I don't like Qaradawy at all; I find his views on women quite derogatory, patronizing and full of double standards. And why can't he make his points without constantly making snide remarks about the "bad West"?
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
I must disagree with you there, Dalia. But anyway Qaradawy has his fans and his non-fans so to speak I've always found his approach to fatwa more to my liking because he always presents all other views not only his own and then he explains why he is inclined towards one view rather than the other which is a sharp contrast with many clerics who insist that their view ia the one and only, even when they're saying something totally mad (Al-albany to mention one of them)..
Also Qaradawy's thinking has been more modern and practical than most other clerics.This alone earned him a lot of criticism.
I appreciate that u might feel his remarks about the West to be annoying. I never noticed that,myself, but this is maybe because it doesn't strike a particular note with me being middle eastern, u know.
I would like to ask u, though, why do u feel his views on women are derogatory? You might draw my attention to something I didnt notice.
Posted by Dalia* (Member # 10593) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: Also Qaradawy's thinking has been more modern and practical than most other clerics.This alone earned him a lot of criticism.
I appreciate that u might feel his remarks about the West to be annoying. I never noticed that,myself, but this is maybe because it doesn't strike a particular note with me being middle eastern, u know.
I would like to ask u, though, why do u feel his views on women are derogatory? You might draw my attention to something I didnt notice.
Well, regarding his remarks about the West ... it's allover his writings and I find this not only offensive but a dishonest way of arguing things. By comparing "in the West" and "in Islam" he is comparing an ideal which is not being applied anywhere to existing conditions. That's a rhetorical trick and not an honest way of looking at things. An honest approach would be to either compare the existing conditions of women living in the West to that of women living in Muslim countries or the Qur'anic ideal to that of other scriptures. By creating sterotypes of Western vs. Muslim women he is not doing justice to either, the different problems women are facing in all parts of the world can't be addressed or solved that way, they are just being used in order to make a point.
Some of his anti-Western comments are not only polemic and hateful, they are also often simply wrong. Claims such as that homosexuality or sexually transmitted diseases such as AIDS originate in the West or that "oral sex is a disgusting Western invention" display either a frightening ignorance on those issues or a deliberate attempt to spread wrong information. Both is not very befitting for someone who is supposed to be an influential Muslim scholar. It's also dangerous to spread those views because in the case of HIV, for example, it's necessary to educate people as well as possible in order for the subject to be approached properly.
Some of the reasons why I feel his views on women are derogatory:
He often implies or straightout says that men are more rational, more able to make decisions etc. For example he claims the reason that men are given the right of divorce is because they are less likely to make emotional or irrational decisions such as women. And he claims womens' testimony is only worth half of that of a man because "a woman’s emotions overcome her mind".
He also says that men have authority over women because of their "natural abilities" and that women have to be obedient to them and are not supposed to "rebel against" that authority.
He says a Muslim husband "is to order his wife to wear hijab".
He suggests a woman who is not married does not lead a valuable life. For example a woman who wants to work instead of being a full-time housewife and mother is, according to him, not fulfilling her divinely ordained duty in life. Women who work are poor, brainwashed, suppressed creatures who are in danger of "losing their femininity". Also he says a woman is better off being a second wife than having no husband at all. According to him, a woman who is not married either "passes her life in bitter deprivation" or becomes "a sex object and plaything" for lecherous men and he suggests the only and much better option for her would be to become a second wife. I find this very offensive and I don't like his use of the word "surplus women" in this context.
He condones the beating of women.
He condones circumcision of girls and says he "personally supports it". He says whoever feels it would "serve the interest of his daughters" should do it.
I see a huge double standard in the way he views sexuality in men and women. According to him, sexual feelings in men, no matter how strong, are a natural thing. A man is not asked to suppress his feelings, to pray, fast and keep himself busy with other things. He claims men need to be supplied with a legal outlet for their lust by all means, so he says masturbation is allowed for men in certain cases and if a man wants more sex than he can get from his wife (or desires more variety) he can go ahead and marry another woman. He says men have the *right* to take a second, third or fourth wife if they are bored or not sexually satisfied with their first one -- or even if she has a long period!
Girls / women on the other hand don't necessarily have sexual feelings. If they do, he suggests, these are triggered by outside factors. It is not appropriate for a woman to have sexual feelings not related to her husband. It is not allowed for her to seek any outlet for her feelings, i.e. masturbation. Instead, those feelings have to be suppressed by praying, fasting, focussing on other things and so on. It is not appropriate for a good Muslim girl to think about sex. He also compares women to animals and claims they only want to have sex when they can get pregnant because that's the way it is in cows, buffalos or she-goats.
I find the view of relationships he displays quite abysmal. Yes, sex is an important part of marriage for many people, but it surely isn't everything, there are many other things that are important, such as love, companionship, understanding and so on. If you truly love and respect someone you don't just go ahead and marry someone else just because you're not getting as much sex as you would like! To me this is just not right morally, it's worse than cheating! And telling people it's the perfect solution for men who can't restrain themselves, as Qaradawi is doing, isn't right either.
Even couples who dearly love each other don't have sex all the time, it happens very often that people don't sleep with each other for a longer period of time, for a multitude of reasons. They might be phsyical – exhaustion from too much work, illness and so on – but very often they are psychological. Often, for example, people lose the desire for sex if something is going wrong in the relationship, if they are somehow unhappy. I feel he reduces the roles of men and women in a marriage to the basest level -- sex and service and emotional attention for the man and financial support and a *dignified status* for the woman.
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote: he says masturbation is allowed for men in certain cases
WHERE DID HE SAID IT? WAT R THE CASES?
quote:He suggests a woman who is not married does not lead a valuable life.
quote: He condones the beating of women.
quote:He condones circumcision of girls and says he "personally supports it".
WATS WRONG IN CIRCUMCSION ?
U CANT SLAUGHTER qARADQY DUETTE DONT EVER TRY CUZ qARADWY MEAT IS POISIONOUS
YUR LIES AND CLAIMS R NONESENSE
GO FIGURE
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
Dear Dalia
While you have a point in some of what you say, I'd still say that you're being a bit unfair to the man. I don't want to make my message into a defense of Qaradawy. After all, he's just a man and people will differ in their views of him and as I said before, he has many ardent supporters and also he has many who absolutely hate his guts.
But just to point out a couple of things. I believe that your understanding of his explanation of women's testimony to be somewhat mistaken, Dalia. This particular point is in the link in the original message of this thread. And while I know that you will not like ALL of what he says there, I'm sure that nowhere he says that woman is inferior or half a man's worth. Maybe you read this as a third party report that was ascribed to him.
The other thing is his opinions on oral sex. I havent read anything of his on the matter of oral sex specifically but I recall that in his book "halal and haram in Islam" he mentions that EVERYTHING in marital sex is allowed except sodomy and I even recall an answer provided by him on islam online to a question to this effect , (asking about oral sex).....and , honestly, Dalia I have never heard him or read such remarks that compare women to animals. Are you sure you are talking about the same man?
You know, look he's a grumpy old man, very conservative and not very funky, to say the least. I admit that... so he might not be kindly inclined towards sexual fun in the modern sense and such like but really, Dalia....I have never seen any of his views that sound as extreme as that. On the contrary, one of my friends calls him Sheikh Abu eltasaheel (something like Sheikh take it easy )...and this is the basis on which he is attacked usually. His fatwas include, for example, allowing face make up based on the verse that allows the apparent beauty to be dispalyed and he interpreted "apparent" as the face. He was attacked based on this fatwa. Most of his fatwas are as progressive as that so I feel totally shocked by what you're telling me.
I would aslo mention the divorce thing. As a Middle eastern person who lived most of my life in the middle east, I have seen how women scream "I want divorce" for the slightest of reasons while they dont really want it and while they still love their husbands but they use it simply as a red card. One of my male friends complains that he is concerned that one time he will just take up her offer since she is in the habit of repeating this so much. His wife is my friend and I know she never really wanted a divorce. This is just an observation but it is a common observation.... so when Qaradawy puts this in his book based on what he observes in his own culture, I wouldnt be surprised. He want worried about political correctness when he wrote it. It might have sounded better if he said that while there are some impulsive men and some really reasonable women, there is a higher tendency towards impulsiveness in females.
I cant remember what he said about cirumcision of girls. I'll review that and the beating of women and I'll get back to you.
But in the end, as I said before, he is only a human being and people will differ in their views of him.
Posted by humanist (Member # 12798) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dalia*: [QUOTE]Originally posted by homing pigeon: [qb]
Some of the reasons why I feel his views on women are derogatory:
He often implies or straightout says that men are more rational, more able to make decisions etc. For example he claims the reason that men are given the right of divorce is because they are less likely to make emotional or irrational decisions such as women. And he claims womens' testimony is only worth half of that of a man because "a woman’s emotions overcome her mind".
He also says that men have authority over women because of their "natural abilities" and that women have to be obedient to them and are not supposed to "rebel against" that authority.
He says a Muslim husband "is to order his wife to wear hijab".
He suggests a woman who is not married does not lead a valuable life. For example a woman who wants to work instead of being a full-time housewife and mother is, according to him, not fulfilling her divinely ordained duty in life. Women who work are poor, brainwashed, suppressed creatures who are in danger of "losing their femininity". Also he says a woman is better off being a second wife than having no husband at all. According to him, a woman who is not married either "passes her life in bitter deprivation" or becomes "a sex object and plaything" for lecherous men and he suggests the only and much better option for her would be to become a second wife. I find this very offensive and I don't like his use of the word "surplus women" in this context.
He condones the beating of women.
He condones circumcision of girls and says he "personally supports it". He says whoever feels it would "serve the interest of his daughters" should do it.
I see a huge double standard in the way he views sexuality in men and women. According to him, sexual feelings in men, no matter how strong, are a natural thing. A man is not asked to suppress his feelings, to pray, fast and keep himself busy with other things. He claims men need to be supplied with a legal outlet for their lust by all means, so he says masturbation is allowed for men in certain cases and if a man wants more sex than he can get from his wife (or desires more variety) he can go ahead and marry another woman. He says men have the *right* to take a second, third or fourth wife if they are bored or not sexually satisfied with their first one -- or even if she has a long period!
Girls / women on the other hand don't necessarily have sexual feelings. If they do, he suggests, these are triggered by outside factors. It is not appropriate for a woman to have sexual feelings not related to her husband. It is not allowed for her to seek any outlet for her feelings, i.e. masturbation. Instead, those feelings have to be suppressed by praying, fasting, focussing on other things and so on. It is not appropriate for a good Muslim girl to think about sex. He also compares women to animals and claims they only want to have sex when they can get pregnant because that's the way it is in cows, buffalos or she-goats.
I find the view of relationships he displays quite abysmal. Yes, sex is an important part of marriage for many people, but it surely isn't everything, there are many other things that are important, such as love, companionship, understanding and so on. If you truly love and respect someone you don't just go ahead and marry someone else just because you're not getting as much sex as you would like! To me this is just not right morally, it's worse than cheating! And telling people it's the perfect solution for men who can't restrain themselves, as Qaradawi is doing, isn't right either.
Even couples who dearly love each other don't have sex all the time, it happens very often that people don't sleep with each other for a longer period of time, for a multitude of reasons. They might be phsyical – exhaustion from too much work, illness and so on – but very often they are psychological. Often, for example, people lose the desire for sex if something is going wrong in the relationship, if they are somehow unhappy. I feel he reduces the roles of men and women in a marriage to the basest level -- sex and service and emotional attention for the man and financial support and a *dignified status* for the woman.
Dalia - I agree with you 100%...the problem with this guy is he totally tries to annihilate the humanity of relationships. For God's sake, people are humans! All of these external fixes he tries to put on women especially are so lacking in authenticity...I don't know Homing, perhaps it is just the differences in our genetics how a Western vs. a Middle Eastern woman interprets these things he says...I too find them appalling...and absolutely counterproductive.
Why are men constantly lauded as being the more rational or logical of the sexes? That is a flawed argument...for example who is more likely to blow his top and murder someone? Who is more likely to be arrested for pedopphilia and/or child molestation? Men do these criminal, irrational and illogical acts at a far greater rate than women!
Homing, what about female circumcision and his views? Do yo believe a husband can "order" his wife to wear hijab? Do you believe hijab is mandantory?
BTW, both of you are debating so nicely. Must be cuz you're women!
Posted by Snoozin No More (Member # 6244) on :
Dalia and HP, it is WONDERFUL to see a debate with opposing views on religion that is still polite and respectful.
Made my day! Posted by Dalia* (Member # 10593) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: The other thing is his opinions on oral sex. I havent read anything of his on the matter of oral sex specifically but I recall that in his book "halal and haram in Islam" he mentions that EVERYTHING in marital sex is allowed except sodomy and I even recall an answer provided by him on islam online to a question to this effect , (asking about oral sex).....and , honestly, Dalia I have never heard him or read such remarks that compare women to animals. Are you sure you are talking about the same man?
HP, my evaluation of him is based on what he says himself, I think most things I read in "The Lawful and the Prohibited" and in the link you gave, as well as in some fatwas on Islamonline.
Here are some quotes relating to what I said above.
However, the most moderate opinion and the most likely one to be correct is in favor of practicing circumcision in the moderate Islamic way indicated in some of the Prophet's hadiths – even though such hadiths are not confirmed to be authentic. It is reported that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said to a midwife: "Reduce the size of the clitoris but do not exceed the limit, for that is better for her health and is preferred by husbands". The hadith indicates that circumcision is better for a woman's health and it enhances her conjugal relation with her husband. It’s noteworthy that the Prophet's saying "do not exceed the limit" means do not totally remove the clitoris.
Actually, Muslim countries differ over the issue of female circumcision; some countries sanction it whereas others do not. Anyhow, it is not obligatory, whoever finds it serving the interest of his daughters should do it, and I personally support this under the current circumstances in the modern world. But whoever chooses not to do it is not considered to have committed a sin for it is mainly meant to dignify women as held by scholars.
Then there may also be the case of a man whose desire for sex is strong, while his wife has little desire for it, or who is chronically ill, has long menstrual periods, or the like, while her husband is unable to restrain his sexual urge. Should it not be permitted to him to marry a second wife instead of his hunting around for girlfriends? There are also times when women outnumber men, as for example after wars which often decimate the ranks of men. In such a situation' it is in the interests of the society and of women themselves that they become co-wives to a man instead of spending their entire lives without marriage, deprived of the peace, affection, and protection of marital life and the joy of motherhood for which they naturally yearn with all their hearts.
Only three possible alternatives exist for such surplus women who are not married as first wives: (1) to pass their whole lives in bitter deprivation, (2) to become sex objects and playthings for lecherous men; or (3) to become co-wives to men who are able to support more than one wife and who will treat them kindly.
Unquestionably, the last alternative is the correct solution, a healing remedy for this problem, and that is the judgement of Islam:
(The Lawful and the Prohibited)
"Statistics and scientific studies have proven that the man's sexual energy is more vigorous. This is a fact … All women arouse a man, but not all men arouse a woman. Even among animals, the females need sex less than the males.This is the case with cows, buffalo, or she-goats; they desire the stallion, ram, or bull only when they want to become pregnant. Afterwards, their desire passes. In contrast, the stallion or ram is [always] willing. This is nature, and woman is this way too…"
(memri.org, I don't have the link anymore but gave it in some other thread a while ago.)
Female masturbation is more risky than male masturbation. ... Do not advise the girls ever to resort to this. A girl must be patient. The thing that tempts such girls, I am sad to say, is that they teach one another. One says to the other: "I did this and that," or "I saw a film, in which they did this and that. " Some TV channels, especially European ones, show outrageous sexual things, which are unacceptable by our standards, our moral values, and religious law. These things are rejected. These scandalous, nude films ... A girl might learn things from these people. A Muslim girl must commit herself to what her God decreed. She must take care of herself, fast, pray, be God fearing, keep herself busy. She can read a useful book, prepare her homework, join a charity, and spend her time doing things that are useful to her in this world and the world to come, instead of thinking about satisfying her urges, especially in a manner forbidden by religious law.
“I was asked about oral sex in America and Europe when I began to travel to these countries in the early 70s. We are not used to be asked these questions in our Muslim countries. Those Western people are accustomed to stripping naked during sexual intercourse. These are communities of nakedness, and from the licentiousness of the woman that she wears nothing to screen her body in her daily life.
So, they are in need of more excitements during copulation. However, men in our Muslim societies see nothing in the Muslim woman that can excite them on the basis of her wearing either Hijab (veil) or Niqab (face cover). But concerning whether being in complete nakedness during practicing copulation is lawful or not, the Prophet of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, is reported to have said, "Guard your private parts except from your wife or your slaves."
Muslim jurists are of the opinion that it is lawful for the husband to perform cunnilingus on his wife, or a wife to perform the similar act for her husband (fellatio) and there is no wrong in doing so. But if sucking leads to releasing semen, then it is Makruh (blameworthy), but there is no decisive evidence (to forbid it).
These parts are not dirty like anus, but it is ordinarily disgusting to man. But there is no decisive evidence to make it unlawful, especially if the wife agrees with it or achieves orgasm by practicing it.
(Dr. Sabri `Abdul Ra’ouf) ... also gives support to the view of Sheikh Al-Qaradawi that oral sex or kissing private parts of the spouse is something viewed disgusting to Muslims, but if the aim is just kissing (without having constant indulgence in it) it's not sinful to do that, but people of high morality normally keep away from that, as not to give in to imitating non-Muslims.”
If the husband senses that feelings of disobedience and rebelliousness are rising against him in his wife, he should try his best to rectify her attitude by kind words, gentle persuasion, and reasoning with her. If this is not helpful, he should sleep apart from her, trying to awaken her agreeable feminine nature so that serenity may be restored, and she may respond to him in a harmonious fashion. If this approach fails, it is permissible for him to beat her lightly with his hands, avoiding her face and other sensitive parts. In no case should he resort to using a stick or any other instrument that might cause pain and injury
(The Lawful and the Prohibited)
Regarding the divorce issue -- I fully understand what you're saying. But he's not some Ahmed or Muhammad sitting in a Cairo coffeeshop giving his opinion, but an influential scholar, and as such he should not make such sweeping generalizations, especially those that might influence legal rulings or public opinion. His fatwas are not issued exclusively for people in Egypt or the ME; so shouldn't he take the realities of life anywhere in the world into account? I see from his writings that he has many misconceptions about European women, so how in the world can he give fatwas that are supposed to be taken seriously by European Muslims if it's clear that he can't really relate to the reality of those peoples' lifes at all?
Yes, I'm aware of the fact that he has given fatwas, especially in regards to womens' rights, that could be considered progressive -- at least compared to some others. But that makes him even less credible in my opinion ... sometimes he's objective and sometimes the reasons he gives for legal rulings seem to be just his own biased opinions.
Posted by Dalia* (Member # 10593) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine:
quote: he says masturbation is allowed for men in certain cases
WHERE DID HE SAID IT? WAT R THE CASES?
The pressing need to relieve himself of sexual tension may drive a young man to masturbation.
The majority of scholars consider it haram. Imam Malik bases his judgement on the verse, Those who guard their sexual organs except with their spouses or those whom their right hands possess, for (with regard to them) they are without blame. But those who crave something beyond that are transgressors, (23:5-7) arguing that the masturbator is one of those who "crave something beyond that."
On the other hand, it is reported that Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal regarded semen as an excretion of the body like other excrete and permitted its expulsion as blood letting is permitted. Ibn Hazm holds the same view. However, the Hanbali jurists permit masturbation only under two conditions: first, the fear of committing fornication or adultery, and second, not having the means to marry. We are inclined to accept the opinion of Imam Ahmad in a situation in which there is sexual excitation and danger of committing the haram. For example, a young man has gone abroad to study or work, thereby encountering many temptations which he fears he will be unable to resist, may resort to this method of relieving sexual tension provided he does not do it excessively or make it into a habit.
(The Lawful and the Prohibited in Islam, p. 76)
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:
Yes, I'm aware of the fact that he has given fatwas, especially in regards to womens' rights, that could be considered progressive -- at least compared to some others. But that makes him even less credible in my opinion ... sometimes he's objective and sometimes he seems the reasons he gives for legal rulings seem to be purley his own biased opinions.
It's more likely to be his own best effort, Dalia. Religious scholars generally take their positions very seriously and are usually not willing to shoulder the sin of misguiding people so they do try and put their best effort and knowledge into reasoning about things. Scholars have been known to issue fatwas and then retract on them years later when they learn something that changes their chain of reasoning. But since they are mere mortals, they are liable to be mistaken sometimes. You cant expect any single human being to be right all the time. Like I said Bukhari is a mortal and can make mistakes, so can Qaradawy and others. Each one of them is a product of their cutlure and their learning and a complex number of other things and they may well be biased or uninformed about things outside their own areas of specialty.
Moderate Muslims accept that fact and the general consensus is to look for "convergence" of opinions of several religious scholars in any one issue. It is extremely rare that Muslims follow a single erratic fatwa against the general opinion of other clerics. Also, in hadith, we were told that a religious scholar can only do his best effort. If he's wrong, God rewards him for trying honeslty to reach the truth but if he's right, God rewards him double for it. So bearing in mind the limitations of any human being, most religious jurisprudence is based on convergent opinion of a panel of scholars.
However, public opinion of one scholar or other naturally depends on his own ideas and reasoning. People in Muslim countries generally take a scholar as a whole. If the majority of his fatwas are lenient, he's seen to be lenient. If the majority of his ideas are strict, he's seen to be strict and so on. Based on this, I still support the view that Qaradawy's ideas in general are more acceptable than many.
I have seen his fatwa on masturbation in his book a long time ago and I dont understand why you dont like it. It's more reasonable to allow a person (man or woman) an outlet for relief of sexual tension whoch cannot be alleviated within a lawful relationship. Not only Qaradawy but a few others , as well, hold this view and I think these are more reasonable than the others who twist themselves into knots in an attempt to prove that masturbation is harmful for health and therefore outlawed. Medical opinion says masturbation is not harmful and the clerics who allow it restrict it to absolute need according to another jurisprudence rule that says " necessity may lift certain restrictions" الضرورات تبيح المحظورات and I find this rule very helpful actually. It allows some flexibility which if we didnt have , we'd be in dire straits indeed!
What I commner Qaradawy for specifically is that when he talks abotu Islamic rulings, he doesnt just mention his opinion but he lists other opposing opinions and their reasons then he states his opinion and his reasons which allows the reader to make up his/her own mind in an informed way. This is in sharp contrast with many other sheikhs who would insist that their opinion is the one correct opinion and everybody else is wrong and would give you their own ruling omitting to state the reasons behind it or the other opposing opinions even if their opinion is really over the top. Mostly, salafi scholars do that and they claim that there is absolute agreement on the issue when it is highly controversial.Chek for example Sheikh ibn Baz or Ibn Othmeyeen or, horror of horrors, Nasser El-Albany. It's when I see those that I thank God that people like Qaradawy exist.
But anyway, I will have a look around his other opinions including wife beating and will report back here Posted by Dalia* (Member # 10593) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: I have seen his fatwa on masturbation in his book a long time ago and I dont understand why you dont like it. It's more reasonable to allow a person (man or woman) an outlet for relief of sexual tension whoch cannot be alleviated within a lawful relationship. Not only Qaradawy but a few others , as well, hold this view and I think these are more reasonable than the others who twist themselves into knots in an attempt to prove that masturbation is harmful for health and therefore outlawed. Medical opinion says masturbation is not harmful and the clerics who allow it restrict it to absolute need according to another jurisprudence rule that says " necessity may lift certain restrictions" ???????? ???? ????????? and I find this rule very helpful actually. It allows some flexibility which if we didnt have , we'd be in dire straits indeed!
Oh, you misunderstood me. I completely agree with you on this one. What I meant to illustrate was his double standard regarding men and women in relation to sexuality. He suggests men are "naturally lustful" whereas libidinous feelings in women are triggered by outside factors, such as watching European TV, for example. He makes a clear difference when addressing men and women regarding this issue by saying for men it's ok in certain cases whereas women should refrain from it under any condition. And his remarks about women only wanting to have sex when they are able to procreate is further proof for his bias on the subject. And what about women who are "naturally more lustful than others"? Would he give them the same advice as men? Would he see it as a priority that they need to "fulfill their urges in a lawful manner" and so on? I don't think so ... and that's why I say he's promoting a double standard.
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon:
What I commner Qaradawy for specifically is that when he talks abotu Islamic rulings, he doesnt just mention his opinion but he lists other opposing opinions and their reasons then he states his opinion and his reasons which allows the reader to make up his/her own mind in an informed way. This is in sharp contrast with many other sheikhs who would insist that their opinion is the one correct opinion and everybody else is wrong and would give you their own ruling omitting to state the reasons behind it or the other opposing opinions even if their opinion is really over the top. Mostly, salafi scholars do that and they claim that there is absolute agreement on the issue when it is highly controversial.Chek for example Sheikh ibn Baz or Ibn Othmeyeen or, horror of horrors, Nasser El-Albany. It's when I see those that I thank God that people like Qaradawy exist.
Even though I personally don't like him I have to agree with you here. Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
But anyway, other clerics and the general opinion that was drawn from his fatwa have generalized this bit over men and women.
I'm not about to defend his sexual attitudes...as I said before.... he may well be hindered by any number of inhibitions imposed in a cultural way. What I defend only is that he would not knowingly misrepresent things and that he tries to be as objective as he can. Sometimes he'll be wrong, naturally but there is more right than wrong in his general opinions.
In no way I represent him as infallible... but I would represent him as honest and more reasonable than many.
I would risk a guess that the majority of our religious scholars have been subject to very inhibited upbringing in relation to sexual matters and that is very likely to bias their views.
Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote: Originally posted by homing pigeon:
What I commner Qaradawy
That was "commend" but for some oblique reason it's not letting me edit it Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
SWYS HOW R YOU?
WAS THEEDITED POST INSULTS TO ME Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
MASTURBATION IS HARAM FOR MEN OR WOMEN
QARADAWY FATWA SAY MASTURBATION IS OK IS FAULTY
Ruling on masturbation and how to cure the problem
Question: I have a question which I am shy to ask but another sister who has come to Islam recently wants an answer to and I do not have an answer (with dilals from the Qur'an and Sunnah). I hope you can help and I hope Allah will for give me if it is inappropriate but as Muslims we should never be shy in seeking knowledge. Her question was "Is it permissible in Islam to masturbate?". May Allah increase us all in knowledge.
Answer: Praise be to Allaah.
Masturbation (for both men and women) is haraam (forbidden) in Islam based on the following evidence:
First from the Qur’aan:
Imam Shafi’i stated that masturbation is forbidden based on the following verses from the Qur’aan (interpretation of the meaning):
"And those who guard their chastity (i.e. private parts, from illegal sexual acts). Except from their wives or (the captives and slaves) that their right hands possess, - for them, they are free from blame. But whoever seeks beyond that, then those are the transgressors." 23.5-7 Here the verses are clear in forbidding all illegal sexual acts (including masturbation) except for the wives or that their right hand possess. And whoever seeks beyond that is the transgressor.
"And let those who find not the financial means for marriage keep themselves chaste, until Allah enriches them of His bounty." 24.33. This verse also clearly orders whoever does not have the financial means to marry to keep himself chaste and be patient in facing temptations (including masturbation) until Allah enriches them of His bounty.
Secondly, from the sunnah of the Prophet (peace be upon him):
Abdullaah ibn Mas’ood said, "We were with the Prophet while we were young and had no wealth whatsoever. So Allaah’s Messenger said, "O young people! Whoever among you can marry, should marry, because it helps him lower his gaze and guard his modesty (i.e. his private parts from committing illegal sexual intercourse etc.), and whoever is not able to marry, should fast, as fasting diminishes his sexual power." Bukhari:5066. The hadeeth orders men who are not able to marry to fast despite the hardship encountered in doing so, and not to masturbate despite the ease with which it can be done.
There are additional evidences that can be cited to support this ruling on masturbation, but due to the limited space we will not go through them here. Allaah knows what is best and most correct.
As for curing the habit of masturbation, we recommend the following suggestions:
1) The motive to seek a cure for this problem should be solely following Allaah’s orders and fearing His punishment.
2) A permanent and quick cure from this problem lies in marriage as soon as the person is able, as shown in the Prophet’s hadeeth.
3) Keeping oneself busy with what is good for this world and the hereafter is essential in breaking this habit before it becomes second nature after which it is very difficult to rid oneself of it.
4) Lowering the gaze (from looking at forbidden things such as pictures, movies etc.) will help suppress the desire before it leads one to commit the haraam (forbidden). Allaah orders men and women to lower their gaze as shown in the following two verses and in the Prophet’s hadeeth (interpretations of the meanings):
"Tell the believing men to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things) and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts, etc.). That is purer for them. Verily, Allah is all-aware of what they do. And tell the believing women to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things) and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts, etc.) ..... " 24.30-31
Allaah’s messenger said: "Do not follow a casual (unintentional) look (at forbidden things) with another look." Al-Tirmidhi 2777. This is a general instruction by the Prophet to abstain from all that may sexually excite a person because it might lead him/her to commit the haraam (forbidden).
5) Using one’s available leisure time in worshipping Allaah and increasing religious knowledge.
6) Being cautious not to develop any of the medical symptoms that may result from masturbation such as weak eyesight, weak nervous system, and/or back pain. More importantly, feeling of guilt and anxiety that can be complicated by missing obligatory prayers because of the need to shower (ghusl) after every incidence of masturbation.
7) Avoiding the illusion that some youth have that masturbation is permissible because it prevents them from committing illegal sexual acts such as fornication or even homosexuality.
8) Strengthening one’s willpower and avoiding spending time alone as recommended by the Prophet when he said "Do not spend the night alone" Ahmad 6919.
9) Following the Prophet’s aforementioned hadeeth and fast when possible, because fasting will temper one’s sexual desire and keep it under control. However, one should not overreact and swear by Allaah not to return to the act because if one does not honor one’s promise, one would be facing the consequences of not living up to one’s oath to Allaah. Also, note that medication to diminish one’s sexual desire is strictly prohibited because it might permanently affect one’s sexual ability.
10) Trying to follow the Prophet’s recommendation concerning the etiquette of getting ready for bed, such as reading well-known supplications, sleeping on the right side, and avoiding sleeping on the belly (the Prophet forbade sleeping on the belly).
11) Striving hard to be patient and chaste, because persistence will eventually, Allaah willing, lead to attaining those qualities as second nature, as the Prophet explains in the following hadeeth: "Whoever seeks chastity Allaah will make him chaste, and whoever seeks help from none but Allaah, He will help him, and whoever is patient He will make it easy for him, and no one has ever been given anything better than patience." Bukhari:1469.
12) Repenting, asking forgiveness from Allaah, doing good deeds, and not losing hope and feeling despair are all prerequisites to curing this problem. Note that losing hope is one of the major sins punishable by Allaah.
13) Finally, Allaah is the Most Merciful and He always responds to whoever calls on Him. So, asking for Allah’s forgiveness will be accepted, by His will.
Wallahu a’lam. And Allah knows what is best and most correct.
END OF THE STORY
Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: SWYS HOW R YOU?
WAS THEEDITED POST INSULTS TO ME
LOL. Batman, nooooooo, I promise. How are you? Still waging a one-man war on evil?
I'm good. Off to have dinner now. Posted by *The Dark Angel* aka CAT (Member # 11953) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: [ CIRCUMCISON OF FEMALES IS HEALTHY HABITS SOUND LIKE ES PEOPLE HAVE NO IDEA ABOUT hUMAN SEXUALITY
Riiight, you're the expert on human sexuality, Batman Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
Batman dear, so Imam Shafey ruled it out but Imam Ibn Hanbal allowed it. Imam Malik ruled it out but Imam Abu Hanifa allowed it with restriction.....so we should be able to accomodate all those views. Each of us will personally chose what we are comfortable with but if you ask Imam Abu Hanifa himself about the issues where he disagreed with Imam Malik (they were contemporaries of each other, u know), he would express his respects for him and vice versa and neither of them would describe the others' view as "wrong" outright.....so why is it that modern Sheikhs have this antagonism towards each other's views? The 4 main Imams even agreed on the conclusion that Allah does not punish on controversial matters where learned scholars have failed to reach a consensus.
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
ya homing pigeaon humans r imperfect u know i did not disqalify Quaradawy or any1
Posted by Rumicrazieluv (Member # 12053) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: MASTURBATION IS HARAM FOR MEN OR WOMEN
QARADAWY FATWA SAY MASTURBATION IS OK IS FAULTY
Ruling on masturbation and how to cure the problem
Question: I have a question which I am shy to ask but another sister who has come to Islam recently wants an answer to and I do not have an answer (with dilals from the Qur'an and Sunnah). I hope you can help and I hope Allah will for give me if it is inappropriate but as Muslims we should never be shy in seeking knowledge. Her question was "Is it permissible in Islam to masturbate?". May Allah increase us all in knowledge.
