Talk:Circumcision: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz (→Nicely balanced start: new section) |
imported>John Stephenson (→Nicely balanced start: genital mutilation articles) |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
[[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 17:51, 7 January 2009 (UTC) | [[User:Howard C. Berkowitz|Howard C. Berkowitz]] 17:51, 7 January 2009 (UTC) | ||
:The ''other'' wiki calls it 'female genital cutting', which is an obvious attempt to placate those who say it's just another part of culture. I suggest an article/disambiguation called [[genital mutilation]] that covers both female and male, with links to [[female genital mutilation]] and [[circumcision]]. [[User:John Stephenson|John Stephenson]] 18:07, 7 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 13:07, 7 January 2009
Nicely balanced start
I wonder if there should be either a disambiguation, or text here, about what I hesitate to call female genital mutilation, which is the usual term in medicine. Without prejudice to issues of male circumcision, even the "mild" forms of FGM are much more radical.
As far as health benefits, other than HIV, there is data for reducing human papilloma virus transmission, causing cervical cancer. I do not know of any work, however, that considers the risk-benefit there in populations where, variously, the non-universal HPV vaccine is used widely, and, for that matter, in populations that have regular cervical cancer screening.
Howard C. Berkowitz 17:51, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
- The other wiki calls it 'female genital cutting', which is an obvious attempt to placate those who say it's just another part of culture. I suggest an article/disambiguation called genital mutilation that covers both female and male, with links to female genital mutilation and circumcision. John Stephenson 18:07, 7 January 2009 (UTC)