[bryondowd]

I'm not aware of any adult women in a free society choosing to be mutilated, whereas it isn't uncommon for adult men to choose to be circumcised. That would seem to indicate that there is indeed a difference.

FGM is evil, plain and simple. MGM/circumcision has interesting points on both sides, and while there might be a stronger argument against it than for, it's not strong enough to be a hill I'd choose to die on. But to each their own, I suppose.

[Mithaldu]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genital_modification_and_mutil...

[bryondowd]

These elective surgeries have no relation to what is typically referred to as FGM, but perhaps I should have been more clear.

I was referring to Types I-III as described here:

http://www.endfgm.eu/female-genital-mutilation/what-is-fgm/

Those are very clearly wrong, with no redeeming value and cause a great deal of harm to the woman, beyond any subjectivity. Nobody is signing up to have this done to them for aesthetic reasons. Compared to this, circumcision is only low-moderately invasive and damaging. If you are going to argue against circumcision, do so on its own merits, not by comparing it to something far worse.

[Mithaldu]

Things can be in the same class but with different grades of strength within that class.

[jquery]

Just like an ear piercing is in the same class as cutting off one's ear entirely.