Answer: Praise be to Allaah.
Masturbation (for both men and women) is haraam (forbidden) in Islam based on the following evidence:
First from the Qur’aan:
Imam Shafi’i stated that masturbation is forbidden based on the following verses from the Qur’aan (interpretation of the meaning):
"And those who guard their chastity (i.e. private parts, from illegal sexual acts). Except from their wives or (the captives and slaves) that their right hands possess, - for them, they are free from blame. But whoever seeks beyond that, then those are the transgressors." 23.5-7 Here the verses are clear in forbidding all illegal sexual acts (including masturbation) except for the wives or that their right hand possess. And whoever seeks beyond that is the transgressor.
"And let those who find not the financial means for marriage keep themselves chaste, until Allah enriches them of His bounty." 24.33. This verse also clearly orders whoever does not have the financial means to marry to keep himself chaste and be patient in facing temptations (including masturbation) until Allah enriches them of His bounty.
Secondly, from the sunnah of the Prophet (peace be upon him):
Abdullaah ibn Mas’ood said, "We were with the Prophet while we were young and had no wealth whatsoever. So Allaah’s Messenger said, "O young people! Whoever among you can marry, should marry, because it helps him lower his gaze and guard his modesty (i.e. his private parts from committing illegal sexual intercourse etc.), and whoever is not able to marry, should fast, as fasting diminishes his sexual power." Bukhari:5066. The hadeeth orders men who are not able to marry to fast despite the hardship encountered in doing so, and not to masturbate despite the ease with which it can be done.
There are additional evidences that can be cited to support this ruling on masturbation, but due to the limited space we will not go through them here. Allaah knows what is best and most correct.
As for curing the habit of masturbation, we recommend the following suggestions:
1) The motive to seek a cure for this problem should be solely following Allaah’s orders and fearing His punishment.
2) A permanent and quick cure from this problem lies in marriage as soon as the person is able, as shown in the Prophet’s hadeeth.
3) Keeping oneself busy with what is good for this world and the hereafter is essential in breaking this habit before it becomes second nature after which it is very difficult to rid oneself of it.
4) Lowering the gaze (from looking at forbidden things such as pictures, movies etc.) will help suppress the desire before it leads one to commit the haraam (forbidden). Allaah orders men and women to lower their gaze as shown in the following two verses and in the Prophet’s hadeeth (interpretations of the meanings):
"Tell the believing men to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things) and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts, etc.). That is purer for them. Verily, Allah is all-aware of what they do. And tell the believing women to lower their gaze (from looking at forbidden things) and protect their private parts (from illegal sexual acts, etc.) ..... " 24.30-31
Allaah’s messenger said: "Do not follow a casual (unintentional) look (at forbidden things) with another look." Al-Tirmidhi 2777. This is a general instruction by the Prophet to abstain from all that may sexually excite a person because it might lead him/her to commit the haraam (forbidden).
5) Using one’s available leisure time in worshipping Allaah and increasing religious knowledge.
6) Being cautious not to develop any of the medical symptoms that may result from masturbation such as weak eyesight, weak nervous system, and/or back pain. More importantly, feeling of guilt and anxiety that can be complicated by missing obligatory prayers because of the need to shower (ghusl) after every incidence of masturbation.
7) Avoiding the illusion that some youth have that masturbation is permissible because it prevents them from committing illegal sexual acts such as fornication or even homosexuality.
8) Strengthening one’s willpower and avoiding spending time alone as recommended by the Prophet when he said "Do not spend the night alone" Ahmad 6919.
9) Following the Prophet’s aforementioned hadeeth and fast when possible, because fasting will temper one’s sexual desire and keep it under control. However, one should not overreact and swear by Allaah not to return to the act because if one does not honor one’s promise, one would be facing the consequences of not living up to one’s oath to Allaah. Also, note that medication to diminish one’s sexual desire is strictly prohibited because it might permanently affect one’s sexual ability.
10) Trying to follow the Prophet’s recommendation concerning the etiquette of getting ready for bed, such as reading well-known supplications, sleeping on the right side, and avoiding sleeping on the belly (the Prophet forbade sleeping on the belly).
11) Striving hard to be patient and chaste, because persistence will eventually, Allaah willing, lead to attaining those qualities as second nature, as the Prophet explains in the following hadeeth: "Whoever seeks chastity Allaah will make him chaste, and whoever seeks help from none but Allaah, He will help him, and whoever is patient He will make it easy for him, and no one has ever been given anything better than patience." Bukhari:1469.
12) Repenting, asking forgiveness from Allaah, doing good deeds, and not losing hope and feeling despair are all prerequisites to curing this problem. Note that losing hope is one of the major sins punishable by Allaah.
13) Finally, Allaah is the Most Merciful and He always responds to whoever calls on Him. So, asking for Allah’s forgiveness will be accepted, by His will.
Wallahu a’lam. And Allah knows what is best and most correct.
END OF THE STORY
Here they tell you as a kid if you mastrubate that you will go blind. Batty, dont tell me you dont mastrubate because I dont believe you... Posted by Snoozin No More (Member # 6244) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: ... he would express his respects for him and vice versa and neither of them would describe the others' view as "wrong" outright.....
A voice of reason. Posted by humanist (Member # 12798) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: Did he say only men? I didnt notice that!
But anyway, other clerics and the general opinion that was drawn from his fatwa have generalized this bit over men and women.
I'm not about to defend his sexual attitudes...as I said before.... he may well be hindered by any number of inhibitions imposed in a cultural way. What I defend only is that he would not knowingly misrepresent things and that he tries to be as objective as he can. Sometimes he'll be wrong, naturally but there is more right than wrong in his general opinions.
In no way I represent him as infallible... but I would represent him as honest and more reasonable than many.
I would risk a guess that the majority of our religious scholars have been subject to very inhibited upbringing in relation to sexual matters and that is very likely to bias their views.
I vote for Homing Pigeon to be a scholar.
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
Rumicrazieluv
believe it or not i don maturb. have no enrgy for it i consume my energy in other stuff like sport
Posted by Undercover (Member # 12979) on :
They say cancer-causing chemicals could build up in the prostate if men do not ejaculate regularly.
is masturbation an induced or natural ejaculation? it's induced one God created human body perfect natural ejaculation will protct agains cancer
eating atioxidant like tomatoes, cucmber can protect againts cancer
we say to people stop masturbation n eat tomatoes carrtots n other green food to protect againts cancer
we also have honey
Several medications and vitamins may also help prevent prostate cancer. Two dietary supplements, vitamin E and selenium, may help prevent prostate cancer when taken daily. Estrogens from soybeans and other plant sources (called phytoestrogens) may also help prevent prostate cancer.
Green tea may be protective (due to its polyphenol content)
Posted by Undercover (Member # 12979) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dalia*: I find the view of relationships he displays quite abysmal. Yes, sex is an important part of marriage for many people, but it surely isn't everything, there are many other things that are important, such as love, companionship, understanding and so on. If you truly love and respect someone you don't just go ahead and marry someone else just because you're not getting as much sex as you would like! To me this is just not right morally, it's worse than cheating!
Sex gives men a headache
Scientists have found that men are more likely than women to be telling the truth if they say: "Not tonight darling, I've got a headache".
A team of German researchers has begun to investigate the phenomenon of sexual headaches - a condition known as Orgasmic Cephalgia.
They have discovered that it is three times more likely to strike men.
quote:Originally posted by Dalia*: I find the view of relationships he displays quite abysmal. Yes, sex is an important part of marriage for many people, but it surely isn't everything, there are many other things that are important, such as love, companionship, understanding and so on. If you truly love and respect someone you don't just go ahead and marry someone else just because you're not getting as much sex as you would like! To me this is just not right morally, it's worse than cheating!
Sex gives men a headache
Scientists have found that men are more likely than women to be telling the truth if they say: "Not tonight darling, I've got a headache".
A team of German researchers has begun to investigate the phenomenon of sexual headaches - a condition known as Orgasmic Cephalgia.
They have discovered that it is three times more likely to strike men.
may b cuz they masturbate regulary for fear of cancer so they have no power to make love so they get dizzy Posted by Ayisha (Member # 4713) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine:
God created human body perfect natural ejaculation will protct agains cancer
funny you say that when talking about a man, however you dont say that regarding female circumcision? Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by humanist: I vote for Homing Pigeon to be a scholar.
They dont get it with votes unfortunately ...and I suppose having a healthy sexual appetite definitely disqualifies you for the job.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
Hey, Dalia
It just occured to me why you and I have had a different understanding of the masturbation issue (whether it was men only or men and women). It might be because of the masculine dominance of the Arabic language. I know You probably read the translation, is that right? I havent read the book in translation. I only read the Arabic copy. There is a grammatical issue with the Arabic language regarding gendre the rule is anythime you talk about a group of men and women, you refer to the group in masculine...so naturally when Qaradawy wrote his section on masturbatio in the book, he would write it all in the masculine and I would intiuitively undertand that it means both male and female while in translation, if the trsnaltor states the masculine pronoun everywhere in the text, it can only mean male to the reader because that's how it is in the English language.
Example: If "someone" needs to do something, "he" has to do it in a way that doesnt annoy "him"
In Arabic, we would never think of puttinh it as he/she or use "them" to include a plural that is not affected by gendre....we just dont so that....I even recall a meeting of some feminist organization in Egypt where they demanded a modernisation approach to the Arabic language that addresses this issue.
You know, even in the quran it is that way....u might get the impression that the verse refers to men when it is men and women inclusive as per Arabic grammar.
It just comes to mind as a possibility but dont quote me on it ....it's just my guess and I may be wrong. I suppose the only way to know for sure is to ask Qaradawy. But I'm sure I saw other scholars opinions on the issue that were in reply to women specifically.
Posted by Dalia* (Member # 10593) on :
Hi homing pigeon
Yes, I've read the translation, but I'm well aware of the issues regarding expression of gender in the Arabic language and that they can create confusion when translating. But I still think he is exclusively (or mainly) addressing men here. Yes, it's possible that he means "young men and women" where the translator wrote "young men", but then he also speaks about semen and mentions that those who can support a wife should get married, imo that seems to suggest he's referring to men. He also says that Hanbali jurists allow masturbation "if the person doesn't have the means to marry" which again seems to indicate that men are addressed here.
The pressing need to relieve himself of sexual tension may drive a young man to masturbation.
The Prophet (peace be on him) said, Young men, those of you who can support a wife should marry, for it keeps you from looking at women (lit., lowers your gaze) and preserves your chastity
For example, a young man has gone abroad to study or work, thereby encountering many temptations which he fears he will be unable to resist ...
Also, if this paragraph was addressing both, men as well as women, why then would he address women separately in another speech / fatwa and give them a different advice as he did in the text I quoted above?
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: I'm not about to defend his sexual attitudes...as I said before.... he may well be hindered by any number of inhibitions imposed in a cultural way. What I defend only is that he would not knowingly misrepresent things and that he tries to be as objective as he can. Sometimes he'll be wrong, naturally but there is more right than wrong in his general opinions.
In no way I represent him as infallible... but I would represent him as honest and more reasonable than many.
But one thing I don't understand is ... if you admit that he is probably influenced by his culture and upbringing, particularly in his views on sexuality, then why do you think it is recommendable to read his opinion on the status of women? Doesn't this obvious bias decrease his credibility? For me personally, his opinion on FGM alone would be enough to completely disqualify him from talking about womens' rights or status. I could never accept someone who holds such views as a spiritual mentor or a religious advisor. In fact, I can't even bring myself to respect such a person at all.
OK, he's not as bad as the Salafi scholars, but is that enough? Aren't there other scholars with a more enlightened view who would be worth listening to or reading? I think there are and I'm sure you know better about those than me. So why chose the writings of someone whose work also contains a lot of objectionable stuff? Honestly, if I was someone with no background knowledge at all and read his texts about women I'd be scared off and get a very negative image of Islam ...
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
Well, Dalia
The answer is that I didnt perceive his writings in the way you did for all the reasons we discussed above.
I read the lawful and the prohibited in islam and I found it to be a very reasonable book. His book about women that I cited in this thread doesnt mention anything about FGM and what I read of it sounded quite reasonable, too.
Besides, I seem to be taking it for granted that it is impossible that we can agree 100% with any writer on what he wirtes so I assume that if we disagree, to some extent, with Qaradawy, this should be no reason to disqualify him completely. As I said before I find him reasonable on most issues. If I disagree with him on matters of sexuality this is not enough to strike off his credibility. There is more to feminine status thatn sexuality and from the point of view of culture, how many 70 year old men in my culture are sexually exciting or are open to sexual emancipation, so to speak? Come to that, how many 70 year old men in Western societies are?
I do not agree that his works give a negative image of Islam. On the contrary, this book on women stautus highlights many commendable features of the religion towards women. However, as I said in the first paragraph in this message, we have to make a distinction between what we are ready to accept based on our personal preferences and what is being represented as one scholar's view of a certain matter and expect that they are never going to match like two pieces of jigsaw. As an example, you and I do not agree 100% on everything but it doesnt hinder me from considering your views on things and agreeing with some of them. More imoportantly, we should be able to accept that sometimes religion is not going to coincide with what we want.
There are a few other things that I omitted to mention earlier that may explain why you and I react differently to Qaradawy. For example, you feel strongly about his references to the west and think it is a rhetorical trick. I dont feel the same on this one. You even drew my attention that I may be doing the same thing sometimes. I dont do it as a rhetorical trick and I dont think Qaradawy does it in that way. When we talk about Western criticisms to Islam, we seem to assume that the West is criticising Islamic conventions (as opposed to cultural) in comparison to what the Western style of life stands at today and our replies are built to address this. So I dont think this is a dishonest attitude on Qaradawy's part and I dont take it as offensive.
Also, when a man who grew up in some very conservative village and went on to study religion and continued to live conservatively first discovers oral sex when he is asked about it abroad and then he assumes that it is a Western idea that is being imported into our culture. I dont see how I can blame him for this. In fact, as an Egyptian, I think he might be right. I think if I could travel in time 50 years back I might not find many people in my culture who are oral sex savvy at all.
Again, his comments about women and work...well, I'd like to discuss this with you on a separate thread because I need to talk about it However, I may agree with some of what he says and disagree with the rest of it. We have to see that there is a limiting line between what religion decrees and what he expresses as his views. He makes this clear when he speaks or writes so people can take thri pick from what he says. He gives the religious ruling then expresses his opinion. Devout Muslims are not under any obligation to take his opinions but that is why he gives the the riligious ruling separately.
For these reasons, I still hold to my view about him and his publications. And I can also see why some people adore hima and some people wouldnmt mind tearing him to pieces. He, at least, is not worried about disagreement. He finds it quite acceptable and doesnt mind acknowledging that other opinion may be right and he shows it everytime he writes or speaks about anything.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dalia*: But one thing I don't understand is ... if you admit that he is probably influenced by his culture and upbringing, particularly in his views on sexuality, ......
Aren't there other scholars with a more enlightened view who would be worth listening to or reading?
Unfortunately, no. I dont think there is any of our religious scholars that is not influenced by culture and upbringing, particularly when it comes to sensitive matters like sex and relationships. I would go further to say that it is only very few people in general who are able to transcend the boubdaries of culture and embrace all views in general matters...and even fewer who can take on board an objective cross-cultural view of sexual issues.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
I searched for Qaradawy's opinion on FGM and found that he doesnt accept it. Here is the link for a new report on a certain conference on the issue. It is in Arabic. Perhaps Google can produce a reasonable translation that gives u the gist of it at least.
أكد الدكتور يوسف القرضاوى ان ختان الاناث لم يأت به دليل قاطع على ضرورته، مشيرا الى ان الاحاديث التى جاءت بشأن ختان الاناث كلها ضعيفة ولم يرد نص فقهى يجزم بضرورة ختان
Dr.Yusuf Alqaradawy has confirmed that there is no difinitive religious indication for female circumcision pointing out that the hadiths that have been cited in support of it are all weak (in terms of authenticity) and there is no jurisprudence text that necessitates female circumcision. وقال العلامة القرضاوى خلال محاضرته التى ألقاها أمس الأول ضمن فعاليات مؤتمر العلماء العالمى الذى تنظمه على مدار يومين دار الافتاء المصرية بالتعاون مع مؤسسة «تارجت» الالمانية الخيرية، ان على العلماء المسلمين ان يضعوا نهاية للجدال الدائر حول عادة ختان الاناث وان تكون هناك بحوث طبية من شأنها تقديم صورة عامة حول المخاطر التى تتعرض لها الفتيات جراء تلك العملية مؤكدا ان رأى الفقيه فى كثير من الامور ينبغى ان يكون مستندا الى رأى العلم مدللا على ذلك برأيه فى التدخين.
Qaradawy said in his lecture...{description of conference organizers}....that Muslim scholars have to put an end to the controversy around the issue of female circumcision by falling back on medical research that highlights the health risks of this procedure. He confrims that the opinion of the religious scholar, in many cases, has to be supported by scientific proof as in the case of smoking, for example.
واوضح القرضاوى ان هناك شبه اجماع من العلماء على جواز عملية ختان الاناث الا ان هذا الجواز يجوز منعه ابعادا للضرر، مؤكدا ان الختان يمثل اعتداء على خلق الله ومحاولة شيطانية لتغيير خلق الله كما انه لايجوز قياس ختان المرأة على ختان الرجل لأن الاستثناء فى ختان الرجل لاينبغى القياس عليه.
Alqaradawy explained that there is almost complete agreement among scholars that female circumcision is allowable {i.e. not prohibited} but this allowance can be suppressed in view of consequent harm. He confirms that circumcision is an assault on the perfection of God's creation and an attempt to change it and that male circumcision is not comparable to female circumcision.
واكد ان حسم القضية موجود فى القرآن والفقه والسنة والاحكام الشرعية فهو امر ليس «سائبا» وانما له اصوله الفقهية، داعيا علماء المسلمين الى التوحد من اجل الخروج بكلمة واحدة تحسم الخلاف حول تلك القضية التى مازالت مطروحة حتى الآن. He confirms that it is possible to determine the ruling on this issue from the quran and sunna and that the jurisprudence guidance on it exist and called out to Muslim scholars to unite for the purpose of issuing a final statement on this issue that is still being debated.
The rest of the article goes on to describe the basis on which Qaradawy has built his opinion regarding this issue from quran and sunna in his own words.
So,you see , Dalia....I have a feeling that we are almost talking about a different person. I have never come across opinions from the Qaradawy that can be described as objectionable....although I may disagree with him on a few matters of detail but for the main issues I find him very reasonable.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
That conference was in 2006 and there is another newspaper interview with him in March 2007 there that says the same thing
He mentions in this one that he does not support the idea of a legislation against performing FGM and he thinks that educating the public is a much better choice.
Naturally, I can understand where he comes from. When there was a ban on the procedure in Egypt, people still did it in secret and in unhealthy septic conditions which resulted in a lot more complications including severe haemorrage and infections.
However, on his own website he mentions that if medical opinion agrees that FGM is harmful then it would be expedient, from the religious point of view to outlaw it.
The beautiful thing is that he analyses the sources of Islamic legislation in detail and reasons about each and every one of them in a way that leaves no room for doubt regarding the Islamic view of FGM. It's an article worth translating. I'll search for its transaltion sometime or do it myself.
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
Hint to homing
fmg is not female circumcision
( but people/organization/medical brainwashed education say it . this is faulty)
no sane perosn say fgm is allowed
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
Batman, I'm a doctor and I know what I'm talking about. Any tampering with female genital organs is FGM whether it is level 1, 2 ,3 or 4
Besides, Qaradawy is talking about it in the Arabic word "khitan" so we dont have to discuss FGM.....any khitan applies to what Qaradawy is saying.... and it would be a good idea to review his reasoning as to why he thinks it isnt Islamic. It's in one of the links up there. Then cross match it with what the other scholars who support (balash FGM) circumcision say and see which one is more convincing.
When you come back to me and say what they usually claim i.e.: there is a certain requirement to what can be described as Islamic circumcision which is limited to removal of a bit of this and a bit of that. I'll tell u as a doctor, the female genital organs are very highly vascular. They will bleed copiously when they are cut and then they will heal with fibrous tissue which will make the remaining structures as good as useless. So your argument about better sensation is totally void. Have you ever had an operation? Did you notice how the sensation changes around the area of the skin incision? This is what happenes for a woman who has circumcision of any type. It's a tiny area and what is left behind changes to fibrous non sensitive tissue like the skin around your operation exactly and touching it feels wiered and uncomfortable.....so I hope this has explained it a little bit
And dont be angry with me for explaining. It's my job. I teach medical students all the time and old habits die hard. Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
************ ختان الانثي في الطب و الاسلام بين الافراط والتفريط اعداد / د. امال احمد البشير اخصائية طب المجتمع ( امومة و طفولة) المقدمة بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم الحمد لله الذي انعم علينا و اكرمنا بالاسلام و الصلاة و السلام علي سيدنا محمد خاتم النبيين , و المبعوث رحمة للعالمين و علي اله و صحبه اجمعين وبعد : ان الذي دفعني للكتابة في هذا الموضوع المعقد (ختان الانثي في الطب و الاسلام) هو خدمة الاسلام و التقرب الى الله سبحانه و تعالي , و ذلك بالرد علي واحدة من ادق الشبهات التى يروج لها لتشكيك المراة -المسلمة وغير المسلمة - في رحمة الاسلام بها و تكريمه لها , كما كرم اخاها الرجل , قال تعالي: ( ولقد كرمنا بني ادم و حملناهم في البر و البحر و رزقناهم من الطيبات و فضلناهم علي كثير ممن خلقنا تفضيلا ) .1 "سورة الاسراء اية 70 تقول الكاتبة الامريكية ايلين قرونبام (Ellen Gruenbaum) :2 ترجمة من مقال منشور للكاتبة, (انظر المرجع رقم 21) ( يعتبر ختان البنات من العادات الضارة التي يجب التخلص منها لانها تمتهن انسانية المراة و تمثل جزءا من الترتيبات الاجتماعية و الثقافية التى تزيد من خضوع المراة و سيطرة الرجل عليها . فالمراة في المجتمعات المسلمة الاصولية تعتمد اجتماعيا و ماديا علي دورها كزوجة و ام , و لذلك فهي تحرص كل الحرص علي الحصول علي زوج لها ولبناتها , ولا يمكنها الحصول علي هذا الزوج الا اذا حافظت علي عفتها و عفة بناتها بواسطة الختان و لذلك لا يمكن التخلص من عادة الختان الا اذا استقلت المراة اقتصاديا عن الرجل و اتيحت لها فرصة التعليم و العمل خارج المنزل). كما تعرضت الكاتبة في مقالها لشبهات اخري حول مكانة المراة في الاسلام. فتحدثت عن الارث , و الطلاق , وسن الزواج , وقوامة الرجل , وخضوع المراة في الاسرة , و تعدد الزوجات , و الحجاب و النقاب و ما اسمته بتحديد حركة المراة . وبعون من الله تعالي قمت فى هذا البحث البسيط بالرد على بعض هذه الشبهات . وقد ركزت على موضوع( ختان الانثي ) لانني لم اعثر على مولف منفرد يناقش هذا الموضوع رغم اهميته 1 (في دراسة اجريت عام 1991 بمنطقة ام شانق , بالسودان وجد ان 99.1 % من الامهات يعزمن علي ختن بناتهن و ان 89.4 % يصررن علي عمل الخفاض الفرعوني "انظر المرجع رقم 19") و رغم ما فيه من تضارب بين اقوال علماء المسلمين و اقوال الاطباء. وقد ادي هذا التضارب الى تفريط بعض الناس و تركهم لختان الانثي نهائيا او افراط البعض الاخر ووقوعهم في الممارسات الخاطئة. فكانت هذه المحاولة المتواضعة لازالة ما قد يبدو من تناقض. و مما شجعني علي المضي في هذا الموضوع- الذى يمس الحياء- واعطاني بعض الجرأة علي نشره هو قول ام المؤمنيين عائشة رضي الله عنها : (نعم النساء نساء الانصار لم يمنعهن الحياء من ان يتفقهن فى الدين) 2( اخرجه البخاري في كتاب العلم (1/276)باب الحياء في العلم) و قوله تعالي ...و الله لا يستحى من الحق ...) 3 (سورة الاحزاب الاية53 )
تعريف الختان في اللغة و الشرع جاء في( لسان العرب)1 :لسان العرب المجلد الثالث عشر, ص 137-138 ختن الغلام والجارية يختنهما ختنا. وقيل الختن للرجال و الخفض للنساء. و الختان موضع الختن من الذكر, و موضع القطع من نواة الجارية. كما روي عن النبي صلي الله عليه و سلم(اذا التقي الختانان فقد وجب الغسل)2 اسناده صحيح اخرجه الامام احمد في مسنده (6/161) ومن هذا التعريف يتضح لنا انه لافرق بين المعنى اللغوى و الشرعي للختان. حكم الاسلام في ختان الانثي يقول ابن القيم1:تحفة المودود باحكام المولود,ص115 (لاخلاف فى استحباب الختان للانثي و اختلف في وجوبه). كما يقول فضيلة الشيخ محمود شلتوت عضو جماعة كبار العلماء2 :نقلا عن كتاب الختان ,لابي بكر عبد الرازق ص87 (الختان شأن قديم ترجع معرفة الناس به الي عهد ابراهيم عليه السلام و كانوا يختنون الذكور و الاناث, وقد رويت فيه عن النبي صلي اله عليه وسلم عدة احاديث اتفق المحدثون علي صحة بعضها ,و ضعف البعض الاخر, فما اتفق عليه قول النبي صلي الله عليه وسلم: (خمس من الفطرة : الختان و الاستحداد و قص الشارب و تقليم الاظافر و نتف الابط)3 اسناده صحيح اخرجه البخاري(7/206),و مسلم(3/146) ومما ناله تضعيف المحدثين:حديث (الختان سنة في الرجال مكرمة فى النساء)4 اسناده ضعيف اخرجه الامام احمد في مسنده(5/75) , و قوله صلي الله عليه و سلم للمراة التي تختن الاناث أشمى ولا تنهكى فانه احظى للزوج واسري للوجه)5 اسناده ضعيف,اخرجه الامام احمد فى مسنده(6/433) . وامام هذه الاحاديث اختلف الفقهاء فى حكم الختان , شانهم في كل ما لم يرد فيه نص صريح قاطع . فراي الشافعية انه واجب في الذكور و الاناث , ووافقهم الحنابلة على الوجوب في الذكور فقط , وراى الحنفية و المالكية انه سنة سنة في الذكور و مكرمة في الاناث , وقد قال الامام الشوكانى : (و الحق انه لم يقم دليل صحيح يدل علي الوجوب , و المتيقن السنية , كما في حديث-خمس من الفطرة -ونحوه,و الواجب الوقوف على المتيقن الى ان يقوم ما يوجب الانتقال عنه). و من هنا يتبين ان الادلة لا تعطي اكثر من ان الختان سنة , وقد كان العموم فى حديث السنية الصحيح وهو(خمس من الفطرة)يقضى بالمساواة بين الذكر و الانثي فى سنية الختان, ولكن كثيرا من المذاهب راى انه مكرمة فى الاناث و سنة فى الذكور)). و سنوضح من خلال هذا البحث اننا نرجح الراى الذى يقول بالمساواة بين الذكر والانثي فى سنية الختان. الجهاز التناسلى للمراة تتكون اعضاء المراة التناسلية من اجزاء داخلية و اخرى خارجية. الاجزاء الداخلية: وهذه تشمل : المبيضان و الرحم وقناتا الرحم و المهبل(vagina) و يحازى المهبل من الامام قتاة مجرى البول(urethra) و من الخلف المستقيم(rectum). 2 . الاجزاء الخارجية : يبين الشكل ادناه الاجزاء الخارجية للجهاز التناسلي للانثي و تشمل فتحة المهبل (او الفرج) (vaginal opening) و يغطيها غشاء البكارة قبل الزواج و توجد فوقها فتحة قناة مجرى البول (urethral meatus) بينما يوجد الشرج(anus) تحت فتحة المهبل . و يوجد الشفران الصغيران و الكبيران على جانبى فتحة المهبل و فتحة مجري البول. ويقع البظر (clitoris) عند التقاء الشفرين الصغيرين فوق فتحة قناة مجري البول. و البظر عضو انتصابى صغير يقابل القضيب (penis) عند الرجل. و طرف ( او حشفة ) البظر (glans of clitoris) حساس جدا للمس كحشفة القضيب (glans of penis) و تغطى حشفة البظر حلدة تسمي القلفة (prepuce or preputium) تماما كما تغطي حشفة القضيب قلفة و تسمى قلفة البظر عذرة (perputium clitoridis)11ما غلفة القضيب فتسمي غرلة (perputium penis) و لقلفة البظر نفس عيوب القلفة في الرجل, اذ تتجمع فيها الافرازات (smegma clitoridis)2" انظر المرجع رقم 22 ص 1297" ( 1 انظر المرجع رقم 20 ص 348 و رقم 22 ص 1135 ) و تنمو الميكروبات. وبعد هذا الشرح المبسط للاعضاء الخارجية للانثي علينا ان نتامل جدوى نزع او ازالة ما يسمى بالعذرة او القلفة التى تغطى حشفة البظر في الانثي. طرق الختان فى الانثي
يمارس ختان الانثي في مناطق كثيرة من العالم و بطرق مختلفة. جميع هذة الطرق يضر بصحة المراة , عدا طريقة و احدة ذكرها كثير من علماء المسلمين وقليل من الاطباء.1
. الطريقة الصحيحة ( الختان الشرعي او السني)
يقول ابن القيم 1(تحفة المودود باحكام المولود ص 113-114) ( عرف ابن الصباغ في الشامل الختان فقال : ( الواجب علي الرجل ان يقطع الجلدة التى على الحشفة حتى تنكشف جميعها . اما المراة فلها عذرة كعرف الديك فى اعلى الفرج بين الشفرين تقطع و يبقى اصلها كالنواة ) و قال الماوردي : ( و اما خفض المراة فهو قطع جلدة فى الفرج فوق مدخل الذكر و مخرج البول على اصل كالنواة و يؤخذ منه الجلدة المستعلية دون اصلها)) وسئل شيخ الاسلام ابن تيمية عن المراة هل تختن ام لا؟2(مجموع فتاوى الشيخ ابن تيمية, المجلد 21 ص114) فأجاب : (( نعم , وختانها ان تقطع اعلى الجلدة التى كعرف الديك, قال رسول الله صلي الله عليه و سلم -للخافضة-و هى الخاتنة-: ( اشمي ولا تنهكي , فانه ابهي للوجه و احظي لها عند الزوج.))) كما يقول الدكتور محمد على البار ( مستشار الطب الاسلامي فى مركز الملك فهد للبحوث الاسلامية بجدة)3 الامراض الجنسية ص 417 ( الختان هو اخذ القلفة التى تكون على القضيب او الغشاء الذى يكون على بظر الانثي) و ذكر الدكتور حامد رشوان 1(اسباب محاربة الخفاض فى السودان د.عبد السلام و د. امنة و اخرون) اخصائي النساء و الولادة ان خفاض السنة يعنى قطع الجلدة ام القلفة التى تغطى البظر. و جاء فى كتاب( العادات التى تؤثر على صحة النساء و الاطفال) 2 انظر المرجع رقم 23 ) الذى صدر عن منظمة الصحة العالمية عام 1979م ما ياتى: (( ان الخفاض الاصلي للاناث : " circumcision proper" هو الاستيصال الدائري لقلفة البظر وهو شبيه بختان الذكور و يعرف فى الاقطار الاسلامية بخفاض السنة ... وهذا النوع لم تذكر له اي اثار ضارة على الصحة...)) و بالمقارنة بين اقوال هؤلاء العلماء و الاطباء و ما وضحناه سابقا من الاجزاء الخارجية للجهاز التناسلي للمراة يتبين لنا ان المقصود بالجلدة و العذرة و الغشاء هو قلفة البظر. اما النواة فتعني حشفة البظر. و معنى هذا ان ختان السنة (اي الختان الشرعي) يعنى قطع قلفة البظر فقط وترك الحشفة مكشوفة لتسهل نظافتها, و لكي تعطي المراة حقها الكامل فى التمتع بالمعاشرة الزوجية-كما وضحنا فى هذا البحث- (انظر ص 22-27), واى زيادة فى ذلك (سواء كانت من البظر او من الشفرين الصغيرين او الكبيرين) تكون مخالفة لختان السنة و تضر بصحةالمراة ولا تنفعها. و قد اوصانا المصطفى صلي الله عليه و سلم بالنساء خيرا حيث قال فى حجة الوداع (استوصوا بالنساء خيرا...). و يمكن ان نترجم ختان الانثي الى اللغة الانجليزية ب(prepucectommy = قطع القلفة) 1 وهذه تعني الختان الذى شرعه الاسلام للمراة و الرجل على السواء)) و ليس (clitoridectomy = قطع كل البظر )2 انظر المرجع رقم 20 ص92)) او (clitoridotomy = قطع جزء من البظر )3 نفس المرجع و الصفحة)) كما هو معروف و متناقل فى المتب و ينسبه البعض الى الاسلام.
