6. American Academy of Pediatrics Proposes Genital “Nicking” – Women on the Left Grossly Rationalize It As Cultural Sensitivity
Perhaps the greatest example of femisogynist hypocrisy and, frankly, insanity is the way that they odiously cover for barbarism because they worship at the shrine of multiculturalism. Few things exemplify this more than their sick rationalizing of the mutilation of women.
In May, the American Academy of Pediatrics showed that they are real contenders in the race to see who can be the most revolting appeasers. They publicly issued a proposal suggesting that doctors give credence to Female Genital Mutilation by performing a ritual “nicking” instead. They also changed the term from Female Genital Mutilation to the euphemistic Female Genital Cutting, so as not to be offensive to other cultures. No, really. Truth doesn’t matter, it seems. All that matters is their ability to pat themselves on their sanctimonious backs for being so ‘inclusive’ and embracing of other cultures. Maybe it’s just me, but I refuse to embrace barbarism.
Not so, for the women on the Left. Amanda Marcotte sickeningly compared this ‘nicking’ of the sexual organs of young girls to marriage in this country.
And it’s not like Western culture is so free of blatantly misogynist traditions, either. Part of me wishes that we had a two minute nicking at the doctor instead of the entire painfully misogynist wedding tradition that persists in the name of tradition.
In her deluded mind, the lopping off of women’s body parts is the same as lovingly binding yourself to a partner and sharing a life together. She almost wishes we had our clitorises nicked instead of the horrors of a loving marriage. In her defense, marriage to her would be a horror, I suspect. Shockingly, Marcotte wasn’t alone in her depraved thinking (term used loosely.) An article at Salon said this:
As a nation of immigrants, we (in some ways like France, with its tensions over the burqa) continue to see tested the limits of liberties we hold dear; we continue to negotiate the tricky territory of embracing peoples while — in this case, rightly — rejecting their practices. And our doctors, evidently, are being asked to do exactly that in their own examining rooms. How can doctors address FGM in a way that makes sense to patients (why boys but not girls?) and educates without alienating, thus possibly helping protect that daughter from future harm? The above scenario with the Somali mother was a real one: It led to a comparable, and also rejected, “nicking” proposal in Seattle in 1996. So here we are again, revisiting the question at a national level, with doctors apparently still trying to figure out the most effective way to help protect the girls they encounter. What can we learn, this time around, about how to help them?
Meta-ethical relativism at it’s most dangerous. To anyone with an ounce of intellectual honesty and, you know, common decency, there is no “tricky territory” to negotiate. There is such a thing as just being right or wrong. There is such a thing as good or evil. But, instead, the women on the Left choose to be apologists for evil behavior all while inventing oppression here out of whole cloth.