It's not the m-word per se, Magoo. It's the context. Have a look at what I said in # 128.
I don't disagree that this thread seemed a bit hinky from the get-go.
But there is a matter of proportion.
Certainly there is. But if an unwanted grope, and [insert much, much worse here] can both be called "sexual assault" I'm not sure why there should be any real controversy over the unnecessary removal of parts of any child's genitals being called "mutilation". There's only a need for some kind of qualitative or quantitative comparison if someone feels that need.
Thank you Mr.Magoo for dragging me back into a conversation I no longer wanted to be a part of.
Sorry about that. But the rest of your post doesn't even mention what I referenced.
Do you think we also need to discuss circumcision for religious reasons, or do religious reasons = a free pass? It was you who made the distinction, so I hope you don't think it's an unfair question.
I suppose if you accept that a foreskin is an essential part of a penis, it fits.
If someone were to cut off your daughters' earlobes, would you consider the term "mutilation" to be too much word to describe that?
Earlobes aren't essential for anything. Ears work just fine without them.