تنبيه: هنالك خطأ يقع فيه كثير ممن يمارس الختان الشرعي للانثي (اي قطع قلفة البظر فقط) وهو انه بعد قطع القلفة يلصق جانبا الجلد المقطوع مما يؤدى الى تغطية البظر مرة اخرى. و الصحيح هو ان يكون القطع دائريا و الخياطة دائرية ذلك اذا احتجنا لها لوقف نزيف الدم من بعض الشعيرات الدموية (تماما كما نفعل فى ختان الرجل).مع ملاحظة ان قلفة البظر تغطى فقط السطح الامامى للحشفة.2
. الطرق الخاطئة و منها : 4
(القطع من البظر يكون معه بالضرورة قطع للقلفة التى تغطيه) " الختان الفرعونى : (يقطع البظر4 , الشفرين الصغيرين وكل او جزء كبير من الشفرين الكبيرين و يضم الجرح ليلتصق و يترك ثقب صغير ليخرج البول و دم الحيض )5 اسباب محاربة الخفاض في السودان ,د.عبد السلام و د. امنة, واخرون )) " الطهور الجديد او المتوسط : ( وهو درجات متفاوتة و يعمل حسب الرغبة . وفى كل الدرجات يبتر البظر (clitoridectomy) و جزء من الشفرين الصغيرين و يخاط الجانبان )6 نفس المرجع)) وقد نبهت بعض الطبيبات الى ان خياطة الشفرين بعضهما مع بعض و التصاق الجانبين , يؤدي الى تغطية فتحة مجري البول و يخلق فراغا داخليا تتجمع فيه الاوساخ و تصعب نظافته . كذلك تصعب الطهارة من البول لاداء الصلاة و العبادات الاخري , فقد يقع بذلك الاثم على من يقوم بهذه العملية و على من يطلب عملها , والله اعلم. كما ان الثقب الصغير الذى يترك يسبب معاناة نفسية و جسدية للمراة و الرجل بداية حياتهما الزوجية . " قطع جزء من البظر (clitoridotomy): وهذا يحدث فى بعض البلاد الاسلامية التى يمارس فيها ختان الانثي ظنا منهم ان هذه هى الطريقة الصحيحة لختان السنة. يقول الدكتور حامد الغوابى1 نقلا عن كتاب الختان لابى بكر عبد الرازق ص50) : ( اخر ما راه الطب خاصة فى مؤتمر الطب الاسلامي هو ان عملية الختان ان لا يقطع البظرمن جذوره بل يقطع جزء منه فتقطع الحشفة و جزء من العضو , و هذا الجزء الاعلى هو ذو الحساسية الشديدة , ثم يبقى جزء منه توجد فيه ايضا الحساسية و لكن بدرجة اقل ). " اما الدكتور محمد على البار فقد ذكر الطريقة الصحيحة لختان السنة في المراة , في كتابه (الامراض الجنسية-ص14 ) , الا انه عدل عن ذلك في كتابه (خلق الانسان بين الطب و الاسلام-ص33 ) حيث قال: ( و الختان فى النساء سنة و يقطع شئ من البظر). اقول : ان هذه الطريقة مخالفة للسنة كما شرحنا سابقا و تؤدى الى ضرر بالمراة.(لا ضرر ولا ضرار) .
" قطع جزء من القلفة: قال الشيخ منصور بن يونس البهوتى2 نقلا عن كتاب سنن الفطرة, للامين محمد احمد ص 42) : ( ويجب ختان الانثي باخذ جلدة فوق محل الايلاج تشبه عرف الديك , و يستحب الا تؤخذ كلها نصا لحديث (اخفضي ولا تنهكي) . للزوج جبر زوجته المسلمة عليه). قلت : كلمة جلدة هنا لها ثلاثة احتمالات : الاحتمال الاول هو : انها استعملت لتعنى البظر مع قلفته و قصد بعدم اخذ الجلدة كلها و قطع بعضها اى قطع القلفة فقط و ترك البظر , كما في الختان الشرعي للانثي. اما الاحتمال الثانى فهو : ان يكون المقصود بالجلدة هو قلفة البظر فيكون المعني هو اخذ بعض القلفة , فيكون ذلك مخالفا لطريقة ختان الانثي الذي شرعه الاسلام وهو قطع كل الجلدة (القلفة) و ترك اصلها (حشفة البظر) مكشوفا تماما فتتحقق بذلك الحكمة من الختان. الاحتمال الثالث هو : ان يكون المقصود بالجلدة هو البظر فيكون المعني هو اخذ بعض البظر و هذا ايضا مخالفا للختان الشرعى للانثي . " ومن الممارسات الخاطئة كذلك : اعادة عملية الختان بعد الزواج و الولادة -على الاخص-ظنا منهم ان ذلك سيجعل المراة كالبكر 1 يعرف ذلك في السودان بالعدلة), وقد اخبرنا القران الكريم ان الله سبحانه وتعالي هو وحده القادر علي اعادة الزوجة بكرا , مكافاة لزوجها في الجنة , قال تعالي (انا انشاناهن انشاء فجعلناهن ابكارا عربا اترابا لاصحاب اليمين)2 الواقعة الايات(35-38) فلا داعي اذن لتعذيب المراة فى الدنيا بالعمليات الجراحية المتكررة و بالالم عند المعاشرة الزوجية , وتعذيبها في الاخرة بعدم صحة طهارتها وعبادتها 3 انظر ص 19), ولاطاعة لمخلوق في معصية الخالق. نسال الله تعالي ان يهدينا لما فيه سعادة الدنيا و الاخرة لعباده ..امين.
موانع ختان الانثي و مضاعفاته ان ختان الانثي الذى شرعه الاسلام عملية جراحية بسيطة و مأمونة اذا ما اجريت من قبل طبيبة او قابلة خبيرة و مدربة و كانت الادوات معقمة .ومضاعفاته نادرة جدا لا تتعدى مضاعفات العمليات البسيطة الاخري كحدوث نزف بسيط يسهل علاجه او التهاب خفيف . يقول الدكتور شوين 1 نقلا عن كتاب اسرار الختان,د.حسان شمسي باشا ص 63 ): (ان فوائد الختان الروتينى عند الوليدين كوسيلة صحية ووقائية تفوق كل المخاطر المزعومة للختان). اما موانع ختان الانثي فهي مطابقة للموانع التي ذكرت بالنسبة لختان الذكر . يقول ابن القيم: 2 تحفة المودود باحكام المولود ,ص118-120) (يسقط وجوب الختان بعدة امور منها : ان يولد الرجل و لا قلفة له .ان يسلم الرجل كبيرا ويجاف على نفسه منه .كما يسقط بالموت , ولا يقاس بحلق العانة و نتف الابط و قص الشارب للميت) ويقول د. حسان شمسي باشا 3 المرجع السابق ص64 (يجب الا يجري الختان عند طفل مريض غير مستقر .و عند طفل مصاب بتشوهات خلقية في الاعضاء التناسلية . كما يجب ان تجري الفحوصات المناسبة عند الوليد اذا كانت هناك قصة امراض دموية (كقصة نزف دموي) في العائلة)) و من اهم موانع ختان الانثي كذلك عدم وجود خاتنة خبيرة و مدربة على الختان الشرعي (السنة) , فيمكن في هذه الحالة تأجيل ختان البنت الى حين وجود مثل هذه الخاتنة ذلك لان ضرر الختان الخاطئ اكبر من ضرر التاجيل . ويمكن ازالة قلفة البظر كعملية جراحية عادية فى اى مرحلة من مراحل عمر الفتاة.4 (يمكن انلا يذكر لفظ الختان فى هذه الحالة حتي لا يكون هنالك حرج للفتاة اذا كبر سنها.) الحكمة من مشروعية ختان الانثي يقول ابن القيم1 (تحفة المودود باحكام المولود ص109-112) : ( الختان من محاسن الشرائع التى شرعها الله تعالى لعباده ... وهو علم للدخول في ملة ابراهيم .و هذا موافق لتأويل من تأول قوله تعالي : ( صبغة الله ومن احسن من الله صبغة ونحن له عابدون) 2 البقرة138 علي الختان . و المقصود ان صبغة الله هى الحنيفية التى صبغت القلوب بمعرفة الله تعالي و محبته و الاخلاص له و عبادته و حده لا شريك له , و صبغت الابدان بخصال الفطرة من الختان و قص الشارب و تقليم الاظافر و الاستحداد و نتف الابط و المضمضة والاستنشاق والسواك و الاستنجاء , فظهرت فطرة الله علي قلوب الحنفاء و ابدانهم فيعرف الناس ان من كان كذلك فهو من عبيد الله الحنفاء فيكون ذلك علما لهذه النسبة التى لا اشرف منها .. وقد كانت هذه الخصال من الفطرة لان الفطرة هى الحنيفية ملة ابراهيم , و خصال الفطرة من الكلمات التى ابتلى الله تعالي بهن ابراهيم(عليه السلام) ...فلما اتمهن جعله اماما للناس ...و قد اشتركت خصال الفطرة في الطهارة و النظافة و التزيين واخذ الفضلات المستقذرة التى يالفها الشيطان ويجاورها من بنى ادم ...هذا مع ما في الختان منتعديل للشهوة التى اذا افرطت الحقت الانسان بالحيوانات , وان عدمت بالكلية الحقته بالجمادات . و لهذا تجد الاقلف من الرجال و القلفاء من النساء لا يشبع من الجماع 3))الجماع فى الاسلام يقصد به المعاشرة الزوجية بعد العقد الشرعي). وقد اشار الامام ابن القيم الى سبب عدم شبع الاقلف من الجماع ,عند حديثه عن الحكمة التى لاجلها يعاد بنو ادم غرلا 4 قلفا ) حيث قال ( وعد الله سبحانه وتعالى انه يعيد الخلق كما بداهم اول مرة من تمام اعضائهم قال تعالي(كما بداكم تعودون)1 الاعراف 29 ,فان الختان انما شرع في الدنيا لتكميل الطهارة و التنزه من البول , واهل الجنة لا يبولون ولا يتغوطون , فليس هنالك نجاسة تصيب الغرلة . كما ان القلفة في الجنة لا تمنع لذة الجماع و لا تعوقه))2 نفس المرجع ص125 . و قد اتفق هذا التفسير مع ما جاءفي كتاب (العادات التى تؤثر على صحة النساء و الاطفال)3 انظر المرجع رقم 23 و الذي ذكر فيه : ((ان الخفاض الاصلي للاناث :circumcision proper يمارس ايضا في بعض الاحيان فى الولايات المتحدة الامريكية لمعالجة عدم حدوث هزة الجماع orgasmعند المراة فى حالة زيادة قلفة البظر او ضيقها...)) و لتوضيح ذلك اكثر اقول : ان الاقلف لا يشبع من الجماع ذلك لان العضو الحساس منه , وهو حشفة القضيب او البظر , قد غطي بالقلفة و هى جلد اقل حساسية يمنع الاحساس بالمتعة الكاملة , فيبقي الاقلف من الرجال و النساء فى بحث متواصل لاشباع رغبته لهذا السبب. وهنا يمكن القول ان خفاض السنة يحقق للمراة اكتمال متعة المعاشرة الزوجية مما يدخل السرور فى نفسها فيزداد بهاء وجهها و يسعد زوجها , وقد بدا لي هذا الفهم من قول الرسول صلي الله عليه و سلم لام عطية رضي الله عنها : (اشمي و لا تنهكي فانه احظي للزوج و اسري للوجه)4اسناده ضعيف ,اخرجه الامام احمدفى مسنده(6/433) .. و الله اعلم. فوائد ختان الانثي يقول فضيلة الاستاذ محمد محمد اللبان 1: (نقلاعن كتاب الختان لابي بكر عبد الرازق ص85 (( فى ختان الانثي تزال تلك الزائدة التى تمنع من وصول المياه المطهرة الي الداخل فيصعب نقاء دقاء الحيض و البول مما يؤدي الى الروائح الكريهة) )2و لهذا فان كثير من المسلمين يطلقون علي عملية الختان الطهارة او الطهور ) كما قدم الدكتور البار الى المجمع الفقهي برابطة العالم الاسلامي بمكة المكرمة بحثا جاء فيه3نقلا عن كتاب اسرار الختان د .حسان شمسي باشا ص100 : (( ان ختان الانثي او خفضا الذى ورد فى لسنة له محاسن كثيرة ذكرها الباحثون فى المؤتمر الطبي الاسلامي عن (الشريعة القضايا الطبية المعاصرة).هذه الفوائد يمكن ان نجملها فيما يلى : " ذهاب الغلمة والشبق 4 (الغلمة و الشبق تعنى شدة الشهوة و الانشغال بها و الافرط فيها و ذهابهما يعنى تعديل الشهوة)عن المختونين من الرجال و النساء " منع الالتهابات نتيجة تجمع اللخن 5 (افرازات دهنية تتجمع تحت القلفة عند غير المختونين من الذكور و الاناث) {smegma}و الميكروبات تحت قلفة الذكور و الاناث. " انخفاض حدوث السرطان لدى الذكور و الاناث من المختونين. " ان الاصابة بالهربس التناسلي {Genital Herpes } و القرحة الرخوة {chancroid} و الورم المغبني {Granuloma Inguinale} تكون اقل حدة عند المختونين من الرجال و النساء على سواء.((كما يقول الدكتور صبري القبانى في كتابه "حياتن الجنسية" و في الختان بعض الفوائد نذكر منها: " بقطع القلفة يتخلص المرء من الافرازات الدهنية المقززة للنفس , و يحال دون امكان الانتان و الالتهابات. " يخفف الختان من كثرة استعمال العادة السرية لدي البالغين لان افرازات القلفة تثير الاعصاب التناسلية حول الحشفة و تدعو المراهق الى حكها و الاستزادة من مداعبة عضوه)) 1 نقلا عن كتاب تربية الاولاد فى الاسلام ص116 ) و قد اشير الى هذا المعنى في جريدة الانقاذ الوطني 2 الخرطوم -2جمادي الاجرة 1415ه -5 نوفمبر 1994 العدد (1732) فى موضوع تحت عنوان (طبيبة امريكية تطالب بختان البنات) جاء فيه (( حذرت الطبيبة الامريكية اي-بي-لوري فى كتاب اصدرته متضمنا خبرتها الطويلة فى مجال التعامل مع الاناث -من عدم ختان البنات. قالت فى كتابها و عنوانه (Herself اي نفسها) , ان عذرة3 (عذرة هنا ربما قصد بها ترجمة لكلمة {clitoris} التى تعنى البظر. و كما ذكرنا فان قلفة الانثي هي التى تسمي عذرة "انظر ص15" ) الانثي بها قلفة امامية صغيرة مطوية فوقها لحماية نهايتها الحساسة , واحيانا ما تكون هذه القلفة معقوفة لاسفل بشدة -فبدلا من ان تكون وقاية فانها تكون مصدر للتهيج ,لان الافرازات الطبيعية تحتجز تحتها -وكم من امراة كانت عصبية طوال حياتها بسبب قلفة معقوفة , وهو ما يمكن تصحيحه بعملية فى منتهى البساطة. و اشارت الطبيبة الى ان العلاج يكون احيانا بالتربية -ولكن الختان المبكر فى سن الطفولة للبنت يكون علاجا مؤكدا -و قالت :ان القلفة المعقوفة ينتج عنها تهيج دائم يعود الى ممارسات مؤذية للفتاة وقد يفضي الى ممارسات شاذة وله صلة بالحياة غير السوية لبعض البنات. وتقول مجلة اللانست البريطانية 1(نقلا عن كتاب اسرار الختان ,د. حسان شمسي باشا ص40 ) في مقال نشر عام 1989م : ((ان ختان الاطفال فى الفترة الاولى من العمر يمكن ان يخفض نسبة التهاب المجاري البولية عند الاطفال بنسبة 90% وتؤكد الدراسات التى اجريت فى هذا المجال ان الاعضاء الجنسية عند الذكور هى عامل هام -كما هى عند الاناث -في احداث التهابات المجاري البولية و الكليتين.ووجد ان هذه الالتهابات-بما قد تسببه من مضاعفات {complications} -يمكن منعه باستئصال قطعة جلدية صغيرة و سليمة هى القلفة)). وقد ثبت ان في اللخن {smegma} مادة تسبب السرطان و اشارت الدراسات الحديثة الى ان هذه المادة هى فيروس يدعى papillovirus . وقد تمكن الباحثون من عزل هذا الفيروس من المرضي المصابين بسرطان القضيب ومن المصابات بسرطان الفرج وسرطان عنق الرحم . ومن العوامل المهيئة كذلك لحدوث السرطان التهاب الحشفة {Balanitis} و تضيق القلفة{phimosis} وهذه تحدث من احتباس اللخن خلف القلفة2.(نفس المرجع ص42-44) وبالرجوع لاقوال هؤلاء العلماء والاطباء 3 انظر ص22-26,نلاحظ ان فوائد ختان الانثي قد انحصرت في فائدتين ,مطابقتين لفوائد ختان الذكر,هما: 1. النظافة: فبعد قطع قلفة البظر تسهل النظافة من الافرازات الطبيعية ومن دماء الحيض و البول, وهذا مهم لاكتمال طهارة المراة المسلمة لاداء عبادتها ,قال رسول الله صلي الله عليه وسلم (الطهور شطر الايمان)1"صحيح مسلم ج1,كتاب الطهارة,بابفضل الوضوء,ص203 "كما ان النظافة تقي المراة من كثير من الامراض العضوية والنفسية. 2. تعديل الشهوة وتقليل الانشغال بها,ويكون ذلك بطريقتين: " ازالة قلفة البظر التى تقلل من متعة الجماع فتكتمل اللذة ويحدث الشبع الذي يقلل من الانشغال بهذه الشهوة والافراط فيها.ويكون ذلك للمتزوجات. " كذلك فان ازالة قلفة البظر يمنع احتجاز الافرازات الطبيعية تحتها وبذلك يزول سبب الاثارة المتكررة للاعصاب التناسلية حول الحشفة , مما يقلل الحك و التهيج. وتشترك فى ذلك المتزوجات و غيرهن من النساء.
والذي بدا لى بعد هذا البحث البسيط هو ان الفوائد جميعها متساوية 2(يعتقد البعض ان مرور مجري البول خلال القلفة يزيد من اهمية الختان فى الذكورولكن وجود دم الحيض ربما زاد كذلك من احتمال تلوث و التهاب القلفةفي الانثي) بالنسبة للختان فى الذكر و الانثي .ولهذا يمكننا ترجيح ما ذكره الشيخ محمود شلتوت3 (انظر ص13) من ان العموم فى حديث السنى الصحيح (خمس من الفطرة)يقضي بالمساواة بين الذكر و الانثي فى سنية الختان..والله اعلم.] اراء خاطئة عن الحكمة من ختان الانثي و الرد عليها
هنالك خطأ غير مقصود وقع فيه كثير ممن تحدث عن الحكمة من مشروعية ختان الانثي, حيث انهم قالوا انه مكرمة لها لانه يمنع عنها الدوافع التى تثير الرغبة الجنسية لديها مما يؤدي الى المحافظة على العفة و الشرف ومن امثلة هذه الاراء ما ياتى: يقول الدكتور محمد نزار الدقر و الدكتور محمد وليد في مقال بعنوان (الختان بين الطب و الاسلام)1 نقلا عن كتاب اسرار الختان ,د.حسان شمسي باشا ص93 : (تتضح الحكمة الصحية من الختان عند الرجال اكثر منها عند النساء ,و نستطيع ان نقول انه فى البلاد ذات الطقس الحار كما فى السودان و غيرها من المناطق الافريقية وفى مصر و الجزيرة العربية فانه يغلب ان يكون للنساء بظر نام مما يزيد فى الشهوة الجنسية لدى احتكاكه بما جاوره من بدن وثياب اثناء المشي ,وقد يكون شديد النمو الى درجة يستحيل معها الجماع ومن هذا وجب استئصال مقدم البظر فى مثل هذه الظروف لتعديل الشهوة و لجعل الجماع ممكنا فى الحالة الثانية). وقال ابن الحاج فى المدخل2 نقلا عن كتاب سنن الفطرة, الامين محمد احمد ص43 (واختلف فى حقهن هل يخفضن مطلقا او يفرق بين اهل المشرق واهل المغرب ؟ فأهل المشرق يؤمرن به لوجود الفضلة عندهن من اصل الخلقة ,واهل المغرب لا يؤمرن به لعدمها عندهن .وذلك راجع الى مقتضي التعليل فيمن ولد مختونا فكذلك هنا سواء بسواء). كما يقول محمد ابراهيم رئيس المحكمة العليا الشرعية1: نقلا عن كتاب الختان لابي بكر عبد الرازق ص 81 ( ختان البنات عادة قديمة من عادات العرب توارثوها عن ابائهم و اجدادهم من اقدم العصور .وقد جاء الاسلام واقر هذه العادة لما فيها من الخير و المصلحة للمراة نفسها و للمجتمع .وهذا الختان الذى اعتبرته الشريعة الاسلامية مكرمة هو ازالة الجزء البارز من البظر المرتفع عن البشرة لينخفض الى مستواها حتى لا يكون عرضة للتهيج من الحركة او الملابس او ركوب الدواب او نحو ذلك.وقد اجمع الفقهاء على استحسان ختان البنات لما فيه من الحفظ و الصيانة من التعرض للالتهابات العضوية و التضخم فى اجهزة التناسل الظاهرية, والانفعالات النفسية ,واثارة الغريزة الجنسية, التى تؤدى الى الالتهاب العصبى فى حالة كبتها, او الى السقوط فى مهاوى الرذيلة اذا اطلقت من عقالها, خاصة فى سن الشباب ونشاط الغدة التناسلية. ولا شك فى ان ختان البنت على هذا الوجه-ازالة الجزء البارز فقط وابقاء الجزء الكامن- يكسبها صحة فى الجسم,وجملا فى الانوثة,وصيانة فى الخلق, ومناعة فى العفة و الشرف,مع الابقاء على الحساسية الجنسية بالقدر المناسب الذى لا شطط فيه ). ويقول الدكتور محمد علي البار2: خلق الانسان بين الطب و الاسلام,ص45-46 (البظر حساس جدا للمس كالحشفة تماما وهو مما يزيد الغلمة و الشبق 3 انظر هامش (4)ص24 و لذا جاء فى الحديث الخفض منه قليلا وفي نفس الوقت على الخاتنة ان تشم ولا تنهك فان ذلك احظي للمراة عند زوجها وادعى الاتصاب بالبرود الجنسي. كما ان الاخذ منه ادعى لتقليل الغلمة و الشبق و دواعى الزنا.. وخاصة اذا لم يقدر للمراة ان تتزوج ..او تايمت بعد زواج بموت او طلاق). ونرد على الاراء الاربعة بلاتى :
" مما ذكرنا سابقا (انظر صفحة 22-27) فان الحكمة الصحية لختان الانثي قد وضحت -ولله الحمد-كوضوحها عند الرجال. " هنالك حالات نادرة جدا(كما فىالذكر) تولد فيها الانثي و هى مختونة (اى ليس لها قلفة تغطي البظر)وهذه الحالات تحددها الطبيبة او الخاتنة المدربة قبل اتخاذ قرار عمل الختان للانثي. " ان وجود بظر نام لا علاقة له بالمناطق الحارة و ربما كانت هنالك حالات مرضية او خلقية, وكذلك الحال بالنسبة للتضخم فى اجهزة التناسل الظاهرية, وهذه الحالات تعالج بعد تشخيص كل حالة على حدة ,و لاعلاقة لذلك بختان الانثي . " ان الفضلة الزائدة التى تكون محلا للختان فى الانثي هي قلفة البظر وهى موجودة فى كل نساء العالم ولا فرق بين اهل المشرق و اهل المغرب في ذلك.و القلفة عبارة عن جلدة فقط, وقطعها لا يؤدى الى تقليل الرغبة الجنسية للمراة. " بالرغم من ان الدكتور البار قد اشار الى الحكمة الصحيحة لختان الانثي,حيث قال 1 نفس المرجع ص33 بقاء القلفة يزيد الغلمة و الشبق فى الرجال و النساء ),كما انه قد ذكر ان موضع الختان فى الانثي هو قلفة البظر (انظرص16 ). الا انه قد عاد وفسر الخفض بقطع جزء من البظر, ولم يذكر قطع قلفة البظر فقط التى-كما اشار هو نفسه-هى موضع الختان وهى السبب فى زيادة الشهوة والافراط فيها. اما قول الدكتور البار (وخاصة اذا لم يقدر للمراة ان تتزوج او تايمت بعد زواج بموت او طلاق), فان هذا قد يحدث للذكور كذلك, ورغم ان صيانة الخلق و العفة مطلوبة من كل افراد المجتمع المسلم, فاننا لانجد احدا يقول ان قطع حشفة القضيب هو واحد من اسباب العفة فى الذكور, لان هذا السبب لا يمكن التخلص منه بعد الاحصان بالزواج وزوال الحاجة اليه كذلك لا يمكن ان نقول ان قطع جزء من البظر (الحشفة) هو واحد من اسباب العفة فى المراة.الاسلام قد كفل حق التمتع بنعمة المعاشرة الزوجية لكل فرد ذكرا كان او انثي بعد النكاح الشرعي ويشير ابن قيم الجوزية الى حق المراة على الزوج فى الوطء ويقول: قال تعالي : (ومن اياته ان خلق لكم من انفسكم ازواجا لتسكنوا اليها وجعل بينكم مودة و رحمة ان فى ذلك لايات لقوم يتفكرون)3 سورة الروم الاية21 ( اما الجماع فكان هديه صلي الله عليه وسلم فيه اكمل هدى, يحصل به مقاصده التى وضع لاجلها. من هذه المقاصد حفظ النسل, وحفظ الصحة, ونيل اللذة, و التمتع بالنعمة, و غض البصر, و القدرة على العفة من الحرام, وتحصيل ذلك للمراة, فالزوج ينفع نفسه فى دنياه و اخراه, و ينفع الزوجة و مما ينبغى تقديمه على الجماع ملاعبة المراة و تقبيلها, وكان الرسول صلي الله عليه و سلم يفعل ذلك مع اهله)4الطب النبوى,ابن قيم الجوزية ص249 . هذا هو راى الاسلام فى الحياة الزوجية, ولا يمكن ان نقول ان تقليل الدافع الجنسي بين الزوجين فيه صحة للجسم, ام مناعة فى العفة و الشرف. ان دواعى واسباب الاحصان والعفة فى المجتمع المسلم قد فصلها علماء المسلمين و الذى قصده العلماء هو قطع قلفة البظر فقط ...و الله اعلم. دواعي الاحصان و العفة فى المجتمع المسلم لما كان الحديث عن ختان الانثي لا يتاتى الا و معه نقاش عن عفة المجتمع, كان لابد من ذكر بعض ما قاله علماء المسلمين عن دواعى و اسباب الاحصان و العفة فى المجتمع المسلم. علقت الدكتورة نائلة مبارك كركساوى عن مقال الكاتبة ايلين قرونبام (انظر ص 9) قائلة: ((المنطق يقول (استنادا الى قول الكاتبة), الختان يحفظ للمراة عفتها , وفي تلك الناطق الاصولية فان العفيفة تستطيع ان تحصل على زوج (فهى تعتمد عليه اقتصاديا) اما اذا استقلت اقتصاديا فلا تحتاج للرجل( يعنى كزوج) و بالتالي يمكنها ان تتخلى عن الختان (اى عن عفتها), وهنا تطفح الفكرة الشيطانية الخبيثة, فلاصل ليس انسانية المراة ولا حوجتها الاقتصادية و لا حوجتها للرجل كزوج ولا حتى الختان ولكن المطلوب هو حرية الممارسات الجنسية و النيل من التعليمات الاسلامية)) ان الاسلام قد حرم الزنا على الذكور و الاناث قال تعالى : (الزانية و الزاني فاجلدوا كل واحد منهما مائة جلدةولا تاخذكم بهما رافة فى دين الله..)1 سورة النور الاية2 والاصل فى المجتمع المسلم هو الزواج والاحصان, فليس هنالك كبت كما يزعم اعداء الاسلام بل يجب ازالة مل العقبات التى تمون سببا فى تاخير الزواج بالنسبة للنساء و الرجال. اما الحالات النادرة التى يتعذر فيها الزواج فتكون فيها المحافظة على العفة و تعديل الشهوة و البعد عن الزنى بالوسائل الاتية: " الايمان الصادق وتقوى الله , قال صلي الله عليه وسلم: (لايبلغ العبد ان يكون من المتقين حتى يترك ما لا باس به حذرا مما به باس)1 رواه ابن ماجة,المجلد الثاني ص567 . ومن اسباب التقوى كذلك معرفة مداخل و مكايد الشيطان2 قال تعالي في سورة الاعراف, الاية201 ان الذين اتقو اذا مسهم طائف من الشيطان تذكروا فاذا هم مبصرون).و الوقاية منها بقراءة القران و التحصينات الماثؤرة عن النبي صلى الله عليه و سلمو المحافظة على الصلوات و الطاعات الاخرى و البعد عن المعاصى. " الاهتمام بالعلم الشرعي, و معرفة ان النعم التى تفوتنا فى هذه الحياة الدنيا الفانية, سنجدها-اذا صبرنا والتزمنا بالاسلام-فى الجنة حيث النعيم الدائم باذن الله. " الصوم. قال رسول الله صلي الله عليه و سلم3*: اخرجه البخارى,(9/106) (يا معشر الشباب من استطاع منكم الباءة 4* الباءة كناية عن النكاح, واصلها المكان الذى يأوى اليه الانسان فليتزوج, فانه اغض للبصر, و احفظ للفرج, ومن لم يستطع فعليه بالصوم,فانه له وجاء(اى مانع)) " الصحبة الصالحة . قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم (لا تصاحب الا مؤمنا ولا يأكل طعامك الا تقي)5 * سنن الترمزى ,(4/600) " ملىء الفراغ بما يفيد فى الدنيا و الآخرة. قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم : (نعمتنا مغبون فيهما كثير من الناس : الصحة و الفراغ)6* فتح البارى شرح صحيح البخاري,(11/299) " الحذر من وسائل الاعلام المسموعة و المنظورة و المقروءة قال تعالى : ( ...ان السمع و البصر و الفؤاد كل اولئك كان عنه مسئولا)7* سورة الاسراء الاية36. " البعد عن المنبهات وعن كل المحرمات التى تؤدى الى الفتن اثارة الغرائز. " قطع القلفة فى الذكور و الاناث. " استقرار المراة فى بيتها و عدم خروجها لغير حاجة. لكن يمكن للمراة ان تخرج لمساعدة اخواتها فى المجتمع اذا لم يتعارض ذلك مع مسئوليتها الاولى داخل بيت زوجها. كما يمكنها ان تعمل فى مجتمع مختلط اذادعت الضرورة قال تعالي وقرن فى بيوتكن ولا تبرجن تبرج الجاهلية الاولى...)1* سورة الاحزاب الاية 33 " الحجاب الذى يستر جميع بدن المراة ووجهها وكفيها فى حالة خروجها قال تعالى : ( واذا سالتمهن متاعا فسألوهن من وراء حجاب...)2* سورة الاحزاب الاية53 " الحذر من الخلوة مع غير المحارم 3*المحارم من الرجال هم الاب, و الاخ, و الابن, و الجد, و العم, و الخال, و ووالد الزوج, و ابن الزوج, وابن الاخ, و ابن الاخت. اما المحارم من النساء فهم الام, و الاخت, و البنت, و الجدة , و العمة , والخالة, و ووالدة الزوجة , وبنت الزوجة , و بنت الاخ , و بنت الاخت.قال رسول الله صلي الله عليه و سلم : ( لا يخلون احدكم بامراة الا مع ذى محرم)4* رواه البخاري(9/290) " تجنب المصافحة (او الملامسة) مع غير المحارم, قال رسول الله صلي الله عليه وسلم: (انى لا اصافح النساء...)5* صحيح اخرجه الامام احمد,(6/357) " غض البصر , قال تعالي قل للمؤمنين يغضوا من ابصارهم ويحفظوا فروجهم ذلك ازكى لهم ان الله خبير بما يصنعون...)6* سورة النور الايات30-31 " تجنب الاختلاط بين النساء و الرجال غير المحارم . والالتزام بالمجتمع المسلم النموذجي الذى يتكون من مجتمعين .واحد للنساء واخر للرجال,ويربط بينهما المحارم ولا يكون التعامل بين المجتمعين الا اذا دعت الضرورة , و الضرورة يجب ان تقدر بقدرها. وعند الضرورة يمون التعامل بضوابطه الشرعية مأن يكون من وراء حجاب و في غير خلوة و دون اخضاع بالقول, قال تعالى : (...فلا تخضعن بالقول فيطمع الذى فى قلبه مرض وقلن قولا معروفا)1*سورة الاحزاب32 سال رسول الله صلي الله عليه و سلم ابنته السيدة فاطمة عن افضل شيء للمراة, فقالت رضي الله عنها (الا تري رجل و لايراها رجل),فضمها صلي الله عليه و سلم الى صدره وقال ذرية بعضها من بعض. " اعتراف المراة بقوامة وفضل الولى2*الولى هو الاب او الاخ او العم ويشترط فيه الاسلام و الحرية و العقل و البلوغ )او الزوج ومعرفة حقوقها وواجباتها فى تعاملها معه قال تعالى : ( الرجال قوامون على النساء)3* سورة النساء الاية 34. وقال صلي الله عليه وسلم (ما افلح قوما ولوا امرهم امراة) رواه البخاري لان فطرة المراة و طبيعتها تساعدها علي الادارة الداخلية فى البيت وطبيعة الرجل تساعده على الادارة الخارجية فى المجتمع . وقد اوصي الاخ د.عصام احمد البشير-فى احدي محاضراته -المسلمين بالاقتداء بقصة بنتى سيدنا شعيب مع سيدنا موسي عليهما السلام , فقد خرجت البنتان من بيت ابيهما لضرورة وهى ان اباهما شيخ كبير , ولم تخرج واحدة تفاديا للخلوة , و انتظرتا حتى ينصرف الرجال تفاديا للاختلاط بهم و مزاحمتهم , وعندما اراد سيدنا موسي ان يسقي لهما رضيتا ولم تستكبرا -وتزعما انهما مساويتان للرجال و يمكنهما عمل كلما يستطيع الرجل عمله-بل طلبتا من ابيهما ان يستأجره لقوته و امانته ,وتفاديا للفتنة زوجه سيدنا شعيب عليه السلام احدي ابنتيه فرضيت البنت براي ابيها 4*وهذا ما يجب ان يفعله كل رجل صالح للمراة,فسيدنا موسي عليه السلام حفظها من مخالطة و مزاحمة الرجال غير المحارم , وسيدنا شعيب عليه السلام حفظها من الفتنة بتزويجها و احصانها. ان الالتزام بهذه الضواط سهل اذا ما قورن بالاضرار الكثيرة التى ستصيب الانسان فى دنياه واخراه ازا لم يلتزم بها . وجميع هذه الضوابط مشتركة بين الذكور و الاناث عدا الاستقرار فى البيت و الحجاب ذلك لان المسئولية الاولى للمراةفى المجتمع المسلم هى رعاية الزوج و الابناء داخل البيت و مسؤلية الرجل هى العمل خارج البيت و جلب المال لينفق على الزوجة و الابناء. نسأل الله تعالي ان يعين النساء على ما كلفهن به سبحانه و تعالى من واجبات, وعدم الجرى وراء الاهواء الدنيويةو منافسة الرجال فى اعبائهم من اجل السلطة و الشهرةو الترف ذلك لانسعادة البشرية فى الدنيا و الاخرة تكون باتقان كل جنس لدوره فى المجتمع.قال رسول الله صلي الله عليه و سلم : (كلكم راع و كلكم مسئول عن رعيته , و الامير راع , و الرجل راع فى اهل بيته , و المراة راعية فى بيت زوجها وولده فكلكم راع و كلكم مسئول عن رعيته )1* فتح الباري شرح صحيح البخاري (9/299) . بعض الشبهات و الرد عليها: " هنالك من يقول ان بعض الضوابط خاص بنساء النبي صلي الله عليه و سلم لكن الراي الراجح عند كثير من العلماء انها عامة لكل النساء لان امهات المؤمنين- رضي الله تعالي عنهن-هن القدوة لكل امراة صالحة.و علي المسلم ان يستفتي قلبه ولو افتاه الناس. " كذلك هنالك من يقول ان تغطية الوجه واجب فقط على المراة ذات الوجه الفاتن. لكن من الذى يملك القياس الذى يحدد ذلك ؟ وكما ذكرت احدي الاخوات , فان الحجاب الكامل 2* الحجاب الكامل يستر جميع بدن المراةحتى الوجه و الكفين و القدمين).نعمة انعمها الله تعالي علي المراة لتستر به عيوبها ومحاسنها من تعليقات و اذي الرجال غير المحارم. " و هنالك من يقول ان المجتمع المختلط يعطينا فرصة لتربية الشباب لانهم سيشاهدون الاخطاء بانفسهم . ونقول لهؤلاء يكفى الشباب الاختلاط المفروض عليهم فى وسائل الاعلام و فى المجتمع عامة, و لا نحتاج ان نهيء لهم هذا الجو, بل نحتاج ان نهيء لهم الجو النظيف الخالي من الفتنو الاختلاط بلا ضرورة , قال تعالي (زين للناس حب الشهوات من النساء و البنين و القناطير المقنطرة من الذهب و الفضة و الخيل ال مسومة و الانعام و الحرث ذلك متاع الحياة الدنيا و الله عنده حسن الماب)1* سورة ال عمران الاية14 . وقال صلي الله عليه وسلم : ( ما تركت من بعدي فتنة هى اضر على الرجال من النساء)2* صحيح البخارى,(5/15) .حمانا الله من الفتن ما ظهر منها وما بطن...امين. " وهنالك من يقول ان هذا التشدد يزيد من الفتنة بين النساء و الرجال , ونقول لهؤلاء ان هذا ليس عيبا في المجتمع المسلم الذى يجب ان يظل الرجل رجلا و المراة مراة, ويستمر التجاذب و التزاوج بينهما لاستمرار الحياة البشرية, و حتى لا نكون كالمجتمعات التى لا تلتزم بهذه الضوابط, و التي شاع فيها الاختلاط بين الجنسين فى المكان و الواجبات, فزهد كل جنس فى الاخر , ونشأ ما يعرف بالجنس الثالث, وانعدمت الحياة الاسرية, انهارت المجتمعات. حمانا الله تعالي من ذلك...