New York Times scraps ‘female genital mutilation’ for being ‘culturally loaded’ term

serious

From Fox News: A top New York Times editor decided the paper shouldn’t use the term “female genital mutilation” because the phrase is too “culturally loaded” and widens a divide between the Western world and “people who follow the rite.”

Health and Science editor Celia Dugger said she came to the conclusion to refer to the act of removing the female genitalia of young girls as “genital cutting” during a trip to Africa in the 1990s. She spoke about her decision in a Times mailbag article in response to a reader’s question.

“I never minced words in describing exactly what form of cutting was involved, and there are many gradations of severity, and the terrible damage it did, and stayed away from the euphemistic circumcision, but chose to use the less culturally loaded term, genital cutting,” Dugger wrote. “There’s a gulf between the Western (and some African) advocates who campaign against the practice and the people who follow the rite, and I felt the language used widened that chasm.”

The term “female genital mutilation” has actually been used by the Times in six articles in 2017, according to a website search; however, the instances are extremely restricted. For instance, two of the mentions occur in the context of a quoted speech or statement, two were in opinion columns, one in a book review and one in the mailbag explanation of why the Times didn’t use the term. The abbreviation “FGM” appeared this year only in stories taken from wire services such as The Associated Press and Reuters.

The Daily Caller was one of the first organizations to draw attention to the Times’ practice; however, groups as ideologically opposite as the United Nations Population Fund have also written about the potential danger in referring to genital mutilation as “cutting.”

“UNFPA embraces a human rights perspective on the issue, and the term ‘female genital mutilation’ more accurately describes the practice from a human rights viewpoint,” a question-and-answer section of the UNFPA website says.

UNFPA estimates some 200 million women worldwide have been subjected to FGM, and though the procedure is typically practiced in African or Middle Eastern cultures, it’s spreading westward. Nearly 6,000 reported cases occurred in Britain from April 2015 to March 2016, according to the Health and Social Care Information Center, and, in the U.S., an Islamic doctor in Michigan was charged earlier this month with performing the procedure on a pair of 7-year-old girls.

The New York Times said the doctor had been “accused of performing genital cutting” in its version of the story.

DCG

Advertisements

14 responses to “New York Times scraps ‘female genital mutilation’ for being ‘culturally loaded’ term

  1. If they call it a “rite” today, it won’t be long before they call it a “right” and a “privilege,” and the dumbed-down will line up for it.

    Liked by 3 people

  2. I propose that in the interest of political correctness and deference to Islamic & African “culture,” NYT Health and Science editor Celia Dugger, age 58, should volunteer to be the first middle-aged woman to undergo the wonderful “genital cutting”.

    Liked by 6 people

    • Amen to that!

      Liked by 4 people

    • DR Eowyn . . . I whole heartedly support the idea that Ms Dugger hop up on the table, and get her feet in the stirrups, and let her have this rite performed on her own self. How dare this POS attempt to soften the horror of this procedure. The fact that the estimate cited of 200 million women having had this procedure forced on them, often when they were very young, is just beyond the pale. After looking at Ms Dugger’s picture, I have no problem in saying that she looks as though she is one brick short of a load! If she wants to “bridge the divide” between those who approve vs those who do not approve of this procedure, I would invite her to have this “genital cutting” as she calls it, post haste!

      Liked by 5 people

    • Touché, let’s see if she puts her money where her mouth is.

      Liked by 1 person

    • I completely agree! Here’s her chance to prove the integrity of her opinion. (sarc)

      Liked by 1 person

  3. Lori Halderson

    I watched a video of a new born circumcision on the website birth of a new earth. The innocent infant screamed continually for a long period and then fell completely silent like the torture set off a circuit switch in his little brain.

    Liked by 3 people

  4. Pingback: KOMMONSENTSJANE (IT IS CALLED BARBARISM) – New York Times scraps ‘female genital mutilation’ for being ‘culturally loaded’ term — Fellowship of the Minds | kommonsentsjane

  5. Crickets chirping from Feminists, NYT and other Leftists…

    Liked by 5 people

  6. She can spin it any way she wants, it is still mutilation and cruel. This is a procedure invented by some sick twisted males to deprive women of the same sensations they have. May they all rot in hell.
    I think all males that think this is acceptable should have to be castrated without anesthesia and see how wonderful it feels.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Wow Glenn tell us how you REALLY feel! (I mean this as a compliment about your passion on this issue!) Maybe I’ll get some kickback on this, but I’ve been reading some recent articles on this about “minimizing” this practice by comparing it to male circumcision. In some way, these “journalists” promote that excising the female clitoris is “OK” b/c it is comparable. (I really hate talking about all this…but….it has arrived on our shores with our immigrants of late…and so it must be faced, like we’ve faced other “cultural norms” that were imported by immigrants to us through the centuries… like maybe, footbinding…pre-arranged marriages of underaged girls…incest….(1st) cousin on cousin marriages….even lately…the murder of the wife in a pre-arranged marriage out of India when the “dowry” runs out—the fate of a good friend in college—–and so much more….). I have worried about this for a long time b/c my husband and I chose to circumcize our boys at birth…..and…..it was after much thought and research (b/c, it is NOT, suppsedly, a medical necessity….). But, when we learned about the reduction of penal cancers to almost NIL,,,,and the contribution of uncircumsized mates to female cervical cancers….(and even into the modern era..it continues….to reduce HIV infections and other nasty STD’s) we decided to “err on the side of caution” for their futures and their partner’s futures….There is NO WAY in any medical literature that excising the female clitoris prevents ANYTHING like this in the female or her mate….it only “controls” her experience of sexual pleasure. Period. It is another “BURKA” another ” physcial prison” imposed upon the females of the Muslim world by the men who run the theocracy.

      Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s