM apparently takes place here is a disgrace. It is yet another demonstration on the negative impact of allowing mass immigration from the third world. Our country has been dragged backwards by politicians allowing mass immigration and pursuing a policy of turning a blind eye to avoid racial tensions, etc. The law must be upheld for all - including the Arab boy racers in Knightsbridge - who appear to be immune from prosecution presumably because the government doesn't want to upset the high spending oil rich states?



It's getting to the stage where the law only applies to white British people who are non-violent! The law has been undermined by political incompetence and as a result our country is becoming corrupt.

I think the number is actually an estimated 66,000 females in the UK have had FGM performed on them. This is the estimate of all women who have had FGM and are now in the UK. This will include a lot of women who had FGM performed on them as children and later emigrated to the UK.



It's a estimate. Some estimates are roughly accurate and some are miles off. The truth is we really don't know how many women in the UK have FGM and we're never likely to know. And it will be difficult to determine how many UK residents are taken to Africa or the Middle East to have the procedure performed.







Because you know the answer. No one else is prosecuting parents for it, it hasn't been used as a way to combat FGM anywhere.







You want the UK to combat FGM in ways that no other countries do. France has prosecuted people for FGM before, but they have all been practitioners, not parents.



The only way parents are going to be found to have committed offences is if social services and the police actively target this issue as a child abuse issue. But IMO for social services and the police to do that they will insist on the Home Office signing off that that is their instruction to go down this route. IMO the Home Office will never do this and nobody but one or two backbenchers would even dare suggest it.







Rather than pleading to the "authorities", I'd like you to nominate which authority should be placed in charge of eradicating FGM. Then write to them making your case and see what response you get.







IMO victims of FGM would chose for a blind eye to be turned rather than treating this as a child abuse issue.

Quote Lord God Jose Mourinho="Lord God Jose Mourinho"No one else is prosecuting parents for it, it hasn't been used as a way to combat FGM anywhere. You want the UK to combat FGM in ways that no other countries do. France has prosecuted people for FGM before, but they have all been practitioners, not parents. '" I frankly forgot that you know the stats for FGM related prosecutions in every country on the globe. Ooops - 0.00007 seconds on Google and already I have found [url=http://allafrica.com/stories/201409020397.htmlthis[/url. Oh well, maybe Tanzania doesn't count. Wait - what's this - [url=http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/uk-must-follow-africas-example-to-tackle-fgm-and-improve-chances-of-prosecution-9109334.htmlprosecutions in Ethiopia[/url? Maybe that doesn't really matter either, I suppose. Quote Lord God Jose Mourinho="Lord God Jose Mourinho"The only way parents are going to be found to have committed offences is if social services and the police actively target this issue as a child abuse issue. But IMO for social services and the police to do that they will insist on the Home Office signing off that that is their instruction to go down this route. IMO the Home Office will never do this and nobody but one or two backbenchers would even dare suggest it. '" In July a certain David Cameron - not, currently, a backbencher - said parents will be prosecuted if they fail to prevent their daughter being cut. Quote Lord God Jose MourinhoAt the historic Girl Summit in London this week, the prime minister, David Cameron, announced that the government would legally oblige teachers, doctors and social workers to report FGM, train professionals and criminalise parents if they failed to protect their children: www.theguardian.com/society/2014 ... ha-dukureh '" Does he count? Quote Lord God Jose Mourinho="Lord God Jose Mourinho"Rather than pleading to the "authorities", I'd like you to nominate which authority should be placed in charge of eradicating FGM. '" With pleasure. I nominate the unit that the government is about to set up: Quote Lord God Jose MourinhoThe government is to set up a unit to tackle female genital mutilation as part of a wide-ranging package of reforms to stop the practice in the UK. Speaking at the Girl Summit – a major international conference in London designed to highlight the issues of FGM and child marriage – the home secretary, Theresa May, said the cross-party unit would help protect thousands of girls across the country. The unit, which could operate in a similar way to the government's forced marriage unit, has been a key demand of campaigners against FGM. "These measures will ensure that we can maintain the momentum on stamping out these harmful practices," May said. The home secretary said the government would also strengthen laws around FGM, and would hold parents responsible if their child was a victim of the practice. May also announced a consultation into making it mandatory for professionals to report FGM and said victims going through court cases would be given lifelong anonymity: www.theguardian.com/society/2014 ... irl-summit '" I further nominate Social Services, to act generally as suggested in [url=http://www.theguardian.com/social-care-network/2014/jun/10/social-workers-protect-girls-risk-female-genital-mutilationthis article[/url Do you accept my nominations? I don't believe there is therefore any need for me to write to make any case, as if the government walks the walk, it is going down the lines I am arguing for. Quote Lord God Jose Mourinho="Lord God Jose Mourinho"IMO victims of FGM would chose for a blind eye to be turned rather than treating this as a child abuse issue.'" Many have, which is one reason why it has been so slow hard and difficult to build any momentum in relation to this vile practice, but despite shiverers like yourself who think it's too hard, there is now firm and concerted action promised in the UK and while we can't control what happens elsewhere, another few milliseconds on Google revelaed the (to me) very heartening news that in fact FGM has now been outlawed in at least 25 African countries. Some FGM victims may want a blind eye turning and I have no illusions about the situation their parents have put them in, but increasingly there is a groundswell of victims now prepared to come forward and you should be a supporter of them and encourage their cause, not an apologist for the perpetrators.