امين. " و هنالك من يتساءل عن كيفية اختيار الزوج او الزوجة الصالحة اذا طبقنا مثل هذه الضوابط. و نقول لهؤلاء ان ذلك يكون بالالتجاء الى الله سبحانه و تعالى ودعائه اولا , ثم بالتزكية من المحارم , وبعد ذلك فان الشرع يبيح, بل يطلب من الخطيبين النظر الى بعضهما البعض قبل اتخاذ قرار العقد, و يكون ذلك بضوابط شرعية فصلها علماء المسلمين3* منها ان يتحين الخطيب فرصة للنظر دون معرفة الخطيبة. ), جزاهم الله عنا خيرا كثيرا. قال تعالي : ( يريد الله ان يبين لكم و يهديكم سنن الذين من قبلكم و يتوب عليكم و الله عليم حكيم. والله يريد ان يتوب عليكم و يريد الذين يتبعون الشهوات ان تميلوا ميلا عظيما.يريد الله ان يخفف عنكم وخلق الانسان ضعيفا)4* سورة النساء الايات26-28 وقت ختان الانثي توصيات بعد ان اكدنا من خلال هذا البحث الفوائد الجسدية و النفسية من ختان السنة فى المريقول ابن القيم 1* : تحفة المودود باحكام المولود ص106-107 (يجب علي الولى ان يختن الصبى قبل البلوغ بحيث يبلغ مختونا. فاذا بلغ الصبى اقلف او المراة غير مختونة ولا عذر لهما الزمهما السلطان به). ((و قال الحافظ ابن حجر فى الفتح : واختلف فى الوقت الذى يشرع فيه الختان, قال الماوردي : له وقتان : وقت وجوب عند البلوغ ووقت استحباب قبله, و الاختيار في اليوم السابع بعد الولادة, فان اخر ففي الاربعين يوما, فان اخر ففي السنة السابعة, فاذا بلغ وكان نضوا(ضعيفا)نحيفا يعلم من حاله انه اذا اختتن تلف سقط الوجوب. و يستحب ان لا يؤخر عن وقت الاستحباب الا لعذر))2* نقلا عن كتاب سنن الفطرة ص45 واقول انالمهم فى وقت ختان الانثي هو ان يكون في السن التى يسهل فيها على الطبيبة او القابلة المدربة فصل القلفة عن حشفة البظر و قطعها دون ان تاخذ معها اى جزء اخر من المنطقة المجاورة, و يختلف ذلك بين طفلة و اخرى, لذلك يجب ان يكون هنالك كشف على العضو التناسلى لكل طفلة-بواسطة الطبيبة المختصة-قبل تحديد وقت ختانها. حفل الختان قال الشيخ الامين محمد احمد1* سنن الفطرة ص52-54 : ((قال ابن الحاج المالكي فى كتابه المدخل و السنة فى ختان الذكر اظهاره و فى ختان النساء اخفاؤه ) و قيل فى الرد على هذا القول انه ورد عن عائشة رضي الله عنها اظهاره فى النساء ايضا)). واقول ان فى المسألة سعة لمن اراد ان يظهر...و الله اعلم. خاتمة نخلص من هذا البحث الى الاتى: " عرف الختان انه موضع الختن من الذكر, و موضع القطع من نواة الانثي. " ان ختان السنة للمراة يعنى قطع كل قلفة البظر, وترك حشفته مكشوفة كما هو الحال فى ختان الرجل. واى زيادة على ذلك (سواء كانت من البظر او من الشفرين الصغيرين او الكبيرين) تعتبر ممارسة خاطئة مخالفة لختان السنة و تضر بصحة المراةو لا تنفعها.و من الممارسات الخاطئة كذلك اعادة عملية الختان(العدلة) بعد الزواج و الولادة. " ترجيح الراي الذى يقول بالمساؤاة بين الذكر و الانثى فى سنية الختان. ذلك لان الختان الشرعي للمراة له فوائد مطابقة لفوائد ختان الرجل, و ليس له مضار-بأذن الله-اذا كانت الطبيبة او القابلة مدربة على ختان السنة و كانت الادوات معقمة. وقد انحصرت هذه الفوائد فى فائدتين هما : النظافة التى تكتمل بها طهارة المراة لاداء عباداتها, و تقيها من كثير من الامراض العضوية و النفسية. و تعديل الشهوة لتقليل الانشغال بها, و ينتج ذلك عن شبع المتزوجات من الجماع بعد ازالة القلفة التى تقلل المتعة . كما ان ازالة القلفة يمنع احتجاز الافرازات الطبيعية حول الحشفة , مما يقلل الحك و التهيج عند المتزوجات و غيرهن من النساء. " هنالك خطأ كبير وقع فيه كثير ممن تحدث عن الحكمة من مشروعية ختان الانثي , حيث انهم قالوا ا نه مكرمة لها لانه يمنع عنها الدوافع التى تثير الرغبة الجنسية لديها مما يؤدي الى المحافظة على العفة و الشرف. وقد تم تصحيح ذلك بتوضيح الطريقة الشرعية لختان الانثي و شرح الحكمة الصحيحة منه.و ذكرت بعض الدواعى و اسباب الاحصان و العفة فى المجتمع المسلم . " لم يفصل هذا البحث في موضوع الشهوة و الرغبة الجنسية و كيفية التحكم فيها و الاستجابة لها , و اعتقد ان هذه مجالات لبحوث اخري تتعلق بشرح قوله تعالى (ولا تقربوا الزنا انه كان فاحشة و ساء سبيلا)1* الاسراء الاية32. " ان المهم فى وقت ختان الانثي هو ان يكون فى السن التى يسهل فيها على الطبيبة او القابلة المدربة فصل القلفة عن حشفة البظر و قطعها دون ان تاخذ معها اى جزء اخر من المنطقة المجاورة. " اختلف العلماء فى اظهار حفل ختان النساء و لكن فى المسألة سعة لمن اراد ان يظهر.. و الله اعلم. اسأل الله ان يشرح صدر الجميع لما فيه سعادتهم فى الدنيا و الآخرة...امين. المراجع اولا: المراجع العربية مرتبة ترتيبا ابجديا 1. القران الكريم. 2. اسرار الختان تتجلى فى الطب الحديث, د.حسان شمس باشا , مطتبة السوادى للنشرو التوزيع,جدة, الطبعة الاولى1412ه-1990م. 3. الطب النبوى,ابن قيم الجوزية, مؤسسة الرسالة للطباعة و النشر و التوزيع, بيروت, الطبعة الثانية عشر1408ه-1988م. 4. اسباب محاربة الخفاض فى السودان, د. عبد السلام جريس, د.امنة الصادق بدرىو الاستاذة ايمان محمد, الخرطوم, 1989م. 5. الختان, راى الدين و العلم فى ختان البنات , ابو بكر عبد الرازق, دار الاعتصام للطباعة و النشر و التوزيع, القاهرة. 6. الامراض الجنسية, د.محمد على البار ,دار المنارة للنشرو التوزيع ,جدة, الطبعة الثالثة 1407ه-1987م. 7. تحفة المودود باحكام المولود,ابن قيم الجوزية , تحقيق بشير محمد عيون,مكتبة دار البيان,دمشق,1987م. 8. تربيو الاولاد فى الاسلام,الجزء الاول,عبد الله ناصح علوان, دار السلام للطباعة و النشر, جدة, الطبعة السابعة عشر,1410ه-1990م. 9. خلق الانسان بين الطب والاسلام د.محمد على البار ,الدار السعودية للنشر و التوزيع , الطبعة الثامنة1412ه . 10. سنن الفطرة, الامين محمد احمد , دار المطبوعات الحديثة, جدة 1410ه-1990م. 11. سنن ابن ماجة , للحافظ ابى عبد الله بن محمد بن يزيد المجلد الثانى. 12. سنن الترمزى , محمد بن عيسى بن سورة الترمزي , دار الكتب العلمية , لبنان. 13. صحيح البخارى , للامام ابى عبد الله بن اسماعيل البخاري . 14. صحيح مسلم , للامام ابى الحسين مسلم بن الحجاج, دار الفكر. 15. فتح البارى بشرح صحيح البخاري , للامام الحافظ احمد بن على بن حجر العسقلانى , دار المعرفة, الرياض. 16. لسان العرب , للعلامة ابى الفضل جمال الدين محمد بن مكرم بن منظور المصرى , المجلد الثالث عشر , دار الفكر للطباعة و النشر. 17. مسند الامام احمد بن حنبل , دار الكتب و الوثائق-الرياض. 18. مجموع فتاوى شيخ الاسلام ابن تيمية , جمع و ترتيب عبد الرحمن بن محمد بن قاسم , المجلد الحادى و العشرون.
ثانيا: المراجع الانجليزية 19- Aplan for the establishment of a model helth area around Om Shanig Rural Hospital , Amal Elbeshier , 1991. 20 -Hitti's New Medical Dictionary ,English-Arabic, YusufK. Hitt and Ahmad Alkhatib. 21- Reproductive ritual and social reproduction: female circumcision and the subordination of womenin Sudan , Ellen Gruenbaum. 22-Stedman's Medical Dictionary , 24th edition. 23- Traditional practices affecting the health of women and children WHO, 1987.
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: Batman, I'm a doctor and I know what I'm talking about. Any tampering with female genital organs is FGM whether it is level 1, 2 ,3 or 4
we can cosdier male circumcsion who is proved to be against AIDS MGM u the forskin in male n female r typicall anatomically removing it from man is ok while from female is not ok
wat a double standard homing Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: Ba the female genital organs are very highly vascular. They will bleed copiously when they are cut and then they will heal with fibrous tissue which will make the remaining structures as good as useless.
the male genital organs is extermly vasculal also dude it will blees also
u never seen a male cirucmsion before
fibrous tissiue is formed also in mal circumsion go figure
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
يعنى هى حضرتها الوحيدة اللى بتفهم و كل الأطباء اللى قالوا العكس مابيعرفوش حاجة؟ طيب ايه رأيك فى عالم دين مؤخرا أباح زواج المسلمة من المسيحى، يبقى كدة صح الكلام؟ دى اسمهاآراء شاذة، خد مثلا دى منظمة الصحة العالمية و تصنيفها لدرجات الختان
و عندك أهه حوالى50 مرجع عن أضراره، ابقى ارجع لى لو مش عارف تلاقيهم و أنا أجيبهم لك
Reference List
(1) Manji MF, Al B, I, El Enbaby A, Al Bareedy N, Manji MF, Al Badawi I et al. Female circumcision (female genital mutilation): a problem for brachytherapy in cervical cancer. International Journal of Gynecological Cancer 2006; 16(2):675-680. (2) Vangen S, Hoffmann R, Flo K, Lorentzen B, Sand S, Vangen S et al. [Female circumcision--complications and treatment]. [Norwegian]. Tidsskrift for Den Norske Laegeforening 2006; 126(4):475-477. (3) Obermeyer CM, Obermeyer CM. The consequences of female circumcision for health and sexuality: an update on the evidence. [Review] [59 refs]. Culture, Health & Sexuality 2005; 7(5):443-461. (4) Chen G, Dharia SP, Steinkampf MP, Callison S, Chen G, Dharia SP et al. Infertility from female circumcision. Fertility & Sterility 2004; 81(6):1692-1694. (5) Anuforo PO, Oyedele L, Pacquiao DF, Anuforo PO, Oyedele L, Pacquiao DF. Comparative study of meanings, beliefs, and practices of female circumcision among three Nigerian tribes in the United States and Nigeria. Journal of Transcultural Nursing 2004; 15(2):103-113. (6) Nour NM, Nour NM. Female genital cutting: clinical and cultural guidelines. [Review] [45 refs]. Obstetrical & Gynecological Survey 2004; 59(4):272-279. (7) Obermeyer CM, Obermeyer CM. The health consequences of female circumcision: science, advocacy, and standards of evidence.[comment]. Medical Anthropology Quarterly 2003; 17(3):394-412. (8) Thierfelder C, Hatz C, Bodiang CK, Thierfelder C, Hatz C, Bodiang CK. [Immigrants with female circumcision in Switzerland: background information and recommendations for medical practice]. [German]. Schweizerische Rundschau fur Medizin Praxis 2003; 92(31-32):1307-1314. (9) Little CM, Little CM. Female genital circumcision: medical and cultural considerations. [Review] [11 refs]. Journal of Cultural Diversity 2003; 10(1):30-34. (10) Essen B, Bodker B, Sjoberg NO, Gudmundsson S, Ostergren PO, Langhoff-Roos J et al. Is there an association between female circumcision and perinatal death? Bulletin of the World Health Organization 2002; 80(8):629-632. (11) Larsen U, Okonofua FE, Larsen U, Okonofua FE. Female circumcision and obstetric complications. International Journal of Gynaecology & Obstetrics 2002; 77(3):255-265. (12) Almroth L, Almroth-Berggren V, Bergstrom S, Almroth L, Almroth-Berggren V, Bergstrom S. [Need for more research on female circumcision. Lack of communication between women and men conserves the traditional practice]. [Review] [19 refs] [Swedish]. Lakartidningen 5360; 98(47):5355-5358. (13) Magoha GA, Magoha OB, Magoha GA, Magoha OB. Current global status of female genital mutilation: a review. [Review] [55 refs]. East African Medical Journal 2000; 77(5):268-272. (14) Abu Daia JM, Abu Daia JM. Female circumcision. [Review] [27 refs]. Saudi Medical Journal 2000; 21(10):921-923. (15) El Mekresh M, El Mekresh M. Urethral pathology. [Review] [42 refs]. Current Opinion in Urology 2000; 10(5):381-390. (16) Enany R, Graf P, Hoss C, Sautter R, Kolta K, Enany R et al. [Female circumcision: historical, sociological and medical aspects]. [German]. Handchirurgie, Mikrochirurgie, Plastische Chirurgie 1999; 31(1):47-50. (17) Davis G, Ellis J, Hibbert M, Perez RP, Zimbelman E, Davis G et al. Female circumcision: the prevalence and nature of the ritual in Eritrea. Military Medicine 1999; 164(1):11-16. (18) Bonilla E, Bonilla E. [Female circumcision--2. Case reports]. [Swedish]. Jordemodern 1997; 110(4):118-123. (19) Eyega Z, Conneely E, Eyega Z, Conneely E. Facts and fiction regarding female circumcision/female genital mutilation: a pilot study in New York City. Journal of the American Medical Womens Association 187; 52(4):174-178. (20) Jones WK, Smith J, Kieke B, Jr., Wilcox L, Jones WK, Smith J et al. Female genital mutilation. Female circumcision. Who is at risk in the U.S.?[erratum appears in Public Health Rep 1998 Jan-Feb;113(1):4]. Public Health Reports 1997; 112(5):368-377. (21) Erian MM, Goh JT, Erian MM, Goh JT. Female circumcision. [Review] [8 refs]. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 1995; 35(1):83-85. (22) Baker CA, Gilson GJ, Vill MD, Curet LB, Baker CA, Gilson GJ et al. Female circumcision: obstetric issues.[see comment]. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology 1993; 169(6):1616-1618. (23) Arbesman M, Kahler L, Buck GM, Arbesman M, Kahler L, Buck GM. Assessment of the impact of female circumcision on the gynecological, genitourinary and obstetrical health problems of women from Somalia: literature review and case series. [Review] [29 refs]. Women & Health 1993; 20(3):27-42. (24) Calder BL, Brown YM, Rae DI, Calder BL, Brown YM, Rae DI. Female circumcision/genital mutilation: culturally sensitive care. Health Care for Women International 1993; 14(3):227-238. (25) Dirie MA, Lindmark G, Dirie MA, Lindmark G. The risk of medical complications after female circumcision.[see comment]. East African Medical Journal 1992; 69(9):479-482. (26) Dirie MA, Lindmark G, Dirie MA, Lindmark G. A hospital study of the complications of female circumcision. Tropical Doctor 1991; 21(4):146-148. (27) Lightfoot-Klein H, Shaw E, Lightfoot-Klein H, Shaw E. Special needs of ritually circumcised women patients. JOGNN - Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic, & Neonatal Nursing 1991; 20(2):102-107. (28) Odujinrin OM, Akitoye CO, Oyediran MA, Odujinrin OM, Akitoye CO, Oyediran MA. A study on female circumcision in Nigeria. West African Journal of Medicine 1989; 8(3):183-192. (29) Tanganelli E, Tanganelli E. [Gynecologic and obstetric implications of female circumcision in Somalia]. [Review] [8 refs] [Italian]. Minerva Ginecologica 1989; 41(9):469-474. (30) Reyners MM, Reyners MM. [Circumcision in women and infibulation]. [Dutch]. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor Geneeskunde 1989; 133(51):2557-2561. (31) De Silva S, De Silva S. Obstetric sequelae of female circumcision. European Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology, & Reproductive Biology 1989; 32(3):233-240. (32) Ahmed SM, Ahmed SM. Research on female circumcision in Somalia. Newsletter: Inter-African Committee on Traditional Practices Affecting the Health of Women and Children 1988;(5):10. (33) Adetoro OO, Ebomoyi E, Adetoro OO, Ebomoyi E. Health implications of traditional female circumcision in pregnancy. Asia-Oceania Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 1986; 12(4):489-492. (34) A traditional practice that threatens health--female circumcision. WHO Chronicle 1986; 40(1):31-36. (35) Sami IR, Sami IR. Female circumcision with special reference to the Sudan. Annals of Tropical Paediatrics 1986; 6(2):99-115. (36) Berardi JC, Teillet JF, Godard J, Laloux V, Allane P, Franjou MH et al. [Obstetrical consequences of female circumcision. Study in 71 circumcised African women]. [French]. Journal de Gynecologie, Obstetrique et Biologie de la Reproduction 1985; 14(6):743-746. (37) Myers RA, Omorodion FI, Isenalumhe AE, Akenzua GI, Myers RA, Omorodion FI et al. Circumcision: its nature and practice among some ethnic groups in southern Nigeria. Social Science & Medicine 1985; 21(5):581-588. (38) Shaw E, Shaw E. Female circumcision. American Journal of Nursing 1985; 85(6):684-687. (39) Muhlbach F, Loser B, Bellee H, Muhlbach F, Loser B, Bellee H. [A case of female circumcision]. [German]. Zentralblatt fur Gynakologie 1985; 107(6):387-389. (40) El Dareer A, El Dareer A. Complications of female circumcision in the Sudan. Tropical Doctor 1983; 13(3):131-133. (41) Agugua NE, Egwuatu VE, Agugua NE, Egwuatu VE. Female circumcision: management of urinary complications. Journal of Tropical Pediatrics 1982; 28(5):248-252. (42) Egwuatu VE, Agugua NE, Egwuatu VE, Agugua NE. Complications of female circumcision in Nigerian Igbos. British Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 1981; 88(11):1090-1093. (43) Diejomaoh FM, Faal MK, Diejomaoh FM, Faal MK. Adhesion of the labia minora complicating circumcision in the neonatal period in a Nigerian community. Tropical & Geographical Medicine 1981; 33(2):135-138. (44) Rushwan H, Rushwan H. Etiologic factors in pelvic inflammatory disease in Sudanese women. American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology 1980; 138(7 Pt 2):877-879. (45) Aziz FA, Aziz FA. Gynecologic and obstetric complications of female circumcision. International Journal of Gynaecology & Obstetrics 1980; 17(6):560-563. (46) Taba AH, Taba AH. Female circumcision. Tropical Doctor 1980; 10(1):21-23. (47) Daw E, Daw E. Female circumcision and imfibulation complicating delivery. Practitioner 1970; 204(222):559-563. (48) HALL L, HALL L. ARTHRITIS AFTER FEMALE CIRCUMCISION. East African Medical Journal 1963; 40:55-57.
و لعلمك يعنى أنا اخترت لك بس اللى مسميينهcircumcision
مش mutilation
لو أضفت الكلمة التانية هاجيبلك 198 بحث
Posted by humanist (Member # 12798) on :
Homing, is Batty one of those low class, ignorant people from Egyptian society you referred to?
Batty, go f..... and shove that Salami, I mean Salafi mentality right up your arse.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine:
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: Ba the female genital organs are very highly vascular. They will bleed copiously when they are cut and then they will heal with fibrous tissue which will make the remaining structures as good as useless.
the male genital organs is extermly vasculal also dude it will blees also
u never seen a male cirucmsion before
fibrous tissiue is formed also in mal circumsion go figure
BATMAN, I AM NOT GOING TO DESCEND TO THIS LEVEL!
I am being patient and nice to you so dont force me to reverse that. I have not only seen male circumcisions but I performed them, too....so behave yourself. When I say female genitals are highly vascular, this means female genitalia ARE highly vascular regardless your rolling out tongue!
AND YES, they are vascular even more than male prepuce....go to medschool and find out!
The more crucial issue is when the skin of the prepuce heals with fibrous tissue it only affects a rim around the penile shaft and the rest of the penis is still sensitive but with the clitoris there is no room for manipulation. Fibrosis affects the area of the cut and nothing remains. I hope it is clear now.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by humanist: Homing, is Batty one of those low class, ignorant people from Egyptian society you referred to?
Batty, go f..... and shove that Salami, I mean Salafi mentality right up your arse.
He's more probably one of those who have been salafisized in spite of their noses and doesnt even recognize it....or maybe does recognize it and is convinced with it. More reason to be wary of these groups.
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon:
(1) Manji MF, Al B, I, El Enbaby A, Al Bareedy N, Manji MF, Al Badawi I et al. Female circumcision ([female genital mutilation): a problem for brachytherapy in cervical cancer. International Journal of Gynecological Cancer 2006; 16(2):675-680.
thought so thanks u
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: u the forskin in male n female r typicall anatomically removing it from man is ok while from female is not ok
wat a double standard homing
In what way are they typical?
First, the male foreskin is made of keratinized epithelial tissue and the female prepuce is made of non keratinized epithelium
Second, the surface area of the male foreskin is much larger than the surface area of the female prepuce
Third, the thickness of the skin of the male foreskin is more than the thickness of the female prepuce
Fourth, the anatomical attachments of the male foreskin are different from the anatomical attachments of the female prepuce
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine:
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon:
(1) Manji MF, Al B, I, El Enbaby A, Al Bareedy N, Manji MF, Al Badawi I et al. Female circumcision ([female genital mutilation): a problem for brachytherapy in cervical cancer. International Journal of Gynecological Cancer 2006; 16(2):675-680.
thought so thanks u
Yes,OF COURSE! This is to prove to u that female circumcision IS the same as female genital mutliation as per WHO definition which includes level 1 removal of prepuce only as u say......what they tell u at the mosque (that they are different) is wrong. Medical classification is right. ALL forms of female genital cutting/mutliation/circumcision/strawberry picking/call it what u want are harmful.
Giving it a different name doesnt make it something else.
PLUS the opinion of moderate Islamic scholars that decides to give the decision into the hands of medical science
من باب اسألوا أهل الذكر
dah elle homma e7na.... elateba2 ya3ni
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
The prepuce is an integral, normal part of the external genitalia that forms the anatomical covering of the glans penis and clitoris. The outer epithelium has the protective function of internalising the glans (clitoris and penis), urethral meatus (in the male) and the inner preputial epithelium, thus decreasing external irritation or contamination. The prepuce is a specialized, junctional mucocutaneous tissue which marks the boundary between mucosa and skin; it is similar to the eyelids, labia minora, anus and lips. The male prepuce also provides adequate mucosa and skin to cover the entire penis during erection. The unique innervation of the prepuce establishes its function as an erogenous tissue
Lamina propria of preputial mucosa
The lamina propria of the male and female prepuce is very vascular, which explains the common haemorrhagic complications associated with circumcision. ref. Taylor JR, Lockwood AP, Taylor AJ. The prepuce: specialized mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision. Br J Urol 1996; 77: 291-5
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon:
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine:
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon:
(1) Manji MF, Al B, I, El Enbaby A, Al Bareedy N, Manji MF, Al Badawi I et al. Female circumcision ([female genital mutilation): a problem for brachytherapy in cervical cancer. International Journal of Gynecological Cancer 2006; 16(2):675-680.
thought so thanks u
Yes,OF COURSE! This is to prove to u that female circumcision IS the same as female genital mutliation as per WHO definition which includes level 1 removal of prepuce only as u say......what they tell u at the mosque (that they are different) is wrong. Medical classification is right. ALL forms of female genital cutting/mutliation/circumcision/strawberry picking/call it what u want are harmful.
Giving it a different name doesnt make it something else.
PLUS the opinion of moderate Islamic scholars that decides to give the decision into the hands of medical science
من باب اسألوا أهل الذكر
dah elle homma e7na.... elateba2 ya3ni
the doctor has a lot of opinion about circumsion داد / د. امال احمد البشير اخصائية طب المجتمع ( امومة و طفولة)
some doctors says masturbation is ok and give protection agains cancer
so we should tell the males to do masturbation in the 20 to have protection against prostate cancer
not all doctors know every thing in everyu thing
some doctosrs talk blah blah
u know "phenyl propnaloamine" in the flu medicnes cause brain stroke as side effects and was withdrawed from market after been used for dozen of years
So who blah is nothing but theories
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: The prepuce is an integral, normal part of the external genitalia that forms the anatomical covering of the glans penis and clitoris. The outer epithelium has the protective function of internalising the glans (clitoris and penis), urethral meatus (in the male) and the inner preputial epithelium, thus decreasing external irritation or contamination. The prepuce is a specialized, junctional mucocutaneous tissue which marks the boundary between mucosa and skin; it is similar to the eyelids, labia minora, anus and lips. The male prepuce also provides adequate mucosa and skin to cover the entire penis during erection. The unique innervation of the prepuce establishes its function as an erogenous tissue
Lamina propria of preputial mucosa
The lamina propria of the male and female prepuce is very vascular, which explains the common haemorrhagic complications associated with circumcision. ref. Taylor JR, Lockwood AP, Taylor AJ. The prepuce: specialized mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision. Br J Urol 1996; 77: 291-5
So your "proof" that the prepuce is the same in male and female is based on this excerpt???? Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: the doctor has a lot of opinion about circumsion داد / د. امال احمد البشير اخصائية طب المجتمع ( امومة و طفولة)
some doctors says masturbation is ok and give protection agains cancer
so we should tell the males to do masturbation in the 20 to have protection against prostate cancer
not all doctors know every thing in everyu thing
some doctosrs talk blah blah
u know "phenyl propnaloamine" in the flu medicnes cause brain stroke as side effects and was withdrawed from market after been used for dozen of years
So who blah is nothing but theories
And this is supposed to mean that you, the collective you of FGM supporters , know more than all the doctors put together?
