Posts
About 3 million women and girls every year suffer the barbaric procedure known as female genital mutilation (FGM). It is becoming more common in Western countries.
The practice, also known as female circumcision, involves removing part or all of a girl's clitoris or labia. It is often carried out by an older woman with no medical training, using anything from scissors to tin can lids and pieces of glass.The victims have no idea what is going to happen to them and anaesthetic or antiseptic treatment is often not used.
. . .
"FGM is a huge problem in the UK," said Ensharah Ahmed, community development officer at the UK-based Foundation for Women's Health, Research and Development (Forward).Forward estimates there are around 279,500 women living in Britain who have undergone FGM, with another 22,000 girls under 16 in danger of joining them.
Since 2003, UK residents have been prohibited by law from arranging FGM at home or overseas; offenders face up to 14 years’ imprisonment. The heavy penalty would appear to indicate a social judgment that FGM is a heinous practice. Authorities have been reluctant to act aggressively to stamp it out, however, due to hyper-sensitivity to foreign cultures. Multiculturalism at its worst.
"It's not something you can stamp out in two seconds — it's been going for thousands of years," [Detective Inspector Carol] Hamilton told Reuters."Most communities will say it's necessary, it's something they need to protect their cultural identity now they are living in another country," she said.
"I've been going to a lot of communities and I have spoken to a lot of women and men and they all tell me the same thing — they have to do it.
If they want to protect their cultural identity, then why did they move to Great Britain?
As Mark Steyn has recently reminded us, there was a time when the British reacted somewhat differently to cruel customs.
In a more culturally confident age, the British in India were faced with the practice of "suttee" - the tradition of burning widows on the funeral pyres of their husbands. Gen. Sir Charles Napier was impeccably multicultural:
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: When men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks, and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
But today we get this twaddle, instead.
Detective Inspector Carol Hamilton from London police's Child Abuse Command says it is difficult to tackle what she calls a "crime of love" as those responsible believe they are doing the right thing for their child.
. . .
"But what it is actually is physical and emotional torture of little girls who have no say in the matter. It is so totally barbaric and against human rights that we need to be seen to be tackling it — but we have to do it slowly."
No wonder they’re moving “slowly”: they haven’t sufficient confidence in the truth to confront those who would torture their own children and call barbarism by its right name. Where have you gone, Charles Napier?
h/t: Clayton Cramer
