Even though I prefer not to get into a blur of angry indignation with anyone's opinion, I would like to clarify that the "female circumcision" you reference is actually not circumcision, but genital mutilation.

The act of circumcising the male newborn's penis involves removing or splitting the foreskin in order to expose the glans, or head, of the penis. Not discussing good or bad here, just clarifying.

In order for female genital mutilation to equate with the practice of circumcision medically, the hood of the clitoris would be either removed or split to expose the clitoris, the part of a female's genital anatomy which generally corresponds to the head of the penis.

In either of these two scenarios, the outcome is/would be increased exposure in the area of the most sensitive part of either sex's genitals. Generally speaking.

What occurs in the case of female genital mutilation is that the labia minor of the females genitals are sewn shut with a needle made from a long thorn, and twine made from a piece of vine, or whatever is locally utilized for sewing.

When the young ladies approach child bearing age, around 13 years old.

In front of the whole village. Laid out in the dirt. With no anesthesia or antibiotics.

And yes I know there are similar proceedures which are performed on both genders with the same level of medical risk such as scarification and male circumcision, but that is not the topic of this thread discussion.

The cultural premise is that this assures that when the girl child is sold into marriage the husband is not receiving tainted goods in exchange for his goats or whatever. Also lessens the risk of the girl becomming impregnated (due to rape or consensual sex) before someone is financially responsible for the children which may result from the aforementioned sexual activities.

One further distressing proceedure which is often practiced in tribal female genital mutilation, and which I think A Dude as well as many other people may confuse with circumcison, is the act of removing the clitoris altogether, with a the edge of piece of sharpened stone, much like a skinning blade.

I postualte that the only purpose possible for this proceedue is to remove a woman's ability to experience any sexual pleasure from the act of intercourse; indeed, to cause it to be so severely painful that she would certainly never think to take a lover outside of the marital bed, nor find any purpose for her sexual organs other than what I am assuming could only be an excruciating childbearing experience following these surgeries, and a lifetime of pain, scarring, and recoccuring infection.

I will speak for speak for those that can't speak for themselves, even if it is to educate.