Listen, Batman. I'm not going to enter into a conversation about whether FGM/circumcision is good or bad or about the prepuce in male is the same as female because this is basic info available for all who want it all over the planet.....so it's pointless to add one more webpage about it.....Also, it isnt a "debatable" issue. The debate about these particular points has been settled with hundreds of scientific studies (50 of which are listed above) so no single doctor statement based on her own reasoning can undo that. If you dont see this, I cant make you see it nor am I interested. If she's one of my students (and I do teach postgrad public health students..I can tell u where if u r interested ) I will most definitely fail her for making irresponsible statements that cannot be supported by an evidence base.
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon:
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: The prepuce is an integral, normal part of the external genitalia that forms the anatomical covering of the glans penis and clitoris. The outer epithelium has the protective function of internalising the glans (clitoris and penis), urethral meatus (in the male) and the inner preputial epithelium, thus decreasing external irritation or contamination. The prepuce is a specialized, junctional mucocutaneous tissue which marks the boundary between mucosa and skin; it is similar to the eyelids, labia minora, anus and lips. The male prepuce also provides adequate mucosa and skin to cover the entire penis during erection. The unique innervation of the prepuce establishes its function as an erogenous tissue
Lamina propria of preputial mucosa
The lamina propria of the male and female prepuce is very vascular, which explains the common haemorrhagic complications associated with circumcision. ref. Taylor JR, Lockwood AP, Taylor AJ. The prepuce: specialized mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision. Br J Urol 1996; 77: 291-5
So your "proof" that the prepuce is the same in male and female is based on this excerpt????
lol here is something
The prepuce in both sexes is formed by the growth of a solid plate of ectoderm into the superficial part of the phallus; on coronal section this plate presents the shape of a horseshoe. By the breaking down of its more centrally situated cells the plate is split into two lamellæ, and a cutaneous fold, the prepuce, is liberated and forms a hood over the glans. “Adherent prepuce is not an adhesion really, but a hindered central desquamation” (Berry Hart, op. cit.).
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine:
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: Ba the female genital organs are very highly vascular. They will bleed copiously when they are cut and then they will heal with fibrous tissue which will make the remaining structures as good as useless.
the male genital organs is extermly vasculal also dude it will blees also
u never seen a male cirucmsion before
fibrous tissiue is formed also in mal circumsion go figure
BATMAN, I AM NOT GOING TO DESCEND TO THIS LEVEL!
I am being patient and nice to you so dont force me to reverse that. I have not only seen male circumcisions but I performed them, too....so behave yourself. When I say female genitals are highly vascular, this means female genitalia ARE highly vascular regardless your rolling out tongue!
AND YES, they are vascular even more than male prepuce....go to medschool and find out!
The more crucial issue is when the skin of the prepuce heals with fibrous tissue it only affects a rim around the penile shaft and the rest of the penis is still sensitive but with the clitoris there is no room for manipulation. Fibrosis affects the area of the cut and nothing remains. I hope it is clear now.
why do u make male circumcison????
for hygeienic reasons? if so y not fameles?
its not written in quran and the hadith say it u say they r weak ( may b u r sholar of hadith and study the men narrator and weaken the hadith of circumsion) is nto it a doubel standard u make male circusmion though lots of doctors say its not good habits
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:
And this is supposed to mean that you, the collective you of FGM supporters , know more than all the doctors put together?
the list u quote is talking about fgm not the supposed to be done female circumsions
all what they say is about female gen mutilation
this is what we mean circumcison is clitoral hood removed (female circumcision) to improve sensitivity and cleanliness
HOming , give me any any study to say it harm????
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
BECAUSE: Medical research proved mfemale circumcision to be harmful while medical research bardo proved male circumcision to be benificial. (I am aware that some medical research say it isnt beneficial but there is a larger body of evidence from research that opposes this view and it is stated in numerous references). It is not onloy protective to the male but to the female sex partner, too. This is why I used to do male circumcision but not female . This is in the past tense because I did them while I was in my internship year where you get some practice in every specialty. Now my specialty is Cancer Public health and cancer epidemiology. I trained as a clinical oncologist then trained in epidemiology and public health so try to avoid me around these things. Focus on things I dont know Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
In a female human anatomy, the clitoral hood, (also called preputium clitoridis and clitoral prepuce), is a fold of skin that surrounds and protects the clitoral glans. It develops as part of the labia minora and is homologous with the foreskin (equally called prepuce) in male genitals.
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: the list u quote is talking about fgm not the supposed to be done female circumsions
all what they say is about female gen mutilation
this is what we mean circumcison is clitoral hood removed (female circumcision) to improve sensitivity and cleanliness
HOming , give me any any study to say it harm???? [/QB]
7ader batman, pm me with ur email and I will send u the full text of these studies as pdf copies . But it isnt true that ALL of them speak about extreme procedures. I deliberately removed the ones that are talking about infibulation (level 3/4 female circumcision). I am repeating to you for the third tiome now: From the point of view of medical science circumcision and FGM ARE THE SAME THING.
Did u check the link to the WHO website that classifies level 1 female genital cutting as FGM?
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: In a female human anatomy, the clitoral hood, (also called preputium clitoridis and clitoral prepuce), is a fold of skin that surrounds and protects the clitoral glans. It develops as part of the labia minora and is homologous with the foreskin (equally called prepuce) in male genitals.
Homologous means equivalent to it in terms of embryologic origin. It doesnt mean that they are structurally identical.
Besides, u r not paying attention to the main things mentioned in how they are different. Go review the previous messages where I said that the surface area is an important factor because after fibrosis occurs, there will be very little functioning normal tissue left.
Eh in shallah hatgeebly wiki link bey2ool en elsurface area bet3et elmale prepuce ad elfemale?
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
From WHO factsheet:
Female genital mutilation
What is female genital mutilation?
Female genital mutilation (FGM), often referred to as 'female circumcision ', comprises all procedures involving partial or total removal of the external female genitalia or other injury to the female genital organs whether for cultural, religious or other non-therapeutic reasons. There are different types of female genital mutilation known to be practised today. They include:
Type I - excision of the prepuce, with or without excision of part or all of the clitoris;
Type II - excision of the clitoris with partial or total excision of the labia minora;
Type III - excision of part or all of the external genitalia and stitching/narrowing of the vaginal opening (infibulation);
Type IV - pricking, piercing or incising of the clitoris and/or labia; stretching of the clitoris and/or labia; cauterization by burning of the clitoris and surrounding tissue; scraping of tissue surrounding the vaginal orifice (angurya cuts) or cutting of the vagina (gishiri cuts); introduction of corrosive substances or herbs into the vagina to cause bleeding or for the purpose of tightening or narrowing it; and any other procedure that falls under the definition given above.
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
wait
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon:
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: In a female human anatomy, the clitoral hood, (also called preputium clitoridis and clitoral prepuce), is a fold of skin that surrounds and protects the clitoral glans. It develops as part of the labia minora and is homologous with the foreskin (equally called prepuce) in male genitals.
Homologous means equivalent to it in terms of embryologic origin. It doesnt mean that they are structurally identical.
Besides, u r not paying attention to the main things mentioned in how they are different. Go review the previous messages where I said that the surface area is an important factor because after fibrosis occurs, there will be very little functioning normal tissue left.
Eh in shallah hatgeebly wiki link bey2ool en elsurface area bet3et elmale prepuce ad elfemale?
double lol
excuse me do u think clitoral hood erect with the clit gans
where fibrosis will occur?
Modifications
It is increasingly common to have the hood pierced and a ring inserted in a similar way to an ear piercing. Though much less common, other women opt to have the hood surgically trimmed or removed so as to permanently expose part or all of the clitoral head. Such a procedure is very much like male circumcision and is also known as female circumcision. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clitoral_hood#Modifications
WHO faulty scientific crap doesnt work to me i talk with reason, science thinking fyi they didnt tell information of harms in clitorlahoodectomy Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
la begad ana khalas mesh harod 3alek...enta bet3raf a7san men el WHO welle yeshaded lohom.
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
still in WHO no harms of hoodectomy( clitoral hood removal for cleaning n sensitivity) is there fyi
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
Mutilation 1. to injure, disfigure, or make imperfect by removing or irreparably damaging parts: Vandals mutilated the painting. 2. to deprive (a person or animal) of a limb or other essential part.
now if u say clitorla hood removal is mutilation acc to WHO, tell me what function clitoral hood prepuce) play???
dont tell me a common function with male and female prepuce like protection
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
Mesh dee elsaf7a elle enta na2el menha?
"Debate over various terms Different terms are used to describe the act of female genital cutting, but regardless of the terminology the same practice is being referred to. Opponents of these practices tend to use the term Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), whereas groups who support and practice this ritual tend to use the term Female Circumcision (FC), which is also considered an euphemism. Advocates of male circumcision argue that the term "female circumcision" results in unwanted associations between the two practices, while genital integrity advocates might refer to all child genital cutting as mutilation.
The expression Female Genital Mutilation gained growing support in the late 1970s. The word mutilation not only established clear linguistic distinction from male circumcision, but it also emphasized the gravity of the act. In 1990, this term was adopted at the third conference of the Inter African Committee on Traditional Practices Affecting the Health of Women and Children (IAC) in Addis Ababa. In 1991, the World Health Organization recommended that the United Nations adopt this terminology and subsequently, it has been widely used in UN documents."
"Different types There are several distinct practices of FGC that range in severity, depending on how much genital tissue is cut away. Four major types have been categorized (see Diagram 1), although there is some debate as to whether all common forms of FGC fit into these four categories, as well as issues with the reliability of reported data.
Diagram 1:This image shows the different types of FGC and how they differ to the normal female anatomy. [edit] Type I: Clitoridectomy Clitoridectomy involves the removal or splitting of the clitoral hood, termed "hoodectomy", with or without excision of the clitoris, see Diagram 1B. The clitoral hood is the female prepuce, homologous to the foreskin of the male. In the Islamic culture Type I FGC is also known as Sunna (tradition) circumcision. This term was devised in The Sudan by the Anglo-Sudanese administration in 1946 in an attempt to promote this "milder" form of FGC instead of the more severe Type III, infibulation or pharaonic circumcision, that was widely practiced.[8] Although labeled Sunna by Islamic advocates of the practice, most Muslim clergy oppose all forms of female genital cutting as it is viewed as a social custom, rather than a religious practice. According to Dr. Sami A. Aldeeb Abu-Salieh at the Swiss Institute of Comparative Law"
I have a question for u...is wiki the highest authority you know? Is it the ultimate source of knowledge?
bas matgawbneesh...aw gaweb zay manta 3ayez...mesh far2a...ma7na olna enta bete3raf a7san men om el WHO Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: la begad ana khalas mesh harod 3alek...enta bet3raf a7san men el WHO welle yeshaded lohom.
nope the prophet knows more than the WHO
In Sahih Muslim (349) it is narrated from 'Aa'ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “When a man sits between the four parts (arms and legs of his wife) and the two circumcised parts meet, then ghusl is obligatory.”
the two circmisied parts r .....
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: Mutilation 1. to injure, disfigure, or make imperfect by removing or irreparably damaging parts: Vandals mutilated the painting. 2. to deprive (a person or animal) of a limb or other essential part.
now if u say clitorla hood removal is mutilation acc to WHO, tell me what function clitoral hood prepuce) play???
dont tell me a common function with male and female prepuce like protection
Even if it is functionless, its removal is harmful as I explained to u earlier and u refused to understand. As I showed u all ther references that prove it and u refused to accept.
3aref 7alal feek tegawez wa7da ma3mool feeha el3amla dee 3alashan tefdal ga3an tool 3omrak we kol ma teegy te2arab menha te2ol lak bas belra7a belra7a......yemken sa3etha te3raf en Allah 7a2. Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine:
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon:
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: In a female human anatomy, the clitoral hood, (also called preputium clitoridis and clitoral prepuce), is a fold of skin that surrounds and protects the clitoral glans. It develops as part of the labia minora and is homologous with the foreskin (equally called prepuce) in male genitals.
Homologous means equivalent to it in terms of embryologic origin. It doesnt mean that they are structurally identical.
Besides, u r not paying attention to the main things mentioned in how they are different. Go review the previous messages where I said that the surface area is an important factor because after fibrosis occurs, there will be very little functioning normal tissue left.
Eh in shallah hatgeebly wiki link bey2ool en elsurface area bet3et elmale prepuce ad elfemale?
double lol
excuse me do u think clitoral hood erect with the clit gans
where fibrosis will occur?
could u answer the q plz
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine:
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: la begad ana khalas mesh harod 3alek...enta bet3raf a7san men el WHO welle yeshaded lohom.
nope the prophet knows more than the WHO
In Sahih Muslim (349) it is narrated from 'Aa'ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “When a man sits between the four parts (arms and legs of his wife) and the two circumcised parts meet, then ghusl is obligatory.”
the two circmisied parts r .....
dee kenaya fe 3lm elblagha.....she used a polite way to refer to the genital organs . The only meaning or indication of this, is that circumcision was common around the time of the prophet but it does not say we should do it. If we had to do it, there would be a clear text saying so. Can u doubt that we have to pray? can u doubt we have to fast? You cant. why not? because there is a clear text that says so. Now , if the prophet wanted us to do it, he would have told us so in no uncertain terms. On the contrary, he dissuaded the woman who was performing the procedure and told her it is better for both, the woman and the husband . That is the other hadith. Both have weak sanad, though.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: could u answer the q plz
If u are asking seeking information, I would answer u but if all u want to do is rhetoric and going around in circles, no I wont. Because I already told u where fibrosis would occur. I told u in a previous message.
Ok, maybe u cant picture where and how fibrosis will be harmful because u have never seen a clitoris or its hood. If I tell u that the size of the clitoris and its hood together can be covered by the tip of ur forefinger, will u be able to understand how a cut (or surgical interference) there will damage the area? ya3ni heya 7etta ad elnemnema, elle mesh haytayaroh elmashrat haybooz men el fibrosis...fahamt wala la2?
Tayeb what will fibrosis do? Fibrous tissue has no sensation. It will not respond to any sexual stimuli and it will feel uncomfortable on touch (like the skin around an operation site)
Got it or not?
Besara7a if u didnt get it ....mesh mohem.....mafeesh shar7 aktar men keda....wait till u get married and see! Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
the sexual stimulation is from friction of clit hood with clit. this is a way
thers another way friction of penis with clit glans
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
clit hood that u will remove? this is first.
Second; friction or no friction,clit or no clit, hood or no hood, it is useless over fibrous tissue that contains no nerve endings. The nerves have been fibrosed in the healing process. That is why any tampering with the area, even if u remove a teeny weeny bit will have the same harmful result.
OF course, the larger the excision, the more damage there is to the surrounding tissue including birth complications, urinary tract complications,..etc.
I know u r not talking about the wide excision. I am including this only for illustration. Focus back on the teeny weeny excision, fibrosis, no feeling, no response.
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: it is useless over fibrous tissue that contains no nerve endings. The nerves have been fibrosed in the healing process.
this is the first joke the first time i hear of the fibrous tissue is very limited one like the a wart or small wound
the area of clit is full of nerves functioning
the hood removal has no effect on the nerves in the clit cuz we wont touch the clit Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
la ya sheikh? aroo7 ana a3od fe beetna ba2a talama mabafhamsh 7aga fe shoghly keda!
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: la ya sheikh? aroo7 ana a3od fe beetna ba2a talama mabafhamsh 7aga fe shoghly keda!
entey betfhammy lekn ta7lelek mish sa7ee7
comment on this case who admit it in brave way
quote: I recently had my clitoral hood removed (female circumcision) to improve sensitivity and cleanliness as it was such a long hood. I had some pain during healing, but that has been minimal. Healing has been rapid.
The glans clitoris has slowly increased in size since the operation. The sensitivity is also there and my ability to orgasm has increased be cause of it.
I think that all women should consider have their hoods removed as it would aid in cleanliness of the area and grreatly improving orgasm! I'm totally satisfied!
Female circumcision (i.e. foreskin removal) is an operation not widely known by females - and usually not widely known by doctors who may be called upon to practice it. Contrary to the recurrent idea in sex manuals today, most females, even in Western countries, had very little idea about their anatomy until the 1950s, and only a minority had any idea what a clitoris was, what it could do for them, and - last but not least - that it had to be cleaned. A good number of female friends whom I've discussed this with have found to have adherences that were extremly unpleasant, causing itching, redness, soreness - just like under the foreskin of uncircumcised boys.
Based on the above, it would seem easy to follow my advice. However, there has been some debate on whether circumcising clitoral hoods did not, in some cases, cause a problem in women - i.e., making the sensitivity of their clits impossible to control. The clitoris is not a penis. It does not thrust to orgasm, is attached to the belly, moves back and forth in the slit. It can be irritated easily (a phenomenon reported for a while by all freshly circumcised women), but certainly bring greater orgasms when it is totally naked. The few cases we see, however, like mine, are insufficient to form a real idea of the benefits of circumcision in females. Obviously for me it did provide many benefits. But it may not for you. I do not know enough circumcised women to form a wide sweeping opinion on this.
Probably one of the best ways to deal with this subject would be to have a clitoral exam when a female reaches a certain sexual maturity (around her twenties). Gynecological exams before then are usually an unpleasant, and sometimes traumatic experience for a girl. The doctor would not only check the vagina, the rectum, and the cervix, but also the sensitivity of the clitoris, the degree to which the hood adheres to the tip, and whether it would be beneficial or not to have a hood removal - which takes 15 minutes under local anesthesia, at the most. It would also be an ideal time to discuss clitoral hygeine with women, and the need for regular clitoral hood retraction and washing. This would enable women to add to the sexual pleasure - giving them greater sexual confidence. It would also give women a basis for which to decide if they believe they would benefit from female circumcision, as I have.
Cindy (USA)
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
Aywaaaaa...ana kont mestaneyak tegeeb dee
Shoof ya sidi: There are rare cases where the clit is literally buried under the prepuce due to an abnormality in the anatomy that she is born with. In this case, medical intervention is about making a slit in the prepuce just to allow the clit to peep out from under it, but not to remove the prepuce completely. In these cases, yes the girl would have difficulty wiht sexual sensation BEFORE the operation and would have better sensation after.
Tayeb, why is there no fibrosis problem here? Because here, the procedure is literally making a slit, so it IS like a small wound. If fibrosis occurs , it will be mild and located at the edges of the prepuce.
BUT if the whole prepuce is removed, this would involve a linear scar extending from one side of the clit , going over the clit and to the other side of the clitoris. In this case, fibrosis will occur all around the clitoris...which as I just explained is only a teeny weeny dot...so it only takes a very small amount of fibrosis to spoil it.
I would draw your attention also to the fact that for Cindy up there, a bit of fibrosis at the edges of the prepuce is not going to be much worse than having the clitoris completely covered by its hood. In medicine, all medical intervention is based on balancing harm against benefit...so even if u take a medication, u will get side effects but how bad are the side effects compared to the original disease? If the balance is in favour of giving the drug , we give it. This is how we decide to operate or not to operate.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
What do we understand from this?
That the decision to slit the prepuce (not remove it) can be made only in congenital cases of clitorial anomaly....in other words, as a treatment for a medical condition, not applicable on everybody.
N.B. this medical condition is rare.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
ya ibn el7alal, howa mesh elmawdoo3 dah hena 3an elqaradawy? we feeh mawdoo3 tany 3an mas2alet elcircumcision dee wana kont saybak te3ok henak bera7tak ? eh elle gaybak ten2el elmawdoo3 hena bas?
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:
why is there no fibrosis problem here? Because here, the procedure is literally making a slit, so it IS like a small wound. If fibrosis occurs , it will be mild and located at the edges of the prepuce.
slit –noun a straight, narrow cut, opening, or aperture.
why will be fibrosis mild in the case u say and not in normal hood removal or trimming?
fibrosis will be in the site of cut and not in the clit fyi
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
copy and paste from previous message:
BUT if the whole prepuce is removed, this would involve a curvi-linear scar extending from one side of the clit , going over the clit and to the other side of the clitoris. In this case, fibrosis will occur all around the clitoris...which as I just explained is only a teeny weeny dot...so it only takes a very small amount of fibrosis to spoil it.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
why will be fibrosis mild in the case u say and not in normal hood removal or trimming?
fibrosis will be in the site of cut and not in the clit fyi
let me talk to u about the wound site for a moment. How many millimetres around the wound site will fibroblasts spread through?
Can u find the answer to that?
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
Dr. Royal H. Benson, III Ob/Gyn
Dr. Royal Benson, III F.A.C.O.G.Dr. Royal H. Benson, III is a highly qualified and skilled, Board Certified, Obstetrician/ Gynecologist offering female genital refinement surgery and in-office tumescent liposuction. Dr. Benson has been performing the refinement surgeries for twenty years. Education
Royal H. Benson, III, M.D. graduated from Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center, School of Medicine, in Lubbock, Texas, where he was elected to the Alpha Omega Alpha Honor Society. He completed his internship and residency at St. Paul Medical Center in Dallas. Certifications & Memberships
Dr. Benson is board certified by the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology. He is a Fellow of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and is a member of the American Medical Association, The Texas Medical Association, the Brazos-Robertson County Medical Society, the Society of Laparoscopic Surgeons, the Association of American Gynecologic Laparoscopists, and the International Society of Cosmetogynecology. Specializations
With new specialized surgical techniques, the patient is able to return to her normal activities in a very short amount of time after this surgery. There is minimal postoperative pain and minimal scarring occurs.
You should demand a surgeon with exceptional surgical skills. There are a limited number of surgeons qualified to perform vaginal refinement procedures. Dr. Royal H. Benson, III is highly qualified to perform this surgery for you.
The procedures Dr. Benson specializes in are:
* Clitoral Hoodectomy or Clitoral Circumcision * Labiaplasty or Labia Minora Reduction * Vaginoplasty or Tightening of the Vagina * In Office Tumescent Liposuction
Increase Self Esteem and Orgasms with Clitoral Hoodectomy
Many women feel that they are abnormal because they either cannot reach climax/orgasm or they are extremely slow in reaching their orgasm. This can be a point of frustration for the woman and her sexual partner. The woman believes that there is something wrong with her because she feels like she does not sexually perform like other women. The partner believes that there is something wrong with him/her because they cannot get the woman to reach the climax in a timely manner.
Dr. Benson has found that sometimes the real problem is undiagnosed clitoral scarring and a simple procedure such as Clitoral Hoodectomy, commonly known as Clitoral Circumcision, will yield tremendous benefits. Safe and Simple
The procedure is very simple. It is done on an outpatient basis and takes only a few minutes. Like other procedures, it is nearly bloodless and is painless. There are no sutures to remove. The patient is able to return to normal activities within several days and may expect a complete return to sexual relations within 4-6 weeks. Reach Orgasm Faster
After the Clitoral Hoodectomy procedure, many women have reported a shortened time to reach orgasm and that they now have multiple orgasms. A patient with a pre-surgical time to orgasm of 30 minutes may now only take 2-5 minutes to reach orgasm. Penile thrusting is much more stimulating to the clitoris after this surgery. Improve Self Esteem
These procedures are designed to improve sexual function. But these procedures are also designed to improve a woman's self-esteem and confidence, not only sexually, but also in the day-to-day activities of her life.
Clitoral Hoodectomy is commonly referred to as clitoral refinement, clitoral hood removal, clitoral adhesion removal, removal of the hood of the clitoris, removal of clitoral adhesions, clitoroplasty, clitoridotomy, female circumcision, and clitoral circumcision, clitoral hood release, or hoodectomy.
why will be fibrosis mild in the case u say and not in normal hood removal or trimming?
fibrosis will be in the site of cut and not in the clit fyi
let me talk to u about the wound site for a moment. How many millimetres around the wound site will fibroblasts spread through?
Can u find the answer to that?
no i cant now cuz am tired if u can find it to me this will be awesome Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: These procedures are designed to improve sexual function. But these procedures are also designed to improve a woman's self-esteem and confidence, not only sexually, but also in the day-to-day activities of her life.
This is in the condition of congenital abnormality of the clitoral hood in the first plce like cindy of the previous message!
If he does it without a proper medical indication, he'll be sued and struck off the medical register, just u wait and see.
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
self esteem الختان مكرمة للأنثي
focus on this word
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
No, you go lok for it urself to maximise the benefit...but here are some links to the process of scar formation; easier and quicker to understand than looking at wound healing
meen elle 2al ba2a eno makrama? sheikh albany?...mafeesh wa7da makhtouna gozha taye2 yebos fe khel2etha, teb2a makrama ezay? de el3aks tamaman
thom enak betgeeb kalam men e3lan togary testadel beeh 3ala sed2 za3mak?
In fact, there are hundreds of research studies that prove exactly the opposite. Circumcised females have absolutely no trace of self esteem.
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: No, you go lok for it urself to maximise the benefit...but here are some links to the process of scar formation; easier and quicker to understand than looking at wound healing
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: Where do u get the idea that scar tissue occurs only in c section?
If it extends 0.5 mm, the clit is lost because of the size of the clitoris
nopee
the surgeon/circu,ciser know it and leave 1 cm for the scar to extend
easy
noting that in the hadith the prophet said to the circumcising woman to not cut the hood in deep cutting. ,menaing he said to her to leave a place for the scar to extend.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
u r talking as if women are queing to do this thing..... r u talking to idiots or what?
I dont care what a commercial site says and how much it charges u to lop off your precious organs. I have scientific evidence that you refuse to consider because a clinic is advertising clitoridectomies. How mad is that?
Posted by Undercover (Member # 12979) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: I'm not about to defend his sexual attitudes...as I said before.... he may well be hindered by any number of inhibitions imposed in a cultural way. What I defend only is that he would not knowingly misrepresent things and that he tries to be as objective as he can. Sometimes he'll be wrong, naturally but there is more right than wrong in his general opinions.
enIn no way I represent him as infallible... but I would represent him as honest and more reasonable than many.
Didn't Muhammad (pbuh) also do the same thing? Muhammad (pbuh) followed the morality of his people. But that morality was ethically wrong. He claimed to be the best human and the last messenger of God. According to him God has said to people all he wanted to say in the Quran and his religion is complete. There is no more guidance to come and his examples and teachings are all we need to know and follow for eternity. Yet what he did and said, under the light of modern values prove to be very wrong.
Now we realize that we cannot live by his examples any more, nor can we practice his teachings. We would certainly put a man in jail if he wanted to follow the Sunnah of the prophet in this day and age and "marry" a 9-year-old child, etc.
If we cannot follow the morality of Muhammad (pbuh) any more, if what he said and did do not fit in this modern day, why we need Muhammad (pbuh)? What part of his teachings should we accept and what part should we discard? Who will determine that? This is an important question. If we give ourselves the freedom to pick and choose the teachings that most suit us we should give the same freedom to others.
Some say we shouldn't judge Muhammad (pbuh) by present-day standards. The society and times the Prophet lived in, were different times. I fail to see the logic of it. Did Muhammad (pbuh) come to teach people the right way of living or follow their wrong way? So on one hand he said I am the perfect example, do as I do and on the other he did what the people of his time did, the very people whom he called ignorant. By doing so, he put the seal of approval on those vices and they became the pattern by which Muslims should live for eternity. Since Sharia laws and the Quran are absolutely immutable and valid for eternity, therefore, there is no hope that any harshness of these Islamic ‘divine’ laws can ever be diminished by reform or through peaceful means.
Is having sex with a 9 year old child okay or is it bad? If it is a bad custom of the people of those times, why he did it and why should Muslims follow his example even now? If what he did was wrong, and he was just foolishly following the tradition of the ignorant people of his time, at least he should have said, don’t do what I am doing. This is wrong. why he said emulate me because I am the perfect example? by saying these were the practices of those time, are you implying that they are wrong now. If so doesn't this mean emulating Muhammad (pbuh) is wrong today?
Muhammad(pbuh) was a bad example in so many ways. He raided villagers with no warning, killed unarmed people and took their wives and children as slaves, he assasinated his critics. Is this a good thing or not? Your response is this was the custom in those days. Damn it! Was he a prophet of God or not? Did he come to teach people good things or learn their evil acts? Why Jesus did not do any of these things? Why he lived a saintly life and why his teachings are all good? Why he did not follow the vices of his people? Why Buddha did not imitate the evil practices of the people of his time? Telling people to kill for religion is not befitting for a Messenger of God! There are many faiths and philosophies that belong to the past and some much older than Islam but they all started and advanced without bloodshed. Confucianism, Taoism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Zoroastrianism, Manism, Christianity and many Greek philosophies grew without the need of killing people. This is absurd to say that I cannot convince you of my truth by logic so let me convince you by my sword. No real God would demand obedience and love through violence.
And for the sake of argument, let us say that people in those days were savages. At least this is the lie some Muslims want us to believe. Is this a good excuse for Muhammad (pbuh) to raid, loot, and massacre people? AGAIN, did Muhammad (pbuh) come to guide people to the right path or was he a victim of the bad traditions of his people? Didn’t he call the pagans ignorant? If so, why did he follow their ways? It is like someone claiming to be a physician telling everyone you are wrong and ignorant, your shamans and medicine men are charlatan and this is not how you cure patients and then he starts practicing in the way that the shamans do. Would you accept such a charlatan as a physician? What Muhammad (pbuh) brought that was new? The only think new that he brought and did not exist is Jihad. Everything else existed prior to him. The belief in Allah existed, hajj existed, fasting existed, salat existed, zakat existed, all the rituals and superstitions about jinn, angels and Satan existed. Muhammad (pbuh) only changed somewhat these superstitions and rituals.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine:
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: Where do u get the idea that scar tissue occurs only in c section?
If it extends 0.5 mm, the clit is lost because of the size of the clitoris
nopee
the surgeon/circu,ciser know it and leave 1 cm for the scar to extend
easy
noting that in the hadith the prophet said to the circumcising woman to not cut the hood in deep cutting. ,menaing he said to her to leave a place for the scar to extend.
meneen ba2a ya 7abiby? heya el7etta dee kolaha feha kam cm? This is the most hilarious thing I have ever heard!!! Operating on giants, is he?
Really this conversation is becoming more and more childish by the minute.....I dont see how I can keep descending to talk to u about basic facts...next thing I will have to prove to u that there are 2 ears in the human body. Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: u r talking as if women are queing to do this thing..... r u talking to idiots or what?
I dont care what a commercial site says and how much it charges u to lop off your precious organs. I have scientific evidence that you refuse to consider because a clinic is advertising clitoridectomies. How mad is that?
the clit hood is precious?? prove it Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
I'm not going to reply to u , undercover, I addressed all these issues in ur message several times before and I find your style of talking about my prophet totally disgusting and absolutely offensive. At least if u show some respect, I might be able to overcome my disgust and converse with u.
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: the clit hood is precious?? prove it
leh howa kol elkalam elle fat dah mesh proof? fadya lak ana ba2a weltasaly bet3atak.
Go back and read from the start and maybe u will see some light and recognize that maybe what the WHO says is more credible than what a commercial advert says and maybe u will see that what a bunch of research results prove is more powerful than what one obscure doctor claims without no supportive research results. I dont need to produce any more proof. Thsi has been proved many times over....and Wallahy lawla ma3azetak ma kont sabart 3alek kol dah.
If u want the full text of the research studies pm me.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: homing
There are FOUR sutures in this procedure, Batman!!! You want to put 4 sutures around the clit we maygeeloosh fibrosis?
Bas ba2a balsh habal ata3t nafasy.... Posted by Dr. Otomatik (Member # 13356) on :
quote:Originally posted by humanist: Homing, is Batty one of those low class, ignorant people from Egyptian society you referred to?
Batty, go f..... and shove that Salami, I mean Salafi mentality right up your arse.
From what I read of both of you. You're exactly the same.