Quote Lord God Jose Mourinho="Lord God Jose Mourinho"No one else is prosecuting parents for it, it hasn't been used as a way to combat FGM anywhere. You want the UK to combat FGM in ways that no other countries do. France has prosecuted people for FGM before, but they have all been practitioners, not parents. '" I frankly forgot that you know the stats for FGM related prosecutions in every country on the globe. Ooops - 0.00007 seconds on Google and already I have found [url=http://allafrica.com/stories/201409020397.htmlthis[/url. Oh well, maybe Tanzania doesn't count. Wait - what's this - [url=http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/uk-must-follow-africas-example-to-tackle-fgm-and-improve-chances-of-prosecution-9109334.htmlprosecutions in Ethiopia[/url? Maybe that doesn't really matter either, I suppose. Quote Lord God Jose Mourinho="Lord God Jose Mourinho"The only way parents are going to be found to have committed offences is if social services and the police actively target this issue as a child abuse issue. But IMO for social services and the police to do that they will insist on the Home Office signing off that that is their instruction to go down this route. IMO the Home Office will never do this and nobody but one or two backbenchers would even dare suggest it. '" In July a certain David Cameron - not, currently, a backbencher - said parents will be prosecuted if they fail to prevent their daughter being cut. Quote Lord God Jose MourinhoAt the historic Girl Summit in London this week, the prime minister, David Cameron, announced that the government would legally oblige teachers, doctors and social workers to report FGM, train professionals and criminalise parents if they failed to protect their children: www.theguardian.com/society/2014 ... ha-dukureh '" Does he count? Quote Lord God Jose Mourinho="Lord God Jose Mourinho"Rather than pleading to the "authorities", I'd like you to nominate which authority should be placed in charge of eradicating FGM. '" With pleasure. I nominate the unit that the government is about to set up: Quote Lord God Jose MourinhoThe government is to set up a unit to tackle female genital mutilation as part of a wide-ranging package of reforms to stop the practice in the UK. Speaking at the Girl Summit – a major international conference in London designed to highlight the issues of FGM and child marriage – the home secretary, Theresa May, said the cross-party unit would help protect thousands of girls across the country. The unit, which could operate in a similar way to the government's forced marriage unit, has been a key demand of campaigners against FGM. "These measures will ensure that we can maintain the momentum on stamping out these harmful practices," May said. The home secretary said the government would also strengthen laws around FGM, and would hold parents responsible if their child was a victim of the practice. May also announced a consultation into making it mandatory for professionals to report FGM and said victims going through court cases would be given lifelong anonymity: www.theguardian.com/society/2014 ... irl-summit '" I further nominate Social Services, to act generally as suggested in [url=http://www.theguardian.com/social-care-network/2014/jun/10/social-workers-protect-girls-risk-female-genital-mutilationthis article[/url Do you accept my nominations? I don't believe there is therefore any need for me to write to make any case, as if the government walks the walk, it is going down the lines I am arguing for. Quote Lord God Jose Mourinho="Lord God Jose Mourinho"IMO victims of FGM would chose for a blind eye to be turned rather than treating this as a child abuse issue.'" Many have, which is one reason why it has been so slow hard and difficult to build any momentum in relation to this vile practice, but despite shiverers like yourself who think it's too hard, there is now firm and concerted action promised in the UK and while we can't control what happens elsewhere, another few milliseconds on Google revelaed the (to me) very heartening news that in fact FGM has now been outlawed in at least 25 African countries. Some FGM victims may want a blind eye turning and I have no illusions about the situation their parents have put them in, but increasingly there is a groundswell of victims now prepared to come forward and you should be a supporter of them and encourage their cause, not an apologist for the perpetrators.

On the contrary. The fact that immigration has taken place between Africa and Europe means that the first world has been informed about appalling treatment of women in the third world.



The fact that the first world countries are taking an interest in this issue means that the world will hopefully be made better for the women of Africa because these practices will be eradicated.

Neither of those stories actually make any mention of parents being prosecuted.







He announced the introduction of new legislation that would prosecute parents for failing to stop FGM being performed on their daughters. I have reservations about the basic premise of that legislation. For example you've written many times that everyone should be the same under the law. So what would you think to a law which said that British parents should be prosecuted if their children suffer from sexual abuse? It suggests that they struggle to gain acceptable evidence over who is responsible for FGM so they are trying to get round that by forcing parents to remain responsible.



That's all well and good if the families are perfect and all live together in harmony, but what happens when families are fractured and children spend time living with grandparents, aunts, friends etc?







To be honest most of the recommendations and policies seem very good. The Govt have definitely stepped up in response to the campaigning and produced a pilot project which seems very positive.



But the fact that they are now setting up pilot projects and offering new instructions to doctors and police shows that the system wasn't equipped to deal with the problem in the past.







The government would never come up with a fantastic report and pilot project which was then ignored, would it?







I support the victims of FGM.



I do not believe in the vilification of the perpetrators if they are not evil but are merely acting upon how they are brought up.



I am also unsure whether the governments response to the issue is a response to the problem or a response to the publicity. Just looking at the numbers of girls born in England and Wales to mothers who have undergone FGM and that number is 60,000. Given that these girls are British African and will mostly be raised as British I'd question how many of them are actually going to be sent over to Africa to have this performed anyway. FGM is not something that is valued in GB at all and one would suggest that if they were going to be brought up under traditional African values then they wouldn't be here in the first place. Given that no actual estimates were made to how many UK girls are at risk of FGM I suspect that the number is left out because it's so small it would kill the attention it's getting. I suspect that the UK government is being pushed to solve a problem it really doesn't have because by doing that it will help eradicate it from Africa. I applaud this if it is true because it's pretty much genius and I hope it works.