LogFAQs > #953690049

grimhilde00 posted...

ehhhh foreskin is not equivalent to a c***oris. I get that you're trying to show it's weird by using a non-norm example. But yeah, not the same thing.

It's more extreme (circumcision makes sex less pleasurable, a clitorectomy makes orgasm all but impossible), but the logic is the same: Chop off part of your bits so you don't like sex so much, then pass it off in the modern world as just being a cosmetic thing because that's easier than trying to come to terms with the reason the tradition was started. Had Kellogg's idea of burning the clitoris caught on, clitoral scarring would be considered as aesthetically normal now as circumcision is, with all the same people jumping to defend it for exactly the same reasons despite how obviously harmful it is.

Really, scale aside, the only difference is that you wouldn't have the cosmetic industry promoting it, since clitoral scarring doesn't produce products they can sell the way that circumcision does. And if you want something more comparable in scale, there are several other parts of the vulva that could be cut off to effect a similar goal, which the cosmetic industry could also turn into a cheap source of human collagen.

---

This is my signature. It exists to keep people from skipping the last line of my posts.