Posted by Dr. Otomatik (Member # 13356) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: while medical research bardo proved male circumcision to be benificial. (I am aware that some medical research say it isnt beneficial but there is a larger body of evidence from research that opposes this view and it is stated in numerous references).
Medical research proved it has benefits but did it go as far as recommending it as routine operation? Not that I know of. Everything I've read is inconclusive and lacking in research/data regarding any adverse effects it may have. Arguments can and are made to prove benefits of female circumcisions but they did not stop there and found that the adverse effects outweigh the benefits
The American Academy of Pediatrics: "Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision"
Sounds too iffy to me!
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: It is not onloy protective to the male but to the female sex partner, too.
One major thing I noticed about this board is, no matter how long I leave the board, whenever I come back I'm sure I'll see people arguing about one of three subjects : polygyny, or Hijab, or Circumcision.
Depressive
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dalia*:
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: HOming , give me any any study to say it harm????
Thanks for those, Dalia. But the interesting thing is that I give him a list of 50 references from medline published in peer reviewed journals and that say it is harmful and then he comes back and says give me one study that says it is harmful. Makes you wonder whether it's any use.
Posted by Undercover (Member # 12979) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: HOming , give me any any study to say it harm????
Some (e.g. the late Rector of Al-Azhar University, Sheikh Gad Al-Haque) argue that since the Prophet did not ban female circumcision, it falls within the category of the permissble. As such, there is no ground for a ban on it. However, isn't it within the 'spirit' of Shariah to restrict something that is permissible if discovered to be harmful? For example, all fish are permisible to eat. Should a particular type of fish be proven to be poisonous or harmful, it could be banned based on a known Shariah rule, or harm must be removed. The real issue then boils down to whether this procedure is harmful or not. Granted that such a procedure may not be seriously damaging like the other two types of circumcision, it may be argued that it is painful, traumatic and often performed in an unhygienic setting leading to infection and other problems. Even if the procedure is performed by a physician, it is so delicate that not all physicians master it. Many times circumcision can go wrong as most circumcisions in Egypt are performed by barbers or midwives, and not by trained medical staff members. As a result there is a high rate of complications even for this type of circumcision, with many operations leading to infertility. So there are great risk involving female circumcision. Circumcision can cause long-term complications such as damage to the urethra resulting in urinary incontinence, sexual dysfunction, urinary tract infection, infertility and can prove fatal for some women during childbirth. Other complications can include severe pain, shock, haemorrhage, urine retention, ulceration of the genital region and injury to adjacent tissue. So why you want to put women in such a great risk when there's no clear-cut evidence in Shariah to indicate that circumcision is prescribed as mandatory for women in Islam?
Name of Questioner Rania - Egypt
Title: Female Circumcision: Is It Really Obligatory?
Question As-Salamu `Alaykum. There is a widespread practice of 'female circumcision' among Muslims in many nations, though limited to some sections only. What does the Shari’ah say on this and what are the Prophet’s words regarding this?
Wa`alaykum As-Salaamu Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuh.
In The Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.
All praise and thanks are due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon His Messenger.
Dear questioner thanks a lot for your interesting and important question, and we hope our efforts, which are purely for Allah’s Sake, meet your expectations.
In his response to the question, Sheikh Ahmad Kutty, a senior lecturer and an Islamic scholar at the Islamic Institute of Toronto, Ontario, Canada, issues the following Fatwa:
“Circumcision for males is considered an important rite of initiation in Islam. It is a part of the legacy of the Prophet Ibrahim, peace and blessings be upon him, whose role model we have been ordered to follow in the Qur’an. It is, therefore, a highly significant rite in Islam, which distinguishes Muslim males from others.
When we come to the issue of “Female circumcision”, however, the mater is quite different. There is nothing in the sources, either the Qur’an or the Sunnah, to suggest that it is a PRESCRIBED ritual of initiation for women in Islam.
While one finds a number of traditions from the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, which clearly indicates that he ordered pagan males who converted to undergo circumcision, it is not stated anywhere that the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, ordered any woman who entered Islam to undergo this practice.
Because there is no absolute proof from the sources of Islam prescribing female circumcision, the vast majority of scholars do not include it in the OBLIGATORY rituals of Islam.
It is common knowledge in Islam that if the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, had wanted female circumcision to be an integral aspect of religious practice in Islam the same way that male circumcision is, he would have said so clearly. Since he did not do so, we can safely assume it is not a prescribed ritual of Islam."
You can also read:
Islamic Ruling on Female Circumcision
If you have any further comments, please don't hesitate to write back!
May Allah guide you to the straight path, and guide you to that which pleases Him, Amen.
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: while medical research bardo proved male circumcision to be benificial. (I am aware that some medical research say it isnt beneficial but there is a larger body of evidence from research that opposes this view and it is stated in numerous references).
Medical research proved it has benefits but did it go as far as recommending it as routine operation? Not that I know of. Everything I've read is inconclusive and lacking in research/data regarding any adverse effects it may have. Arguments can and are made to prove benefits of female circumcisions but they did not stop there and found that the adverse effects outweigh the benefits
The American Academy of Pediatrics: "Existing scientific evidence demonstrates potential medical benefits of newborn male circumcision; however, these data are not sufficient to recommend routine neonatal circumcision"
Sounds too iffy to me!
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: It is not onloy protective to the male but to the female sex partner, too.
How so?
Otomatik. I have yet to see a proper medical study- not a webpage- a proper medical study published in a peer reviewed journal and indexed in ovid that claims it is beneficial. I have searched across the most prominent medical publication databases (medline, embase, psychinfo) and the result is always studies reporting adverse effects, nothing that says anything good.
If u r referring to the few "rare" cases of congenital anomalies in which the clitoris is completely covered by its prepuce and stuck behind it due to narrow apperture, then I would like to point out that this is a disease, a congenital abnormality that is treated by corrective surgery that incidentally looks like clitoral hood slitting. There is only one study that I saw about these cases. It claimed a prevalenec of 20% of patients who were referred to a tertiary gynae clinic complaining of difficulty during sexual intercourse were found to have this problem. If u have some medical knowledge, this should tell u how rare such a condition is.
How male circumcision protects the female sexual partner? It has been proved by loads of medical research- and is beyond no doubt now- that incidence of cancer of the cervix is significantly higher in female sex partners of uncircumcised men. This is thought to be related to the higher chance of transmission of carcinogenic viruses implicated in the occurence of cancer of the cervix namely; Human papilloma virus types 16 and 18. These tend to accumulate under the foreskin at higher concentrations than they would be if the male partner is circumcised. The other main factor is the carcinogenic effect of the male smegma which also accumulates under the foreskin of the uncircumcised male.
I cannot spare time to dig out references again but if you want to see it published somewhere, you can check a standard textbook called "Gynaecology by ten teachers". There, you will find this information and you will find further supportive references if u want.
quote:Originally posted by LaZeeZ: One major thing I noticed about this board is, no matter how long I leave the board, whenever I come back I'm sure I'll see people arguing about one of three subjects : polygyny, or Hijab, or Circumcision.
Depressive
You're right actually. Having gone the round once and a bit now, I'm beginning to feel bored and lose interest. What's the point of wasting time on it if the same people keep repeating the same things.
Also, the shocking thing is having to explain basic facts and not only so but argue about them. If I had a first year med student, he'd know that wounds heal by fibrotic tissue . Anyone who doesnt know would take the doctor's word for it and accept that piece of information......but here, I find people who dont know and dont want to take the word of people who know AND argue against the baseline medical facts....which makes it totally futile really.
Same as those who skim over a book of Islamic something and then come to attack it and argue without having ever looked any deeper or read the other side of the matter thinking that they are providing info to the Muslim world that nobody ever noticed before . One might respect what they were saying if they show proper knowledge and broader awareness of what they aere talking about or, at least, show that they have looked at both sides of the claim and are analysing it.
The way it is, it's totally futile....In Arabic, just a matter of طق حنك Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:10. Is clitoral unhooding as involved a procedure as labiaplasty? And should a woman consider having this procedure done?
Clitoral unhooding (also known as Hoodectomy) is analogous to circumcision in men. It involves reducing the tissue that forms a hood or covering that shields the clitoris. Some surgeons won’t perform this delicate operation because of the innervation (neuron cell density) of the clitoral node is many times more concentrated than in any of the surrounding tissue areas—thus if not done correctly, clitoral unhooding can result in heightened sensation of the node by normal movements, in some cases creating considerable discomfort. However, for surgeons who perform the procedure regularly, clitoral unhooding can result in increased stimulus of the clitoral node and many patients have reported increased sexual climaxes (orgasms). Surgeons who do clitoral unhooding usually have a method of determining the extent of sensitivity of the clitoris before proceeding by testing the area with cold and warm swabs. Patients SHOULD ONLY have this procedure performed by a surgeon who has extensive experience in this area and has performed many clitoral unhoodings.
quote: Hoodectomy, or removal of the fold of skin around the clitoris, is performed to expose the clitoris and make it more sensitive. However, there is little information on outcome, other than anecdotal.
As with many aspects of human anatomy, there are a wide variety of shapes, sizes and appearances of the female genitalia, all of which are within the limits of normal. Before undergoing any surgery, it is important to determine whether there really is a problem with the genitalia or whether another solution would be more rewarding.
quote: Dr. Benson performed a vaginoplasty, a labiaplasty, and a clitoral unhooding. All were performed in Dr. Benson's State-approved Surgical Center, in Bryan, Texas, and they were done at the same time. The combined surgery took a bit over three hours and Dr. Benson employed traditional techniques; using iris scissors to achieve a natural-looking rugated tissue edge (naturally wrinkled) for labiaplasty. There were no complications.
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon:
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: homing
There are FOUR sutures in this procedure, Batman!!! You want to put 4 sutures around the clit we maygeeloosh fibrosis?
quote: In males, the circumcision scar refers to the scar after a male circumcision has healed. In some cases, the scar can be darker-colored, and it will encircle the shaft of the penis.
Problems with the scar
Although circumcision is advertised as a safe medical procedure, it is becoming increasingly controversial in the United States. Although many of the medical benefits of circumcision have been debunked as myths, there is evidence that circumcision can have real medical benefits. A 2005 study in Africa indicated that circumcised men had up to a 60% lower chance of contracting HIV when having sex with infected women, when compared with uncircumcised men. While there may be health benefits in some cases, incorrectly performed circumcisions can lead to painful and disfiguring complications. Botched circumcisions may result in excessive scarring, skin bridges, excessive skin removed and even penectomy with gender reassignment and death. Many men do not know that abnormalities in the appearance of their penises are the results of a botched circumcision.
Occasionally, the scar can swell or become irritated during intercourse. Some men with significant amounts of scarring have used cream to cause the scar to fade.
any anti scaring cream can treat the scar ya homing. the problem of scraing is nothing to be mentioned.
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dalia*:
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: HOming , give me any any study to say it harm????
sorry sahlai i \ dont buy all stuff from WhO or amnesty
u knwo they add this hoodectomy to the stuff as amatter of exaggerataion to stop people doing it only not because it's 100 100 valid study
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine:
any anti scaring cream can treat the scar ya homing. the problem of scraing is nothing to be mentioned. [/QUOTE]
You think that antiscarring creams work?
You think that antiscarring creams can restore function and sensitivity?
Antiscarring creams help the car to fade, i.e., look less obvious but it doesnt make it go away, the nerves do not grow back into it.
And how can u compare males with females. If a male loses sensation over an area of 10% around the penile shaft, does that stop him from having normal sexual intercourse? But if the female who has 4 sutures round her clit, loses the sensation in the whole of the clitoris, how does that compare to the male according to extract u got above?
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: [qb]
Antiscarring creams help the car to fade, i.e., look less obvious but it doesnt make it go away, the nerves do not grow back into it.
Anti-scar agent may be key to nerve regeneration
by Anissa Anderson Orr Stephen Davies, PhD Stephen Davies, PhD
Infusing a naturally occurring anti-scarring agent called decorin into the damaged spinal cords of rats suppresses key molecules that block nerve regeneration after spinal cord injury, said Baylor College of Medicine researchers in a study published in a recent issue of the European Journal of Neuroscience.
The researchers are the first to use decorin in this manner. Decorin derives its name from its appearance in pictures from electron microscopes. It shows up on the collagen network, decorating the collagen fibers.
“Scar tissue that develops at sites of injury stops the regeneration of connections in the adult central nervous system,” said Stephen Davies, PhD, lead author on the study and an assistant professor of neurosurgery and neurosciences at BCM. “Infusion of decorin into spinal cord injuries prevents the formation of proteoglycan-rich scar tissue by suppressing inflammation.”
Misaligned scar tissue that forms at spinal cord injuries physically blocks nerve regeneration. This scar tissue contains molecules called chondroitin sulfate proteoglycans that inhibit nerve fiber growth.
Decorin hinders the action of molecules that promote inflammation, which means that the immune system is responding to an invasion. When a spinal cord injury occurs, these molecules called transforming growth factors are produced. They are thought to promote the formation of scar tissue.
In this study, Davies and his colleagues infused decorin directly into the injury site in rats. To do this, they used a mini-pump system with silica cannulas or tiny tubes 160 microns (1 millionth of a meter) in diameter. The tiny cannulas did not contribute to the formation of scar tissue as bigger tubes would.
Viewing the site of the injury with the help of a high-powered laser scanning microscope and the using protein chemistry to analyze tissue samples, Davies and his co-workers showed that infusion of decorin reduced inflammation, scar formation and the levels of some proteoglycans by as much as 80 to 95 percent. This made it possible for the nerve fibers called axons to grow across spinal cord injuries in just four days.
“We have found a promising new approach to controlling inflammation and scar formation, which will be an important part of future strategies to encourage axon regeneration and recovery after spinal cord injury,” Davies said.
Ok when this product is actually licensed and in the market and phase III clinical trials have been done on it and proved it effective, come back and talk again.
You know I worked for Cancer Research Uk, Batman. In 2003, we had 109 promising products in the lab, only 3 of them made it to the market as licensed effective products.
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote: And how can u compare males with females. If a male loses sensation over an area of 10% around the penile shaft, does that stop him from having normal sexual intercourse?
The head or glans of the clitoris is a simple bundle of 8000 nerve fibers, estimated to be twice the number found in the penis
refflect on this plz
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
7ader, batman....I will forget everything I learned at medschool and reflect on the info u r giving me from wiki.
Posted by Dr. Otomatik (Member # 13356) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: How male circumcision protects the female sexual partner? It has been proved by loads of medical research- and is beyond no doubt now- that incidence of cancer of the cervix is significantly higher in female sex partners of uncircumcised men.
Is any of that research available on the net? Everything I found clearly stated that it is NOT significantly higher. It is higher but no where near enough to reccomend routine cirucmicison. AND there are in fact many in the medical community who clearly stated that there is no relation between lack of crcumcision and penile cancer or cervical cancer.
Overall assessments Lawler, Bisonni and Holtgrave27 used a decision tree to illustrate the consequences of the choice to circumcise or not to circumcise male infants. With the use of the Markov process,119 they simulated the natural history of uncircumcised patients in whom penile cancer develops later in life. They assumed there was no risk of penile cancer after circumcision.
They included in the analysis the risks of death from the surgical procedure, of surgical complications, of UTI, of death from UTI and of penile problems. For the uncircumcised patients, the analysis included the risks of penile problems (e.g., balanitis, phimosis and paraphimosis), of death from the surgical procedure when performed at a later age, of surgical complications, of UTI, of death from UTI and of penile cancer. The incidence of these events was taken from the literature. However, this incidence information varies widely, and reliable data on the incidence of phimosis and the need for circumcision later in life are lacking as a result of differences in diagnostic criteria.97
Given an 85-year life expectancy, these investigators calculated that the expected lifetime cost of routine neonatal circumcision was $164.61 per patient, and the quality-adjusted survival was 84.999 years. For those not circumcised, the expected mean lifetime cost was $139.26 per patient and the quality-adjusted survival was 84.71 years. The investigators therefore concluded there was no medical indication for circumcision or contraindication against it. According to their sensitivity analyses, if the rate of surgical complications of neonatal circumcision fell below the threshold value of 0.6%, then circumcision would be preferred, both in terms of its cost and its favourable effect on lifespan. Similarly, if the risk of penile problems among uncircumcised males rose to 17% from the baseline value of 14%, then circumcision would be preferred from a cost perspective. The authors recognized and emphasized the need for epidemiologically sound data on the surgical complications of circumcision and on the incidence and outcome of therapy for balanitis, phimosis and other penile problems, in order to better assess the risks and benefits.
Ganiats and coworkers28 performed a cost-utility analysis of two hypothetical groups of 1000 neonates, one circumcised and the other uncircumcised. Their analysis included the reported differences in incidence of UTIs and of penile cancer, the estimated costs of treating these diseases, the incidence and cost of later therapeutic circumcision and the costs of neonatal circumcision and its complications. The net discounted lifetime cost of routine circumcision was $102 per man, and the net discounted lifetime cost to health of no circumcision was 14 hours per man. The results suggested that the financial and medical advantages and disadvantages of routine neonatal circumcision cancel each other out, and that personal cultural or religious views, rather than cost or health outcomes, should be the basis for decision making.
Poland10 commented that relatively few medical procedures are routinely recommended for the care of infants and children, and that a good general principle is to withhold the routine application of procedures to large groups unless the benefits clearly far outweigh the risks and costs. Our review of the literature leads us to conclude that, for routine neonatal circumcision, the benefits have not been shown to clearly outweigh the risks and costs.
When information on the medical advantages and disadvantages of neonatal circumcision is presented to parents before they make a decision concerning neonatal circumcision, it results in little change in their decisions.120,121 There is evidence that parents' decision making is based mainly on social, rather than medical, concerns.122 The strongest factor associated with the decision about whether to circumcise a male infant is whether his father was circumcised, and concerns about the attitude of peers and the boy's self-concept are also prominent influencing factors.122 These concerns also need to be discussed during physician counselling of parents. Further information that addresses these concerns is required.
Conclusions
We undertook this literature review to consider whether the CPS should change its position on routine neonatal circumcision from that stated in 1982. The review led us to conclude the following.
-There is evidence that circumcision results in an approximately 12-fold reduction in the incidence of UTI during infancy. The overall incidence of UTI in male infants appears to be 1% to 2%.
-The incidence rate of the complications of circumcision reported in published articles varies, but it is generally in the order of 0.2% to 2%. Most complications are minor, but occasionally serious complications occur. There is a need for good epidemiological data on the incidence of the surgical complications of circumcision, of the later complications of circumcision and of problems associated with lack of circumcision.
-Evaluation of alternative methods of preventing UTI in infancy is required. More information on the effect of simple hygienic interventions is needed.
-Information is required on the incidence of circumcision that is truly needed in later childhood.
-There is evidence that circumcision results in a reduction in the incidence of penile cancer and of HIV transmission. However, there is inadequate information to recommend circumcision as a public health measure to prevent these diseases.
-When circumcision is performed, appropriate attention needs to be paid to pain relief.
-The overall evidence of the benefits and harms of circumcision is so evenly balanced that it does not support recommending circumcision as a routine procedure for newborns. There is therefore no indication that the position taken by the CPS in 1982 should be changed.
-When parents are making a decision about circumcision, they should be advised of the present state of medical knowledge about its benefits and harms. Their decision may ultimately be based on personal, religious or cultural factors.
"The authors found that the RR of penile cancer was 3.2 for uncircumcised men compared with circumcised men (95% CI 1.8 to 5.7). "
This means that the study sample found that uncircumcised men were 3 times more likely to get penile cancer than circumcised men. The 95% confidence interval in brackets is statistical jargon for "If this study is repeated 100 times, we are 95 % confident that the risk will be everytime between 1.8 fold to 5.7 fold." So, actually lack of circumcision increases the risk of penile cancer by up to 5.7 times.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
The same carcinogenic elements that are implicated in penile cancer are involved in cervical cancer. Although in cervical cancer , other etiological factors contribute to the risk in a more prominent way than male circumcision, this does not mean that circumcision can be chucked out of the regression model that is used as a statistical method to assess the risk related to cirrcumcision in prescence of other risk factors. This study shows it:
If you could get hold of gynaecology by ten teachers from your local library, you will find more info and more references in the chapter of cervical cancer.
I know that there are people who would kill to prove that male circumcision is not beneficial and that there is an ongoing debate about this but so far, the evidence is hugely on the side of the protective effect of male circumcision. That is the medical evidence obtainable from medical journals and academic sources. The internet, on the other side, is seen as an easy spread method so campaigners always aim to spread over it as densely as possible to create a certain public view...while medical journals are , of course, subscription based through academic institutions. That's why u cant find the data.
Posted by Dr. Otomatik (Member # 13356) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: I know that there are people who would kill to prove that male circumcision is not beneficial and that there is an ongoing debate about this
Who are those people?
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: but so far, the evidence is hugely on the side of the protective effect of male circumcision.
Please note your eatlier much stronger statement of :
and is beyond no doubt now
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: That is the medical evidence obtainable from medical journals and academic sources. The internet, on the other side, is seen as an easy spread method so campaigners always aim to spread over it as densely as possible to create a certain public view...while medical journals are , of course, subscription based through academic institutions. That's why u cant find the data.
Thanks for saying this again as I didn't want to appear like I am nit-picking.
1-I am not a medical professional nor do I have any knowledge of medical journals or where to get them. 2-I believe I represent the majority of people on the planet in this respect. 3- The use of the Internet is so wide spread( at least in the western world) that it became and excellent medium to deliver information. 4- I sure hope to God that the medical community with their medical research and journals are aware of the aforementioned fact as well as the fact that "campaigners" often try to "create a certain public view" through the Internet .
We can then conclude that the medical community would've failed miserably had they not published their scientific opinions on the Internet. The fact is they did and do publish them either directly or indirectly. What's more important is that, within those medical journals, there exisit opposing veiws on most issues and certainly on circumcision. Take for example the British Medical Journal:
Of course these are articles supporting my argument but I'm sure they have article that support your argument.
Now the copy and past in my last post was from the Canadian Paediatric Society. I doubt you were referring to them when you said "campaigners"! And here is a Statement from the British Association of Paediatric Surgeons, The Royal College of Nursing, The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, The Royal College of Surgeons of England and The Royal College of Anaesthetists.:
Here is an excerpt from a pdf file which you can download off British Association of Paediatric Surgeons' website :
"There is no current evidence to support an increased risk of penile cancer, Human Immunodeficiency Virus infection or cervical cancer in uncircumcised males. Circumcision to prevent Unary Tract Infection (UTI) is unproven except in boys with abnormal renal tract"
I think we can reasonably conclude that the benefit of male circumcision has not been proven "beyond no doubt".
Posted by Dr. Otomatik (Member # 13356) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: In the link you cite in ur message
"The authors found that the RR of penile cancer was 3.2 for uncircumcised men compared with circumcised men (95% CI 1.8 to 5.7). "
This means that the study sample found that uncircumcised men were 3 times more likely to get penile cancer than circumcised men. The 95% confidence interval in brackets is statistical jargon for "If this study is repeated 100 times, we are 95 % confident that the risk will be everytime between 1.8 fold to 5.7 fold." So, actually lack of circumcision increases the risk of penile cancer by up to 5.7 times.
But immediately after it continued:
"However, other factors were also found to be associated with an increased risk of penile cancer. The RR was 2.8 (95% CI 1.4 to 5.5) among men who currently smoked compared with men who had never smoked. In addition, the RRs associated with a history of genital warts, penile rash or penile tear were 5.9 (95% CI 2.1 to 17.6), 9.4 (95% CI 3.8 to 23.9) and 3.9 (95% CI 1.9 to 7.7), respectively. Furthermore, the men with penile cancer reported more sexual partners than those without cancer, and the men with tumours associated with HPV also reported more sexual partners than those whose tumours had a negative result of a test for HPV"
And the paragraph concluded with this :
"These studies support the need for further evaluation of the causal role of hygiene and STDs in penile cancer." Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
It is beyond doubt when u analyse the full extent of the available data.
Before the campaigners started campaigning about male circumcision, u would have had difficulty coming across a study that supports the idea the male circumcision is not beneficial.
However, I'm not about to fight u on this one, u dont like circumcision, dont so it. It's ur choice.
Did u get hold of gynaecology by ten teacher s yet? because I really dont have the kind of time to dig out loads of references everytime someone has a point to make against mine.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dr. Otomatik:
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: In the link you cite in ur message
"The authors found that the RR of penile cancer was 3.2 for uncircumcised men compared with circumcised men (95% CI 1.8 to 5.7). "
This means that the study sample found that uncircumcised men were 3 times more likely to get penile cancer than circumcised men. The 95% confidence interval in brackets is statistical jargon for "If this study is repeated 100 times, we are 95 % confident that the risk will be everytime between 1.8 fold to 5.7 fold." So, actually lack of circumcision increases the risk of penile cancer by up to 5.7 times.
But immediately after it continued:
"However, other factors were also found to be associated with an increased risk of penile cancer. The RR was 2.8 (95% CI 1.4 to 5.5) among men who currently smoked compared with men who had never smoked. In addition, the RRs associated with a history of genital warts, penile rash or penile tear were 5.9 (95% CI 2.1 to 17.6), 9.4 (95% CI 3.8 to 23.9) and 3.9 (95% CI 1.9 to 7.7), respectively. Furthermore, the men with penile cancer reported more sexual partners than those without cancer, and the men with tumours associated with HPV also reported more sexual partners than those whose tumours had a negative result of a test for HPV"
And the paragraph concluded with this :
"These studies support the need for further evaluation of the causal role of hygiene and STDs in penile cancer."
When we talk about risk factors of any disease. There is hardly any disease that can be attributed to a single factor. Every disease has a number of contributing risk factors. To assess the relative contribution of each of these risk factors to the occurence of the disease we use a statistical method called regression model. So being able to detect several risk factors does not cancel out each other. It means that the next research question is : how much would the risk be if one of those factors was eliminated.
The concluding paragraph is a very common way to conclude scientific writing. We teach postgrads writing their thesis to be "confidently uncertain". You give the numbers and then say further research is needed. Because all medical research is based on hypothesis testing and a 95% confidence interval which basically means that in 5% of the time, you will get a mistaken result juts by chance. This is 1 in 20. So if for every 20 studies that support the protective claim of circumcision , u find 1 that says the opposite, this means little more than nothing. Until u find 6/100 studies, u wont be able to make any claims...and even then, the evidence would still be hugely against u. In order that medical opinion take the reverse view, u need to reverese the balance of the available data, which I cant see ever happening, to be honest.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dr. Otomatik: 3- The use of the Internet is so wide spread( at least in the western world) that it became and excellent medium to deliver information. 4- I sure hope to God that the medical community with their medical research and journals are aware of the aforementioned fact as well as the fact that "campaigners" often try to "create a certain public view" through the Internet .
The medical profession has never cared to give the public the details of their scientific research over the internet unless it was a drug company advertising its product. Public health education has always been conducted through an established public health startegy addressng a carefully defined target population in a carefully calculated manner. The public is not expected to be able to understand what odds ratio, risk ratio, relative risk , p values and confidence intervals mean, unless u plan to educate the public in medical statistics as well.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote: Here is an excerpt from a pdf file which you can download off British Association of Paediatric Surgeons' website :
"There is no current evidence to support an increased risk of penile cancer, Human Immunodeficiency Virus infection or cervical cancer in uncircumcised males. Circumcision to prevent Unary Tract Infection (UTI) is unproven except in boys with abnormal renal tract"
I would strongly contest this statement and if u follow the medical literature a bit closely over the coming weeks and months, u will definitely see several contesters. You must at least have seen the recent WHO recommendation on circumcision in relation to HIV all over the web. How do u think they came to such a recommendation with "no" evidence?
The followinf excerpt comes from the same pdf file, so howcome they can go so far as to say "NO evidence". All they do in their analysis is decide to reject the result of the available studies because they dont like the methodlogy. This doesnt make the available studies go away. Authors of those studies are going to come back and defend them and u will see a lively debate around all that presently.
"Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection
The results from existing observational studies showed a strong epidemiological association between male circumcision and prevention of HIV. These observational studies however were done in specific high risk groups. Randomised controlled trials are currently under way and the results are awaited. A Cochrane review found insufficient evidence to support an interventional effect of male circumcision on HIV acquisition in heterosexual men.
Cervical cancer:
Several studies have shown an association between an increased incidence of human papilloma virus infection in heterosexual uncircumcised men with high risk activity (multiple sexual partners, avoidance of condoms) and cervical cancer16-17. These studies are retrospective observational studies from different geographical areas with a variable incidence of cervical cancer. The current evidence is inadequate to recommend routine male circumcision as a preventive measure against cervical cancer.
Urinary tract infection (UTI)
Recent meta analysis18, data on 402,908 children were identified from 12 studies (one randomised controlled trial, four cohort studies, and seven case-control studies). Circumcision was associated with a significantly reduced risk of UTI for all three types of study design. This study concluded that circumcision reduces the risk of UTI. Given a risk in normal boys of about 1%, the number-needed-totreat to prevent one UTI is 111. In boys with recurrent UTI or high grade vesicoureteric reflux, the risk of UTI recurrence is 10% and 30% and the numbers-needed-to-treat are 11 and 4, respectively."
And collectively, if u sum up the risks of all the ihealth problems. let's say for the sake of argument one day it was found that the risk is only truly borderline for each individual health problem. So how much in total protection does 3, 4 or 5 borderline risks amount to?
Smoking has been found to be no doubt behind many health problems and yet tobacco companies are financing studies to prove it isnt!
In the end, it's a free world. Take ur choice and I take mine.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
Also, the position of the British health services is centred around the issue of informed consent of a patient for any procedure or treatment. They contest the right of parents to make a decision of circumcision on behalf of their children when there is no medical indication as opposed to their right to consent to medical or surgical treament when it is absolutely needed. So the medical opinion is influenced by the general ethos that governs medical practice in the country as opposed to absolute research results. You can sense that if u read the last bits of the pdf file.
In the UK, often a patinet's daughter would say '"dont tell him he's got cancer" being protective but this would never work because the patient has to consent formally to treatment while it might work in other countries.
Also, the situation of a tax payer funded National Health System which is struggling with funds the way it is adds some pressure on to the idea of offering elective procedures like circumcision on a large scale when there is no obligatory reason to do it.
All these factors interact for the production of the final position on the matter.
Ultimately, what u r missing over this thread is the main story line. Even if u r prepared to debate the utility of male circumcision, I doubt that u r going to go so far as to claim it is harmful and that loss of the foreskin interferes with a man's quality of life. This in contrast to the position regarding female circumcision which has been proved to be harmful. Therefore, while it is easy to let people who want male circumcision to have it, it is imperative that efforts be put in place to stop the practice of female circumcision. As to people who dont want to have male circumcison, it's their own business.
Posted by welsafty (Member # 5051) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: I'm not going to reply to u , undercover, I addressed all these issues in ur message several times before and I find your style of talking about my prophet totally disgusting and absolutely offensive. At least if u show some respect, I might be able to overcome my disgust and converse with u.
this was the best post I read in this thread so far
Posted by Dr. Otomatik (Member # 13356) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: This in contrast to the position regarding female circumcision which has been proved to be harmful. Therefore, while it is easy to let people who want male circumcision to have it, it is imperative that efforts be put in place to stop the practice of female circumcision. As to people who dont want to have male circumcison, it's their own business.
The problem with that one is Religion. It's a hell of dance trying to convince a religious person that FGM is not mandated in Islam and prove to them that it is harmful, and in the same breath advocate MGM. It makes for a very very weak argument.
As a professional can you tell me of any other body part of that you would recommend routine surgery to have removed and/or modified and why?
Posted by Dr. Otomatik (Member # 13356) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon:
quote:Originally posted by Dr. Otomatik: 3- The use of the Internet is so wide spread( at least in the western world) that it became and excellent medium to deliver information. 4- I sure hope to God that the medical community with their medical research and journals are aware of the aforementioned fact as well as the fact that "campaigners" often try to "create a certain public view" through the Internet .
The medical profession has never cared to give the public the details of their scientific research over the internet unless it was a drug company advertising its product.
But I just posted link to the British Medical Journal! All I would have had to do is pay to get access to the full text. The Canadian Medcial Journal is also avaialbe online and I beleive it's comletely free.
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: The public is not expected to be able to understand what odds ratio, risk ratio, relative risk , p values and confidence intervals mean, unless u plan to educate the public in medical statistics as well.
Thank you I completely agree. And you've just made my point for me Posted by Dr. Otomatik (Member # 13356) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon:
Before the campaigners started campaigning about male circumcision, u would have had difficulty coming across a study that supports the idea the male circumcision is not beneficial.
