I see no difference between circumcision and genital mutilation as some cultures consider what we call "genital mutilation" as circumcision. Its just semantics really and these terms are easily interchangeable. Both involve the altering or "disfigurement" of ones parts whether the person in concern wants to undergo the process or not. If we restrict the term "genital mutilation" to women only because we are horrified by the sheer pain that they undergo then I believe that this concept becomes redundant because men/boys can also experience tremendous pain when having their foreskins cut off. Take a look at the pictures of Aborigine boys being circumcised on the net and tell me if that is not prolonged genital mutilation. In fact the second part of the male circumcision ritual to that culture involves a subincision being made along the entire length of the underside of the penis causing it to basically "flay" apart. The urethral tube along the penile shaft is completely obliterated in the process. So, is this mutilation or circumcision? In fact they are both the same things and differ only in the context that they occur; on whom it is being carried out on; and to the severity and extent that such alterations happen.

From Matt's Wife: I know, I have read about it and it is very wrong