Now if you have time to reply to any of my posts this would be the one. Who are those "campaigners"? They sound so evil! What exactly is their agenda? And when did they start campaigning?
Posted by Dr. Otomatik (Member # 13356) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: [QUOTE] You must at least have seen the recent WHO recommendation on circumcision in relation to HIV all over the web. How do u think they came to such a recommendation with "no" evidence?
I am aware of it and believe that is was utterly stupid to issue such statement. The statement was based on "Kenyan and Ugandan trial findings regarding male circumcision and HIV". In other words, they failed to combat the spread of HIV in those nations. They're looking for quick easy and CHEAP way and thought something as barbaric as MGM could be the way. They failed to provide education and or raise awareness. They failed to provide basic health care and access to medical drugs.
You want to see how valid that statement is, watch western health professional react to it. No one is going to follow those recommendations as they were intended for Saharan Africa.
Male circumcision was first introduced int the UK to combat masturbation! Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dr. Otomatik:
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: This in contrast to the position regarding female circumcision which has been proved to be harmful. Therefore, while it is easy to let people who want male circumcision to have it, it is imperative that efforts be put in place to stop the practice of female circumcision. As to people who dont want to have male circumcison, it's their own business.
The problem with that one is Religion. It's a hell of dance trying to convince a religious person that FGM is not mandated in Islam and prove to them that it is harmful, and in the same breath advocate MGM. It makes for a very very weak argument.
As a professional can you tell me of any other body part of that you would recommend routine surgery to have removed and/or modified and why?
I believe you are missing the point regarding routine implementation. When we talk about a procedure being introduced routinely into practice, we look at it from the cost effectiveness point of view. How much it's going to cost to do it routinely for everybody as cpmpared to how much it's going to save by sparing us the resulting health problems. Thus routine vaccination against polio is cost effective but routine vaccination against chicken pox may not be so. Now, I'm sure u cant deny that chicken pox is a disease and that there is a vaccine for it available since 1994. But it's just not worth the cost of it from a provider perspective because chicken pox has no serious health consequences usually. The maximum it would save is a few hundred mothers missing few days of work every year which doesnt add up to the cost of vaccination. So, in the same sense, routine male circumcision is not routinely recommended. That is the concept of routine in the studies you've seen.
BUT, neither does it need to be banned....nor a euphemism applied to it as MGM either because from the medical point of view, there is no long term damage associated with removal of the foreskin and a quite a bulk of evidence to the contrary.
Female circumcision, on the other hand, is a totally different story. There is a bulk of evidence that it is harmful when performed and no evidence that it isnt harmful when not performed. This is a perfectly reasonable professional perspective (well, at least form my humble opinion. You're welcome of course to disagree). But I suppose u see now why I take no stance against male circumcision but do take a stance against female circumcision.
So, to answer your question. I wouldnt recommend its routine performance either on account of health or hygiene but I wouldnt dissuade people who want to do it from doing it and would encourage them based on the bulk of evidence pointing towards its protective effect. This isnt a contradictory standpoint, by the way. It is perfectly defendable in terms of statistical figures.
Now, what I see u doing here is bringing the social context into the medical one and expecting the medical professional to take a standpoint based on social/cultural concepts of right and wrong which are more debatable than medical statistics by far . What is seen as right in one culture is wrong in another and nobody has the right to say which side is wrong. I'm not going to adopt the cultural view against anything based on my own cultural perceptions. I would respect the other culture and would only oppose the procedure on medical grounds if any. In lack of medical evidence that "MGM" will leave a man with a long term health problem, people who want to do it should be free to do so.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dr. Otomatik: But I just posted link to the British Medical Journal! All I would have had to do is pay to get access to the full text. The Canadian Medcial Journal is also avaialbe online and I beleive it's comletely free.
It just happens that some medical literature is available freely on the internet but it still isnt pitched at the public. It still is directed at the medical professionals who would be aware of previous research results, data published elsewhere and are able to interpret the figures in the light of the other data. There are more journals that are accessible freely on the internet but they wont come up at the top of a google search. They dont try to advertise themselves or invest into their web design in that way because they rely on the fact that their own readership (professionals) will come to their web address without the need of any of this. They dont seek to make public their content because simply it is too jargony for public and too dependent on other data that the public are not expected to be aware of.
When and why would the medical profession find it necessary to de-jargonize info and publicize it? When it has a specific health impact, like breast cancer awareness , for example. i dont see male circumcision ever coming anywhere close to justifying the expenditure. Health education/awareness programs cost money, u know and public health funding has priorities.
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: The public is not expected to be able to understand what odds ratio, risk ratio, relative risk , p values and confidence intervals mean, unless u plan to educate the public in medical statistics as well.
Thank you I completely agree. And you've just made my point for me [/QUOTE]
I dont understand how I made ur point for u. Maybe I didnt quite get ur point from the start.
If the non medical public are aware that they cant interpret the medical research data, then they shouldnt necessarily want it handy over the internet in its raw form. Also the medical profession dont see it as their role to lend their weight to this or that debate. They see their role is to provide information per individual patient as they come into contact with them; except for public health professionals who have a duty to raise the health awareness of the public and they would prioritize time, effort and money as I said before. When the health problems of male circumcision (if any ) become worth the trouble , u'll see them doing it.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dr. Otomatik:
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon:
Before the campaigners started campaigning about male circumcision, u would have had difficulty coming across a study that supports the idea the male circumcision is not beneficial.
Now if you have time to reply to any of my posts this would be the one. Who are those "campaigners"? They sound so evil! What exactly is their agenda? And when did they start campaigning?
I dont know who the campaigners are. I never pay attention to them long enough to know who they are anyway but I am aware of them hovering at the edge of my hearing and vision with a dedicated position against male circumcision that is ultimately aiming to ban or eradicate the practice. Probably some health professionals are among them as well.Their claims are centred around the ethical aspect and they are trying to strengthen it by drawing attention to studies that have failed to detect a protective effect of circumcision.
I never said they were evil They may be doing what they think is right....but I simply dont agree with them and it just so happens that medical consensus is not going to take a stance against anything without hard data proving the need to do so.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dr. Otomatik:
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: [QUOTE] You must at least have seen the recent WHO recommendation on circumcision in relation to HIV all over the web. How do u think they came to such a recommendation with "no" evidence?
I am aware of it and believe that is was utterly stupid to issue such statement. The statement was based on "Kenyan and Ugandan trial findings regarding male circumcision and HIV". In other words, they failed to combat the spread of HIV in those nations. They're looking for quick easy and CHEAP way and thought something as barbaric as MGM could be the way. They failed to provide education and or raise awareness. They failed to provide basic health care and access to medical drugs.
You want to see how valid that statement is, watch western health professional react to it. No one is going to follow those recommendations as they were intended for Saharan Africa.
Male circumcision was first introduced int the UK to combat masturbation!
Are you sure that the recommendations are only valid for African countries? and are based only on a the two African studies? I very much doubt that the WHO woul up and issue a recommendation overnight based on two studies. This is not how the WHO works. There must be "other evidence". And do you think that the WHO would recommend a procedure that is controversial in terms of safety or long term effects? You might want to check these:
And the following excerpts fromt he WHO statement:
"Objectives The specific objectives of the meeting were: 1. To review the results of the 3 randomised controlled trials and other data on the efficacy, safety and acceptability of male circumcision for HIV prevention. 2. To inform participants about the outcomes and recommendations of several recent meetings leading up to the consultation, including the 'Regional consultation on male circumcision and HIV prevention (Nairobi, November 20-21, 2006), 'Strategies and approaches to male circumcision programming' (Geneva, December 5-6, 2006) and 'Perspectives from social science on male circumcision for HIV prevention' (Durban January 18-19, 2006). 3. To determine the policy and programme implications of the evidence on male circumcision and reduced risk of HIV infection for different settings (in relation to HIV prevalence and patterns of male circumcision)"
"Conclusions and Recommendations Conclusion 1: The research evidence is compelling The research evidence that male circumcision is efficacious in reducing sexual transmission of HIV from women to men is compelling. The partial protective effect of male circumcision is remarkably consistent across the observational studies (ecological, cross-sectional and cohort) and the three randomized controlled trials conducted in diverse settings. The three randomised controlled trials showed that male circumcision performed by well-trained medical professionals was safe and reduced the risk of acquiring HIV infection by approximately 60%. The efficacy of male circumcision in reducing female to male transmission of HIV has been proven beyond reasonable doubt . This is an important landmark in the history of HIV prevention."
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
Posted by ZAME (Member # 12914) on :
April 13, 2007 11:09pm Article from: ReutersFont size: + - Send this article: Print Email A PAKISTANI man faces death by stoning in the United Arab Emirates for committing adultery with four of his stepdaughters.
In the first case of its kind in the UAE, the Federal Supreme Court confirmed the death sentence issued by an Islamic sharia court in the emirate of Ajman, the English-language Gulf News reported.
Police arrested the man, identified only as Abdul Aziz, in 2005 after his youngest and fifth stepdaughter reported the case when he refused to let her marry a local man, it said.
The man, who had 11 children from illicit relationships with his four stepdaughters, admitted his guilt but said he was the father of only some of the children, Gulf News said.
The four stepdaughters had been sentenced and received 80 lashes each, it added.
Like most Arab states, the UAE implements Islamic sharia laws, but rarely executes convicted criminals.
Posted by welsafty (Member # 5051) on :
mm, and what are we supposed to do with this peace of information .. Zani ???
Posted by Dalia* (Member # 10593) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dr. Otomatik:
I am aware of it and believe that is was utterly stupid to issue such statement. The statement was based on "Kenyan and Ugandan trial findings regarding male circumcision and HIV". In other words, they failed to combat the spread of HIV in those nations.
Exactly. There are other, more important, factors to take into consideration when combatting the spread of AIDS in those countries. Focussing on male circumcision in this context doesn't really make any sense, it just distracts from the real issues.
The relationship between abuses of women's rights and their vulnerability to AIDS is acutely clear in Africa, where 58 percent of those infected with HIV are women. Infection rates among adolescent girls and young women in much of Africa are strikingly higher than those of their male counterparts, exposing the disturbing reality that young women face appalling levels abuse and discrimination.
In Uganda, domestic violence prevents women from freely accessing HIV/AIDS information, from negotiating condom use, and from resisting unprotected sex with an HIV-positive partner, yet the government has failed to take any meaningful steps to prevent and punish such abuse.
In Kenya, simply because of their gender, many women AIDS victims sink into poverty and will die even sooner because customs condone evicting women from their homes and taking their property upon their husband's death.
Across the region, there is a clear need for more, better and in-depth information about the patterns of HIV transmission, especially the roles of sex work and of sex between men. On both fronts, scant information has been gathered; this suggests that there is a likelihood that HIV is transmitted through other risky behaviours or in other contexts. For example, in several countries of this region, a combination of inadequate surveillance data and strong sociocultural taboos against sex between men could be hiding sex between men as a factor in HIV transmission. Little is known about HIV transmission in prisons, although available data point to elevated risk in those settings. HIV prevalence of 18% has been reported in prisons in Tripoli, Libya, 2% in Sudan in 2002 and almost 1% in Morocco in 2003 (Sammud, 2005; Ministry of Health Morocco, 2005).
HIV prevention programmes and services remain sporadic in this region. Knowledge of AIDS is generally poor, and preventive practices are rare, even among populations most at high risk of becoming infected. Substantive efforts are clearly needed to introduce more effective HIV prevention strategies in the Middle East and North Africa.
What you are saying, Dalia, is correct in itself but it doesnt change the fact that transmission of AIDS was halved in circumcised as compared to uncircumcised. No one ever claimed that circumcision alone will control AIDS not even the WHO.
The discussion of whether circumcision is a good or a bad thing is one thing and AIDS control strategies is another thing.
You should at least grant the WHO the courtesy of assuming that it is composed of professionals who understand that disease transmission is multifactorial and know about the extent of interaction between one factor and another. I am concerned at the position taken about the WHO being a good organization when it says something we like and a bad one when it says something we dont like!
You seem also to be disregarding the fact that the two American funded studies are run by American scientists on the other side of the ocean and it was those who decided that the results have to be made public earlier than the end of study. This is only ever done when the results are so overwhelming that it becomes ethically unsuitable to withhold them and continue allocating people into the non-circumcision (control) arm of the study!!! This is not a marginal effect we are talking about here.
Posted by welsafty (Member # 5051) on :
come one, haven’t we talked enough about gentiles ?!!! I am getting sick of all the FGM and MGM pence’s and vagina’s talk on this forum foreskin hymen and balls, Why every now and then someone has to talk again about it,
Some people like it and think it is good, other hate it If you like it do it for yourself, your daughters, and marry a clitoris less woman If you hate it, don’t preformed it on your daughter. Don’t marry someone with no clitoris. Talk about something else.
and when did religion become soo cheep to the point that the status of women and how they are treated or respected has to always come down to the private parts.
Posted by American dream (Member # 13390) on :
Welsafty - gentiles are not the same as genitals!
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by welsafty: come one, haven’t we talked enough about gentiles ?!!! I am getting sick of all the FGM and MGM pence’s and vagina’s talk on this forum foreskin hymen and balls, Why every now and then someone has to talk again about it,
Some people like it and think it is good, other hate it If you like it do it for yourself, your daughters, and marry a clitoris less woman If you hate it, don’t preformed it on your daughter. Don’t marry someone with no clitoris. Talk about something else.
and when did religion become soo cheep to the point that the status of women and how they are treated or respected has to always come down to the private parts.
Isn't it such an obvious thing, Welsafty? It's strange that a large proportion of westerners always focus on this aspect when addressing Muslim women rights and status as if that's what all a woman is about and all she is for. I would say that is a totally derogatory look towards women. At the same time, the same westerners do not focus on how much Islam has dignified women when it comes to other important life issues. If I say this is often used as a ruse to distract from the reality of Islam's dignifying of women, I'd be accused of buying into the consiparcy therory!
But as u say the other strange thing is that often people are not satisfied by making their own minds up about something to their own satisfaction and expressing their reasons for it but also want to force their views on the rest of creation.
Posted by welsafty (Member # 5051) on :
quote:Originally posted by American dream: Welsafty - gentiles are not the same as genitals!
oh yaaa, you are right. my bad
BY THE WAY: It is called "The World's Nightmare" not "American dream" Posted by humanist (Member # 12798) on :
quote:Originally posted by ZAME: April 13, 2007 11:09pm
The four stepdaughters had been sentenced and received 80 lashes each, it added.
Nice. Posted by The Conditioned (Member # 12020) on :
No text.
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
quote:Originally posted by welsafty: BY THE WAY: It is called "The World's Nightmare" not "American dream"
How so?-- considering the US has among the highest rates of human rights unlike many other nations such as Sudan.
Posted by The Conditioned (Member # 12020) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: At the same time, the same westerners do not focus on how much Islam has dignified women when it comes to other important life issues. If I say this is often used as a ruse to distract from the reality of Islam's dignifying of women, I'd be accused of buying into the consiparcy therory!
Thing is though Pigeon, Islam dignifies women in theory, but not in practice..
In many Islamic countries, women do have less rights than men do, and are treated as second class citizens much of the time.
The very laws that Muhammad meant to dignify women, are being used AGAINST them to keep them down by seemingly misinterpreting or denying them on purpose.
It is a fact that women in Western democratic nations today have more rights and freedoms than in any country, and at ANY TIME throughout History.
Yet these very same Western Democratic nations are not Islamic at all.
They are all secular.
Why is this?
You may argue that it's not Islam's fault why men in Islamic nations dominate women, but on the same token, why even claim that Islam "dignifies" women when it's not even happening in reality?
It's like the Bible saying "All Men are created equal," yet we all know that Christian nations engaged in slavery in the past.
It is evident that Religion and Morality are not synonymous with each other.
Moral people never commit offense against other people, man or woman.
But religious people do, often using their religion as justification.
I hope you don't find this offensive, but this is just the perspective of one non Muslim, non religious Westerner
~There is no space between us; but the crossings are infinite Posted by Undercover (Member # 12979) on :
The attitudes of Muslims to women are, in some respects, central to the religion. As Salman Rushdie wrote after the London bombings: "The Koran was revealed at a time of great change in the Arab world, the 7th-century shift from a matriarchal nomadic culture to an urban patriarchal system. It is possible to read the Koran as a plea for the old matriarchal values in the new patriarchal world, a conservative plea that became revolutionary because of its appeal to all those whom the new system disenfranchised, the poor, the powerless."
Before [Islam], arrived in the 7th century C.E., Arabia was governed by queens, matriarchal for over a thousand years of recorded history. "The land's original Allah was Al-lat, part of the female trinity along with Kore or Q're, the Virgin and Al-Uzza, the Powerful One, the triad known as Manat, the Threefold Moon." (p. 51, "Women's Encyclopedia of Myths and Secrets" by Barbara G. Walker)
In pre-Islamic Mecca the goddesses Uzza, al-Manāt and al-Lāt were known as "the daughters of god". Uzzā was worshipped by the Nabataeans, who equated her with the Graeco-Roman goddesses Aphrodite, Urania, Venus and Caelestis. Each of the three goddesses had a separate shrine near Mecca. Uzzā, was called upon for protection by the pre-Islamic Quraysh. "In 624 at the battle called "Uhud", the war cry of the Qurayshites was, "O people of Uzzā, people of Hubal!" (Tawil 1993).
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
فوائد الختان الشرعي:
1. تثبيت شرع الله سبحانه وتعالى وسنة نبيه صلى الله عليه وسلم.
2. تثبيت البديل الشرعي لمحاربة عادة ضارة (الختان الفرعوني)، مع مراعاة النواحي الاجتماعية والنفسية الناتجة عن التخلي المطلق عن الختان.
3. إعلاء شعيرة العبادة (الختان الشرعي) لا العادة (الختان الفرعوني).
4. مزيد الطهارة والنظافة، فإن القلفة من المستقذرات عند العرب. وقد كثر ذم الأقلف في أشعارهم، فهي تحبس النجاسة، فيصعب نقاء دماء الحيض والبول مما يؤدي إلى الروائح الكريهة ووجود النجاسة [فتح الباري، ص10].
5. ذهاب القلفة والشبق، وهي تعني شدة الشهوة والانشغال بها والإفراط فيها فذهابها يعني تعديل الشهوة عند المختونين من الرجال والنساء.
6. انخفاض حدوث السرطان للمختونين من الرجال والنساء.
7. التخفيض من كثرة استعمال العادة السرية لدى البالغين. لأن إفرازات القلفة تثير الأعصاب التناسلية حول الحشفة وتدعو المراهق إلى حكها والاستزادة من مداعبة عضوه.
8. منع التهابات نتيجة تجمع اللخن والميكروبات تحت قلفة الذكور والإناث [ختان الإناث في الطب والإسلام د. آمال أحمد البشير ص 24، وتأصيل ختان الإناث د. ست البنات خالد ص 9 – ورقة طبية قدمت في سمنار ختان الإناث بجامعة أم درمان الإسلامية وبالمجمع الفقهي].
أضرار الختان غير الشرعي (الفرعوني):
1. مخالفة الشرع في كيفيته.
2. تشويه وتغيير لخلق الله بقطع جزء أو أجزاء من أعضاء المرأة التناسلية. قال تعالى: (لقد خلقنا الإنسان في أحسن تقويم)[سورة التين: 4]. وقد لعن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم المُغيِّرات خَلْقَ الله.
3. الأضرار الصحية التي تتمثل في النزيف، الالتهابات، الأكياس والخراج، احتباس البول في الأيام الأولى، تعسر الولادة، تأثر الجنين بتعثر الولادة، حمى النفاس بعد الولادة، تهتك العجان، تكرار العدل.
4. الأضرار النفسية، الصدمة النفسية، الخوف والهلع عند الزواج والإنجاب مع صعوبة المعاشرة الزوجية.
5. الأضرار الاجتماعية؛ للزواج بالأجنبيات، الطلاق [الأبعاد النفسية والاجتماعية لختان البنات، د. آمنة عبد الرحمن. تأصيل ختان البنات (ورقة طبية) د. آمنة خالد].
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
Medical Studies
To the best of my knowledge, there have been four medical studies of circumcision of the clitoral hood (prepuce). The earliest report concerns a procedure that does not actually remove the clitoral prepuce, but stretches it in such a way as to obtain the result that "It is seldom that the prepuce will overgrow again once it has been opened." The other three report on results obtained from the actual surgical removal of the clitoral prepuce. All four report a striking percentage of those who had the procedure done experience enhanced sexual enjoyment.
McDonald, C. F. "Circumcision of the Female." General Practitioner 18.3 (September, 1958). 98-99. (Claims to have circumcised "perhaps 40 patients," including some adult women. Among the adult women who underwent the procedure, "Very thankful patients were the reward. For the first time in their lives, sex ambition became normally satisfied" [98].)
Rathmann, W. G. "Female Circumcision, Indications and a New Technique." General Practitioner 20.3 (September, 1959). 115-120. (Sent out a questionnaire to women whose prepuces he had removed, and received 112 replies. Of the 72 women who reported having never experienced an orgasm prior to the surgery, 9 [12.4%] reported continued failure to achieve orgasm; 64 [87.6%] reported successful achievement of orgasm after the surgery. Of the 39 who reported achieving orgasm only with difficulty prior to the surgery, 5 [12.5%] reported no improvement; 34 [87.5%] reported improvement after the surgery. Rathmann provides a number of indications and contraindications for the surgery, and invented a new clamp for the procedure.
Wollman, Leo."Hooded Clitoris: Preliminary Report." The Journal of the American Society of Psychosomatic Dentistry and Medicine 20.1 (1973), 3-4. (Provides a "Statistical analysis of one hundred cases." Not clear whether the statistics Wollman reports include all one hundred women [32 of whom were not circumcisedösee below] or a statistical report of those who were circumcised. In this study, he reports the frequency of sexual intercourse before treatment as 3 times per week on average; after treatment as 5 times per week on average. 49 women were able to attain orgasm prior to treatment; 92 after. 92 subjectively report improvement in intensity of sexual response, rapidity of sexual response, and/or greater number of orgasms; 7 subjectively report no change, and 1 subjectively reports being worse off. The longest time since treatment was 20 years; 64 patients were followed up after 5 years since treatment. The treatment occurred in Wollman's office 98 times; in the hospital [at patient's request] 2 times.)
_______. "Female Circumcision." The Journal of the American Society of Psychosomatic Dentistry and Medicine 20.4 (1973), 130-131. (Reports on one hundred consecutive patients referred to him by psychoanalysts and clinical psychologists. "Sixty eight benefited by surgical female circumcision: of the remaining thirty-two, twenty-eight showed no need for this procedure; four refused to be treated by this technique.")
Crist, Takey. "Female Circumcision." Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality 11.8 (August, 1977), 77. (Reports on Crist's circumcision of fifteen women, and provides a list of four conditions for when the surgery would be indicated: "a) they could achieve orgasm only by masturbation and/or oral sex, b) they could have orgasm in the lateral or female-superior positions only, c) they stated, "it feels good, I get there, but suddenly it's over," d) they had a positive cotton-tip test, where patients felt a distinct difference when a cotton-tipped applicator was applied directly to the clitoris when the foreskin was retracted as opposed to application to the foreskin" [77]. Crist's study concludes, "Patients who have undergone this procedure have generally commented that they have enhanced sexual response.") III. Comparison of the Glans of the Clitoris with the Glans of the Penis Scott, F. Brantley. "Nerve Endings in Glans Clitoris vs. Glans Penis." Medical Aspects of Human Sexuality. 15.7 (July, 1981), 88. (Several argumentsösome, by famous sexologists, such as Masters and Johnsonöhave been published over the years claiming that the removal of the clitoral hood should not be compared to the removal of the male foreskin, on the ground that the clitoral glans was much more sensitive to stimulation than the male glans. Scott's brief answer to a question sent to the journal would appear to count against any such claim: "Anatomic studies have shown that on a per centimeter surface area, the number of nerve endings in the glans clitoris is equal to that in the same surface area of the glans penis" [88]. The same evidence would seem to support the surgical removal of the clitoral hood, for women who find its presence has the effect of dampening stimulation, on the simple ground that the clitoral glans is so much smaller, and thus offers less opportunity for stimulation than does the male glans.) Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
after we read th studie i quote upove. and let's tie with wat is it sunna. what is in sunna is to trim the clitoral hood to increase/adjust the feeling of the females during copultaion...
the sunna has nothing to say cut the clit but only to trim the clitoral hood this is what is kn as " female sunna circumsiosn"
other idiotic ignorant stuff that cut any other stuff in the female organs is not islamic....
Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
Batman,
Your obsession with this subject is too weird for words. It creeps me out. Please stop - it makes you look like some kind of fetish freak. Enough. Khalas. Get help, dude. Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by SayWhatYouSee: Batman,
Your obsession with this subject is too weird for words. It creeps me out. Please stop - it makes you look like some kind of fetish freak. Enough. Khalas. Get help, dude.
the intention is good to help women enjoy sex for the 1st time in thier lives
may b i can get Noble prize from such medical study Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
Batman,
Women have been and are enjoying sex, without your unhealthy concern or barbaric surgery. I have never heard of even one woman who 'needed' to have such a surgical procedure . The necessity for this operation is so rare that you would be better spending time advising women how to cope, if abducted by aliens. You shift and twist your position, according to the degree of outrage expressed, but your true feelings are transparent. You think FGM is Islamic. It is barbaric, sick and harms women. Thank goodness there are only a few 'men' on this forum who believe this utter RUBBISH. The more I read, the more I wonder if you, Sultan and a few other suspects are the same troll. Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by SayWhatYouSee: Batman,
Women have been and are enjoying sex
LOL GOOD JOKE
quote:Originally posted by SayWhatYouSee: I have never heard of even one woman who 'needed' to have such a surgical procedure .
R U SEXOLOGIST YA SWYS? Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
Are you gay, Batman? I'm not trying to insult you, as being gay is not a term I would use derogatively. You appear to be afraid of women. Why do you feel the need to advocate the butchery of females? Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by SayWhatYouSee: Are you gay, Batman? I'm not trying to insult you, as being gay is not a term I would use derogatively. You appear to be afraid of women.
IF THAT QUESTION IS INNOCENT NOPE AM NOT A GAY
AM NOT AFRAID OF WOMEN. BY THE WAY R GAYS AFRAID OF WOMEN?
Why do you feel the need to advocate the butchery of females?
MAY B CUZ FEMINISTIC WHO ADVOCATE BUTCHERY OF MALE N CREATE DOUBLE STANDARDS WAT DO U THINK? GUESS WAT MAY B AM BUTCHER HEHEH
WAKE UP DUDETTE, WOMEN SHOUDL HAVE SEX LIKE MAN Posted by The Conditioned (Member # 12020) on :
Are female circumcision advocates advocating the removal of the HOOD?
Or are they wanting to mess with the CLIT itself?
This is an important distinction.
If they are talking about the removal of the hood, then it's not a big deal, and could result in enhanced sexual pleasure for the woman because the sheath on her clit has been removed.
However, if they are talking about messing with the clitoris itself, then they should shoot themselves!
I didn't have the inclination to read through this entire thread with all of the cut and paste articles to find what the pro female circumcision crowd has been advocating
Anyway, female circumcision as practiced by Medical doctors in the West is completely different from what you see in African nations where the "surgery" is performed by some "tribal elder" with a dull, rusty tool who doesn't have a f*cking clue about the basics of Medicine and female sexual anatomy.
~There is no space between us; but the crossings are infinite Posted by humanist (Member # 12798) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Conditioned: Are female circumcision advocates advocating the removal of the HOOD?
Or are they wanting to mess with the CLIT itself?
This is an important distinction.
If they are talking about the removal of the hood, then it's not a big deal, and could result in enhanced sexual pleasure for the woman because the sheath on her clit has been removed.
However, if they are talking about messing with the clitoris itself, then they should shoot themselves!
I didn't have the inclination to read through this entire thread with all of the cut and paste articles to find what the pro female circumcision crowd has been advocating
Anyway, female circumcision as practiced by Medical doctors in the West is completely different from what you see in African nations where the "surgery" is performed by some "tribal elder" with a dull, rusty tool who doesn't have a f*cking clue about the basics of Medicine and female sexual anatomy.
~There is no space between us; but the crossings are infinite
Hey Alistair,
Glad you make the distinction but you need to know that the vast majority of women do not need to have their HOOD's removed! As Homing pointed out, while there may be exceptional cases where an overdeveloped or excessive hood actually is preventing the woman from fulfilling her sexual satisfaction this is NOT THE NORM!
Furthermore, the advocates of FGM such as Batty and Sultan first began their argument that removal of a part of the clitoris is SUNNA because it CURBS and CONTROLS a female's sexual desire. It is obvious that the Sheiks they run and cry to have now tried to backpeddle on this issue with all the international heat they are catching and now trying to use examples of Western clitorectomies (where the hood has been removed to enhance desire) as an argument for FGM. First they say, to curb desire is Sunnah and now they try to say, enhancing desire is Sunnah AND IT IS ALL A BUNCH OF BULLSHIT.
And as you so rightly pointed out, most of these morons are having their daughters butchered by midwife types and/or physicians who are poorly trained about female anatomy and sexuality.
And we all know you know your clit's well Alistair. That's what we love about you. Posted by The Conditioned (Member # 12020) on :
quote:Originally posted by humanist: Hey Alistair,
Glad you make the distinction but you need to know that the vast majority of women do not need to have their HOOD's removed! As Homing pointed out, while there may be exceptional cases where an overdeveloped or excessive hood actually is preventing the woman from fulfilling her sexual satisfaction this is NOT THE NORM!
Yes O' Seeker of Truth, I'm aware that most women don't need to have their hoods removed
Much in the same way that most men don't need to have their foreskin removed..
Why would we be born with a clitoral hood or a foreskin if God wanted us to chop them off?
But I just wanted to know what exactly was being debated, because there is a HUGE difference between removal of the hood, and removal (even partial) of the clitoris.
quote:Furthermore, the advocates of FGM such as Batty and Sultan first began their argument that removal of a part of the clitoris is SUNNA because it CURBS and CONTROLS a female's sexual desire. It is obvious that the Sheiks they run and cry to have now tried to backpeddle on this issue with all the international heat they are catching and now trying to use examples of Western clitorectomies (where the hood has been removed to enhance desire) as an argument for FGM. First they say, to curb desire is Sunnah and now they try to say, enhancing desire is Sunnah AND IT IS ALL A BUNCH OF BULLSHIT.
Ahh. This doesn't surprise me at all.. I wondered what Battyman was going on about when he started posting Medical Reports of clitoral hood removal; which is completely different from FGM.
Actually, this was what prompted me to ask what the hell the pro female circumcision crowd was advocating.
quote:And we all know you know your clit's well Alistair. That's what we love about you.
For God's sake woman, you make it sound like I have a bloody clit myself
Actually I do in a way I suppose. A penis is basically a much larger INVERTED clitoris, and a clitoris is a much smaller inverted penis
~There is no space between us; but the crossings are infinite Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote: . I wondered what Battyman was going on about when he started posting Medical Reports of clitoral hood removal; which is completely different from FGM.
ya alistair feministic WHO may cut ur inverted penis if u tell hoodectomy is not FGM Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by humanist:
Furthermore, the advocates of FGM such as Batty and Sultan first began their argument that removal of a part of the clitoris is SUNNA because it CURBS and CONTROLS a female's sexual desire. [/QB]
yeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaah humanist
i never advocate cutting the clitoris i teel about clitoral hoodectomay whch will satiasfy the female sexuality n control her desire as a result.
like when women don enjoy sex they have desire in their brains but no satisfaction so wat. they desire gonna b out of control cuz they can not recieve any saifaction.
soooo yes circumsion( hoodectomy) control her sexual desire on other words it give her a chance to have sex feel
Posted by humanist (Member # 12798) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Conditioned: [/qb]
For God's sake woman, you make it sound like I have a bloody clit myself
[/QB][/QUOTE]
Nah, just that you know them intimately well.....how about starting a consulting business...I'll pay for Batty and Sultan's first lesson...no wait, for their entire course! Posted by Dr. Otomatik (Member # 13356) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: So, to answer your question. I wouldnt recommend its routine performance either on account of health or hygiene but I wouldnt dissuade people who want to do it from doing it and would encourage them based on the bulk of evidence pointing towards its protective effect. This isnt a contradictory standpoint, by the way. It is perfectly defendable in terms of statistical figures.
I agree for the most part but again my opinion is to not even encourage.
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: Now, what I see u doing here is bringing the social context into the medical one and expecting the medical professional to take a standpoint based on social/cultural concepts of right and wrong which are more debatable than medical statistics by far
No I'm not. This point was completely separate from what I believe to be lack of medical evidence tipping the scale in favour of circumcision. I mentioned it in passing and as something that struck me as illogical but I don't see it as worth arguing.
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: In lack of medical evidence that "MGM" will leave a man with a long term health problem,
I have read medical research pointing toward circumcison affecting the quality of life of men who had the procedure done. Not health problems and certainly nothing to be compared to FGM. In time I wouldn't be surprised if research shows that it has adverse affect.
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon:
I dont understand how I made ur point for u. Maybe I didnt quite get ur point from the start.
If the non medical public are aware that they cant interpret the medical research data, then they shouldnt necessarily want it handy over the internet in its raw form.
My point is, based on the information available to the general public there's no evidence to support the benefit of circumcision. Everything I posted stated exactly that. The fact that you can read in them something other than what was clearly stated in simple English is irrelevant. We simply look for simple and clear statement.
For example when the British Association of Paediatric Surgeons states the following, it is over. Most of the general public in UK will take that and not be interested in the rest of the research.
"There is no current evidence to support an increased risk of penile cancer, Human Immunodeficiency Virus infection or cervical cancer in uncircumcised males. Circumcision to prevent Unary Tract Infection (UTI) is unproven except in boys with abnormal renal tract"
What you did was tell me that based on research that is not easily available to me and one that I am unlikely to understand, all those statements I read and posted are flawed or flat out wrong. That unknown campaigners with unknown agendas have been putting out false information for some unknown reasons! All very mysterious.....all very scary
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: Are you sure that the recommendations are only valid for African countries? and are based only on a the two African studies?
It is my opinion that the recommendations were aimed at Sub-Sharan Africa as I am certain no western health authority would ever consider adopting them. People would laugh at them. And yes, everything I read clearly stated that the research was based on those African studies.
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: I very much doubt that the WHO woul up and issue a recommendation overnight based on two studies. This is not how the WHO works. There must be "other evidence". And do you think that the WHO would recommend a procedure that is controversial in terms of safety or long term effects? You might want to check these:
LOL, unlike you I don't presume that there must be "other evidence". I believe their decision was politically motivate(campaigners with secret agendas ). I am not in any way convinced of their position on circumcision as a way to combat HIV. If they are ever able to get this going what is going to happen is people will get circumcised and continue to engage hi risk sexual activities believing they're now immune. And who's going to perform the circumcision? They can hardly provide them with basic medical care now they're going to have extra staff to perform the surgery and follow up care, all within WTO(western) standards! Really?
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
No, I am most definitely not "assuming" the prescence of other evidence. I KNOW there is other evidence. I presented you with some. I cant understand how you missed them. What's more the WHO state that in their report. I copied the sentences and highlighted them. This is typical cheryy picking. If I like this study, it exists. If I dont like this study, it never happened.
And I am under the impression that I explained what the Paeditraic Society means by saying no need for "routine" male circumcision for health or hygiene and gave the example of chicken pox vaccinatin and no need for routine vaccination against chicken pox. I would have thought this is clear enough to understand.But again, you are cherry picking. So British public will stop doing circumcision soley for its protective effect or its health benefits? I have no problem with that. I never said to do it just to be able to clean the glans!!
There is a world of difference between the following two sentences:
1- " Is it worth doing circumcision routinely for every male child on account of health or hygiene?"
2- "Is it worth banning male circumcision on account of health reasons?"
While the answer to the first is : not particularly, because the available evidence does not warrant routinity, the answer to the second is : hardly because the available evidence does not point that way but to the other i.e. that circumcision has its benefits
I dont think I'm obliged to go on clarifying this any further.
As to the spooky "secret"campaigners (I have no idea how campagining can happen in secret but no problem, if u say I said so !), look me in the eye and tell me that activists against circumcision dont exist, that the site called nocirc or something along those lines dont exist ....and u dont exist ..... Really, making fun of something someone says and trying to make it sound ridiculous doesnt change facts. The fact that I ignore them and never pay attention to who they are doesnt make them "secret"...it just shows u that there is at least one medical professiona who thinks them irrelevent. Again, You're free to disagree.
I lost interest in this conversation. I am used to discussing research results with people I dont need to explain them to and who have enough academic integrity to look at the whole picture AND do not rely on sarcasm to undermine the opposing opinion.
When it comes to that, I dont see why I should carry on talking. The public can have whatever opinion they want but its the medical profession who change the policy.
Posted by LaZeeZ (Member # 10655) on :
Homing Pigeon, are you a doctor?
Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine:
quote:Originally posted by SayWhatYouSee: Are you gay, Batman? I'm not trying to insult you, as being gay is not a term I would use derogatively. You appear to be afraid of women.
IF THAT QUESTION IS INNOCENT NOPE AM NOT A GAY
AM NOT AFRAID OF WOMEN. BY THE WAY R GAYS AFRAID OF WOMEN?
Why do you feel the need to advocate the butchery of females?
MAY B CUZ FEMINISTIC WHO ADVOCATE BUTCHERY OF MALE N CREATE DOUBLE STANDARDS WAT DO U THINK? GUESS WAT MAY B AM BUTCHER HEHEH
WAKE UP DUDETTE, WOMEN SHOUDL HAVE SEX LIKE MAN
Batman you are quite right to defend gay men. I agree that the word 'afraid' was badly chosen, in the given context. I didn't intend to imply that all gay men were afraid of women. I know this is not true. What I meant to say was that I have observed some gay men (by no means the majority) make negative comments about female genitalia. Your views on sexuality are plain freaky. I have seen you describe butchered girls as '"hot and cute.'' FGM is barbaric and you know it, but try to pretend that women benefit from less drastic levels, to cover up your sinister desire to repress sexuality. You and your few soundalikes have squirmed like worms on a hook, retreating from previous statements supporting FGM, as a means of controlling sexuality. You think such distortion is effective. It isn't.
I have no double standards for men and women. Male circumcision is a cultural practice, not a medical necessity, for the majority of the male population. The numbers needing surgery are small, compared to the procedures being carried out. The number of girls or women needing surgery is so low that it is not worth mentioning. It has only been brought into this debate, to counter the morons using the rare need for such procedures, in an attempt to justify mass FGM. I repeat, I have never known even one woman whom has required such a procedure. Your knowledge of human sexuality is severely lacking. Your interpretation is just sickening.
So, if you are not gay, are you Sultan? I see little to separate your views. I have a few other suspects, 'Fess' up, Batman, or The Chippendales are being sent to your cave. Josette has been outed . Might just be your turn soon. Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
RESTART UR CPUTER swys NOW A WORM IS IN
Posted by Djehuti (Member # 6698) on :
^LOL How did this discussion turn from the status of women in Islam into gays?
Posted by LaZeeZ (Member # 10655) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^LOL How did this discussion turn from the status of women in Islam into gays?
I was about to give you some ES introduction but then I noticed you have more posts here than me.
I'll give you something else>>>> Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: RESTART UR CPUTER swys NOW A WORM IS IN
There are quite a few worms in ES, ya Batman. Impotent little worms don't worry me in the least. U Restart UR computer, before I 'skelp yer lugs.' Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
lazeez how r u?
yes homing is a doctor
she did write here shes a doctor. Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^LOL How did this discussion turn from the status of women in Islam into gays?
Tis the magic of ES.
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
quote:Originally posted by SayWhatYouSee:
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: RESTART UR CPUTER swys NOW A WORM IS IN
There are quite a few worms in ES, ya Batman. Impotent little worms don't worry me in the least. U Restart UR computer, before I 'skelp yer arse.'
u gotta electric shock when u kelp my arse Posted by SayWhatYouSee (Member # 11552) on :
I edited it to 'lugs' ya - so go figure.
And it is 'SKELP' Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by The Conditioned: Thing is though Pigeon, Islam dignifies women in theory, but not in practice..
In many Islamic countries, women do have less rights than men do, and are treated as second class citizens much of the time.
The very laws that Muhammad meant to dignify women, are being used AGAINST them to keep them down by seemingly misinterpreting or denying them on purpose.
It is a fact that women in Western democratic nations today have more rights and freedoms than in any country, and at ANY TIME throughout History.
Yet these very same Western Democratic nations are not Islamic at all.
They are all secular.
Why is this?
You may argue that it's not Islam's fault why men in Islamic nations dominate women, but on the same token, why even claim that Islam "dignifies" women when it's not even happening in reality?
It's like the Bible saying "All Men are created equal," yet we all know that Christian nations engaged in slavery in the past.
It is evident that Religion and Morality are not synonymous with each other.
Moral people never commit offense against other people, man or woman.
But religious people do, often using their religion as justification.
I hope you don't find this offensive, but this is just the perspective of one non Muslim, non religious Westerner
~There is no space between us; but the crossings are infinite
Hi,Alistair. I respect your opinion but I still dont agree. While I acknowledge your right to chose "no religion" as a personal stance , I cant see the logic of holding religion responsible for the way people twist it...i.e. If people routinely screw up religions, it cant mean that we better not have religion. Maybe we better not have people ...Seriously, if religion was a man and he was consistently being misrepresented by Mr. Religious where Mr. Religious falsely claims that every atrocity he commits is Mr.Religion's instructions. Then one day Mr. Religion decides to sue Mr.Religious, what would be the fair ruling?
No, seriously,now, I promise ..... You say that religions and morality clash and I query this statement because I cant accept that there is something innately evil in any religion. All religions revolve around offering their followers a cut and dried way of life based on goodness. What moral people call right and wrong/moral and immoral is the halal and haram of any religion (lawful and sin). I think this is where you disagree with me because u see that some religions condone immoral acts. I dont agree because I believe that religions dont but there will always be people in the world who would want to blur the edges in order to squeeze in their own fucked up views. If we leave the world without religions, these people will find another reason to do the same thing. They'll claim it is one of the pillars of morality! It's true that some people commit atrocities from a moral standpoint;look at animal activists and look at the at the concept of freedom fighting and I'm sure there are lots of examples. My claim is based on the idea that moral people who have a solid sense of responsibility and honour will behave well with or without religion. The rascals will behave badly with or withour religion but there is a group of people in the middle who just need an extra reason to behave well and religion gives them this. So I think on the whole, the world is doing better with religion than without.
Now talking about women's rights is a different matter.Take religion out of the equation and have agood look. Even the West have not been treating women well for such a long time as it is (check the state of women's rights in 19th century Britain).....and really, we should take a close look at the reality of women's lives in the west and elsewhere. I believe that there is a profound cross-cultural ignorance and generalisations are being applied based on anecdotal information. Lets take domestic violence, for example. Domestic violence exists in the west. It isnt the sole property of religious people in third world countries....I would even confirm that in the Egyptian culture, a man hitting a woman is seen as the lowest of the low. It's totally unacceptable in all levels of society. It's part of the cultural code. You just dont hit a woman. If u even watch the movies,old and new, u will often find the phrase "R u going to raise ur hand on a woman?" indignantly thrown about. But for some oblique reason I find that Egyptians or Muslims generally are accused of condoning domestic violence....while we forget the rate of such things in western countries. Official position aside, what is the reality on the ground, Alistair? The differenc is not that huge.
Again, women's work....Am I not an Arab Muslim woman? I am having difficulty convincing my husband and my parents that I'd like to give up my career, for God's sake. I never had to fight my way to a career. I was practically manhandled into it and I cant even buy my way out.
I'm not saying the position of women in religious countries is ideal but neither it is as bad as u people seem to think......and , more importantly, neither is life ideal for a woman in western societies. Ah, I remembered something that I find absolutely demeaning for women in western countries; the "show me your assets" culture all over the place! A woman is nothing but boobs and ass; a sex object. In Muslim countries, the whole ethos is against this. People are not allowed to judge women by the size of their bras and when women cover up or wear decent clothes it is basically about refusing to be treated as a sex object.It's strange how westerners perceive this as exactly the opposite of what it is....so u see, there is a lot of misunderstandiong going on.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by SayWhatYouSee:
quote:Originally posted by Djehuti: ^LOL How did this discussion turn from the status of women in Islam into gays?
Tis the magic of ES.
Characteristically, no thread ever sticks to the title. The day this happens on this board, u have to realize something's gone awfully wrong! Posted by Dalia* (Member # 10593) on :
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon:
I would even confirm that in the Egyptian culture, a man hitting a woman is seen as the lowest of the low. It's totally unacceptable in all levels of society. It's part of the cultural code. You just dont hit a woman. If u even watch the movies,old and new, u will often find the phrase "R u going to raise ur hand on a woman?" indignantly thrown about.
Alarming portrayals
How does Egyptian television portray violence against women? Lina Mahmoud investigates
On 8 May the New Woman Research Centre (NWRC) and the Media House (MH), an independent video production company, held a meeting entitled "Together We Can Confront Violence Against Women" to release the results of a media monitoring project conducted by both organisations during Ramadan 2002.
The project is the first of its scale to study the way the Egyptian media portrays violence against women. "The project comes at a time when there is a general political trend that recognises the importance of women as an integral part of society. Efforts are being made to combat things that impede women from participating effectively in society," said Nawla Darwish of the NWRC.
The MH, the NWRC and a group of participants including professors of mass communication conducted a study of 18 television dramas shown on Egyptian national television during Ramadan 2002. Among the serials watched were Asa'd Ragul fi Al-Alam (The Happiest Man in the World), Al-Atar wa Al-Saba'a Banat (The Herbalist and His Seven Daughters), Qassem Amin, Ayna Qalbi (Where is My Heart?), Amira fi Abdeen (A Princess in Abdeen), together with six films shown on the two main Egyptian channels, Channel One and Channel Two. Among these films were Al Hafid (the Grandson), Al Zawga 13 (Wife Number 13).
The group counted the number of cases of violence shown on the programmes. The study was conducted during the month of Ramadan because it is the month with the highest television viewer rates. According to Darwish, "Audiovisual media has a great influence in shaping the collective consciousness of Egyptians. The extremely high illiteracy rates in Egypt, among women in particular, give media an uncontested role in dictating people's behaviour and ideas."
The study concluded that 67 per cent of the characters presented on television last Ramadan were men and only 33 per cent were women. "In reality, the number of women in society is almost equal to the number of men. Why do they represent only a third of the characters on TV?" said Darwish.
The report of the findings of the study shows that all of the programmes reviewed last Ramadan included scenes of violence against women. "The problem is that those who perpetuate the violence are the heroes of the episodes, are those who are closest to the hearts of the audience and hence have the largest impact on them," said the report.
The report also addressed the ways viewers react to violence. Just as disturbing as the portrayals of violence against women is the lack of public outrage to them. In many cases, observers responded with either indifference or approval, making such aggression seem commonplace or justifiable.
The majority of the women portrayed in the television episodes were housewives, followed by a large number of students. Unemployed individuals comprised 5.1 per cent of the characters. The report argued that this is not an accurate representation and that the actual unemployment rate for women is much higher. The report also noted that 31 per cent of the characters are middle class, 23.4 per cent upper class and only 15.9 per cent are part of the lower class. For some characters, the social class was not identified. The focus on the upper and middle classes makes the drama unrealistic. Many of the soap operas featured educated characters, particularly university graduates, ignoring the fact that half of the Egyptian population is illiterate.
Beating was the most prevalent mode of physical violence against women in the dramas, accounting for 42 per cent of all physical aggression. Other forms of violence included killing (13.1 per cent) and forms of sexual abuse. Incidents of verbal and sexual harassment were found in many of the shows and withholding sex from wives was portrayed as a form of punishment.
In all of the cases of violence against women, 41.9 per cent of the "heroines" displayed active resistance whereas 31.1 per cent accepted the abuse. This resistance was usually verbal in form, although one woman reacted by killing herself and another became physically paralysed. Further, 67.3 per cent of the men who acted violently against women displayed no remorse. Thirty per cent felt guilty and shameful.
Most of the women in the programmes played negative roles. The few women who were portrayed positively were shown as naïve or harmless wives, lovers and mothers.
Darwish expressed her uneasiness at the results of the report. "In 12 serials, there were 500 violent episodes. This means there are one or two scenes of violence in each part of a serial. This is too much. Moreover, not a single series was free of violence against women."
After the completion of the report, a documentary was filmed in which people were questioned about their reactions to violence in television dramas. "Women deserve to be beaten," responded one viewer. "A husband should beat his wife if she does something wrong," said another. One woman said that "men are so cruel to women. They should be merciful." A young man commented that beating a woman makes her "more stubborn".
The meeting convened by the NWRC and MH posed several important questions. What is required of the media? Should the media portray violence against women? Should television programmes condemn violence against women or reflect it as it is? Most everyone seemed to agree, however, that television should stop stereotyping women negatively and avoid showing violence against women in a positive light.
The dominance of men over women is accepted to varying degrees among Egyptians of both genders. For example, the 1995 Egyptian Demographic and Health Survey found that a significant number of women, especially among lower and middle income women and those residing in rural areas, believed that wife beating was justified under certain circumstances. Another study - carried out between January and March 1997 on a sample of 100 women aged between 14 and 65 years old (married or having been married) from Manshier Nasser, an informal settlement located ten minutes from the city of Cairo - reveals that 30% of the women questioned admitted to being subjected to domestic violence on a daily basis, 34% on a weekly basis, 15% on a monthly basis and 21% occasionally.
For 75% of these women, the main reason for this domestic violence was found to be sexual. Women are beaten, raped or abused for having refused to have sex with their husbands. Other reasons cited were spending (65%), visiting (32%), housework (25%), religion (8%), jealousy (6%) and disobedience (5%). Sixteen percent of the women suffered injuries necessitating hospitalisation, such as broken arms, broken ribs, internal bleeding and wounds in the head or the arms requiring stitches, while 9% of them attempted to commit suicide.
Following this violence, most of them (53%) suffered in silence; 13% went to the police, although all of them subsequently withdrew the charges, the objective being only “to teach the husband a lesson”, not really wanting to cause him any harm.
Only 6% of these women demanded a divorce. Of the remainder, 26% called their neighbours; 25% tried to leave their homes at least once; 23% got help from family members (either their own or their spouse’s), while 15% responded to the violence. The fact that 87% of these women did not mention the violence to the police is due to embarrassment (65%), for the children’s sake (32%), fears for their husband (19%), fear of their husband (13%), and fear of their own families (7%). Four percent felt that it was a waste of time, while 11% cited other reasons.
The researcher specified that although this study is not representative of Egyptian society as a whole, she feels that “the instances of violence even among different social classes within Egyptian society is widespread.” OMCT welcomes the promulgation of Law No. 6 of 1998, mentioned in the fifth and fourth government report on page 15, which criminalises the phenomenon of intimidation and the threat of the use of force or violence against a wife, offspring or parents. However, it believes that this measure does not provide women with sufficient protection from domestic violence as wife battering in Egypt is only dealt with as a crime if it exceeds the accepted limits of disciplining or if it results in certain injuries. Social and other interpretations of religious values reinforce the wife’s duty to obey and serve her husband, a role reinforced by the media. Moreover, the custom of a man paying a dowry for his future wife also perpetuates the idea that a wife is her husband’s property.
Domestic Violence
III.2 Marital Rape
In Egypt, a husband who forces his wife to have sexual intercourse is not considered by the law to have committed a criminal offence, “because the woman is legally obliged due to the marriage contract to obey her husband and to follow him to his bed each time he asks her, and she can only refuse for a legally valid reason.”
A study conducted by the New Women Research Centre and El-Nadim Centre has found that 93% of the women in the sample considered intercourse under such conditions as rape. However, 46% of the men in the sample said that they were entitled to force their wives to have intercourse.
III.3 Crimes against Women Committed in the Name of Honour
As already discussed above, there is a notable difference in the penalty for the murder of one’s spouse upon discovery of adultery. Whereas men are given a light prison sentence of not more than three years for murdering an adulterous wife, women are often sentenced to hard labour for life for murdering an unfaithful husband. This difference is justified by the widespread attitude that a man’s honour is dependent upon his wife’s virtue. Consequently, his violent reaction to his wife’s adultery becomes excusable, especially if committed in the heat of the moment. Moreover, although under the penal code, only the husband is “afforded” a lesser sentence for “provocation”, the woman’s family is often given a provocation defence by lenient court officials. Judges allegedly impose light sentences in such cases as an appreciation of the family’s suffering.
Most (87.4%) of the women surveyed in the 1995 Egyptian Demographic and Health Survey subscribe to the view that husbands are justified in hitting their wife sometime (El-Zanaty et al., 1995), whereas women between the ages of 20 and 29, according to El- Zanaty et al.’s (1995) study, agree that violence was justified if a woman “talked back” to her husband (70%), for talking to another man (65%), for neglecting children (50%), for spending too much money, (42%), and for burning dinner (26%). Yount (2005) reports that “only 27% of respondents reported that a husband is never justified in beating his wife, whereas 52% reported that a husband is seldom or sometimes justified, and 21% reported that a husband is often justified” (p. 587). Other research conducted in rural Egypt (Forman & Ghosh, 2000) shows that 80% of women surveyed have said that beatings are common and often justified, particularly if the woman has refused to have sex with her husband. Even though Egyptian women are not unique in their belief that the battered wife deserves it, cultural values and the criminal justice response make it a more pervasive issue. Although women possibly do report the violence to their family or their neighbors (Tadros, 1998; Yount, 2004), the prevailing attitudes that tolerate wife battery as “well-intentioned discipline” or as the fault of the victim lead to a more passive acquiescence in its inevitability. The prevailing social norms, which lead to such understandings of the nature of spousal abuse, are at issue here and need to be addressed systematically.
quote:Originally posted by homing pigeon: Hi,Alistair. I respect your opinion but I still dont agree. While I acknowledge your right to chose "no religion" as a personal stance , I cant see the logic of holding religion responsible for the way people twist it.
Hi Pigeon. Let me explain my thoughts further..
The Abrahamic Religions Judaism, Christianity and Islam are thousands of years old collectively.
They were formulated in a time where women were seen as property, chattel etc, and as such, there is a CLEAR bias AGAINST women in the Holy Books.
A woman's testimony is worth half that of a man and all that etc..
As Time progressed, people began to ask questions about these Religions, and noticed that many things did not make sense; or were clearly wrong.
The rapidly evolving Science also began to show us things about Life and the Universe in such depth and detail, that even more scrutiny was thrown upon Religion.
Secularism then came about, and much of Religion's power and control was diminished; and as a result, womens' rights and freedoms grew by leaps and bounds..
This was the Western World.
Now in the Islamic World, the above never occurred. There were Scientific advancements to be sure, but they were constrained under Islam; which seeks to dominate all aspects of Life.
Secularism....what is that?
Islam was the foundation of the Muslim World, and the basis of the Society so secularism was non-existent.
Now here we are in today's World, and women in the Muslim World universally have LESS rights, freedom and dignities compared to their Western sisters.
Why? The answer to me is obvious.
While Western Civilization outgrew Religion, the Islamic World is still firmly grasped by it.
When Christianity held a similar amount of power in the West that Islam does in the Middle East, women had far less rights and freedoms.
Once Christianity's power was diminished, womens' rights and freedoms increased dramatically.
So Secularism was instrumental for womens' rights here in the West.
In the Muslim World on the other hand, women are still held captive by Religion.
This might sound weird to you, but think about it.
The most "Islamic" countries in the Middle East ie Saudi Arabia, Iran etc that operate firmly under the auspicies of the Qu'ran and Hadiths, all have terrible track records when it comes to women's rights.
Only in the more secular Muslim nations do women have greater rights and freedoms.
Is this a coincidence? No it's not.
quote:No, seriously,now, I promise ..... You say that religions and morality clash and I query this statement because I cant accept that there is something innately evil in any religion.
Not even Satanism? Dear Pigeon, there's been religions on this planet that advocated the ritual slaughter of humans and animals; even children to appease the false gods they worshipped.
Believe me, lots of Religions have had an evil taint to them.
Is Islam like this? No, I don't believe so.
However, being an Abrahamic Religion, Islam suffers from the same bias towards females that Judaism and Christianity do, which explains why women in Muslim countries will never have the rights and freedoms that women do in Secular nations.
Islam was stamped by the Age in which it was made, and it has many aspects found within it which are simply "out of date" in modern times.
quote:All religions revolve around offering their followers a cut and dried way of life based on goodness. What moral people call right and wrong/moral and immoral is the halal and haram of any religion (lawful and sin).
My point when referring to Morality and Religion were that truly moral people, don't NEED religion to teach them whats right and wrong.
Morality precedes Religion when it comes to determining whats right, and whats wrong.
Also, whats considered right and wrong can be subjective.
Muslims consider eating pork a sin, while Christians have no problem doing so for example..
quote:My claim is based on the idea that moral people who have a solid sense of responsibility and honour will behave well with or without religion. The rascals will behave badly with or withour religion but there is a group of people in the middle who just need an extra reason to behave well and religion gives them this. So I think on the whole, the world is doing better with religion than without.
Yes, this was what I was trying to say! However, I'm not so sure that the World wouldn't be a nicer place if Religion never existed.
Look at all the Wars, violence, conflicts that have been waged over the centuries due to Religion.
quote:I believe that there is a profound cross-cultural ignorance and generalisations are being applied based on anecdotal information. Lets take domestic violence, for example. Domestic violence exists in the west. It isnt the sole property of religious people in third world countries....I would even confirm that in the Egyptian culture, a man hitting a woman is seen as the lowest of the low. It's totally unacceptable in all levels of society. It's part of the cultural code. You just dont hit a woman. If u even watch the movies,old and new, u will often find the phrase "R u going to raise ur hand on a woman?" indignantly thrown about. But for some oblique reason I find that Egyptians or Muslims generally are accused of condoning domestic violence....while we forget the rate of such things in western countries. Official position aside, what is the reality on the ground, Alistair? The differenc is not that huge.
Yes I agree, there are erroneous facts being propagated by both sides..
But I must say, I don't think domestic violence is a womens' rights issue.
Instead, it's a family problem.
However, women in the West can and do use the Law to protect them from abusive husbands or boyfriends.
The question is, would they get the same protection from the Law in Muslim countries?
Perhaps not. But, thats not to say that they are left defenseless.
Women probably rely more on their family to resolve domestic violence issues in Muslim countries I'd wager.
quote:Again, women's work....Am I not an Arab Muslim woman? I am having difficulty convincing my husband and my parents that I'd like to give up my career, for God's sake. I never had to fight my way to a career. I was practically manhandled into it and I cant even buy my way out.
Well, I'd say it was time to put your foot down then eh?
quote:Ah, I remembered something that I find absolutely demeaning for women in western countries; the "show me your assets" culture all over the place! A woman is nothing but boobs and ass; a sex object. In Muslim countries, the whole ethos is against this. People are not allowed to judge women by the size of their bras and when women cover up or wear decent clothes it is basically about refusing to be treated as a sex object.It's strange how westerners perceive this as exactly the opposite of what it is....so u see, there is a lot of misunderstandiong going on.
I agree, that the sexualization of women in Western culture is demeaning to them; but the fact is, none of them are being forced to do it.
The women that you see walking around with their tits hanging out and their thong showing are doing so because they WANT TO.
Anyway, I think issues like the breakdown of family values and morality in the West is a fallout from less religious influence.
While there are many negative aspects of Religion, there are positive ones aswell, and the focus on men and womens' roles in the family were probably one of the better traditions.
Western Society is going to have to learn to get by without religion though.....or Religion itself is going to have to change dramatically to keep up with a forward, progressive culture and Society.
~Alistair
Posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine (Member # 11915) on :
The Human Factor Every 9 seconds a women is beaten in the United States.
Sorry, Not Found.
Posted by ZAME (Member # 12914) on :
The Italian man said, "Last week, my wife and I had great sex. I rubbed her body all over with olive oil, we made passionate love, and she screamed for five full minutes at the end."
The Frenchman boasted, "Last week when my wife and I had sex, I rubbed her body all over with butter. We then made passionate love and she screamed for fifteen minutes."
The Jewish man said, "Well, last week my wife and I also had sex. I rubbed her body all over with schmaltz (chicken fat). We made love, and she screamed for over six hours."
The other two were stunned. The amazed Frenchman asked, "What could you have possibly done to make your wife scream for six hours?"
The Jewish man said, "I wiped my hands on the bedspread."
This is where the joke normally ends. However, considering the plight of all women who are trapped in Islam, I would like to add another ending:
The Muslim man said, "Well, last week my wife and I also had sex. She enjoyed it so much that for punishment I poured hot boiling oil all over her body and she screamed all day until she died.
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dalia*: [QB]
The dominance of men over women is accepted to varying degrees among Egyptians of both genders. For example, the 1995 Egyptian Demographic and Health Survey found that a significant number of women, especially among lower and middle income women and those residing in rural areas, believed that wife beating was justified under certain circumstances. Another study - carried out between January and March 1997 on a sample of 100 women aged between 14 and 65 years old (married or having been married) from Manshier Nasser, an informal settlement located ten minutes from the city of Cairo - reveals that 30% of the women questioned admitted to being subjected to domestic violence on a daily basis, 34% on a weekly basis, 15% on a monthly basis and 21% occasionally.
OK, that's right. I point out the following, though: - Apparently from what you copid that the prevalence is between 15-34% ... this is what ? 1/3rd? So the majority of Egyptians reject this behaviour as I said.
- This study that is cited by the EDHS was conducted on 100 women ; which you must admit is too small for a population surveyr and not enough to generalize from. So it is effectively 15/100 women and 34/100 women in raw numbers, mind u.
-This study says it is conducted among women of Manshiet Nasser. You can find a description of manshiet nasser on wiki. I'll leave it to u to decide whether this neighbourhoud is representative of the majority of egyptians or not. And also to infer what possible health and social problems could typically be prevalent in such a community, comparing it to western neighbourhoods of the same type.
quote:Originally posted by Dalia*: [QB] For 75% of these women, the main reason for this domestic violence was found to be sexual. Women are beaten, raped or abused for having refused to have sex with their husbands. Other reasons cited were spending (65%), visiting (32%), housework (25%), religion (8%), jealousy (6%) and disobedience (5%).
This is 75% of the 34 who reported violence, right? This means it is about 25 women in all. We have to keep our eyes open when we look at the data and especially, when we present it to public view....or else we are at risk of drawing wrong conclusions and further propagating the myths.
When I say myths, I dont mean domestic violence is non existent but as I said earlier, it is existent and stigmatised; more stigma against the man than the woman. The kind of man who accepts for himself to be a woman beater is despised by his peers in the majority of the sectors of egyptian society. I dont see for whose benefit it is to direct attention away from this because this, in itself, is a protective social concept that contributes to limiting violence against women
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
Whoever thinks of satanism as a religion, Alistair? . I can see why you take a position against religion if u include these cults into what qualifies as religion.
When I say religion, I mean real religions. Not only the Abrahamic religions, though. I take a broad sweeping look around at Bhudism, Hiduism, Sikhism and other major religions. I dont count cults.....or else anybody can write a 100 page holy book and start a new religion can claim entry into the category .
Posted by LaZeeZ (Member # 10655) on :
quote:Originally posted by Batman, non-stop, righteous machine: lazeez how r u?
yes homing is a doctor
she did write here shes a doctor.
Thank you, I didn't really read through the whole thread. Kinda feel bored of this subject.
I'm okay, thanx for asking Posted by ZAME (Member # 12914) on :
Dalia ...I always knew muslim woman are masocist they think it's ok hosbond beat them, now an then
Posted by homing pigeon (Member # 8039) on :
quote:Originally posted by ZAME: Dalia ...I always knew muslim woman are masocist they think it's ok hosbond beat them, now an then
Shows u know absolutely nothing that has a remote resemblence to being right.....as I am a Muslim woman who was never beaten by her husband or anybody and I dont think it is OK. Morever, I dont know anybody (friends, neighbours, relatives, colleagues...and they're lots!) who think it's OK either.
Unless of course, you think u know my countrywomen more than I do Posted by Undercover (Member # 12979) on :
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
I've always found his approach to fatwa more to my liking because he always presents all other views not only his own and then he explains why he is inclined towards one view rather than the other which is a sharp contrast with many clerics who insist that their view ia the one and only, even when they're saying something totally mad (Al-albany to mention one of them)..![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
)...and this is the basis on which he is attacked usually. His fatwas include, for example, allowing face make up based on the verse that allows the apparent beauty to be dispalyed and he interpreted "apparent" as the face. He was attacked based on this fatwa. Most of his fatwas are as progressive as that so I feel totally shocked by what you're telling me.![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
But that makes him even less credible in my opinion ... sometimes he's objective and sometimes the reasons he gives for legal rulings seem to be just his own biased opinions.
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)