How about Chula thinking babies dont have human rights? Or trying to justify circumcision by comparing it to cutting an umbilical cord?

Way ahead of you.

Definitely the most head-scratching element of this convo.

When you mutilate something, you cut it up with the intention to alter it so radically as to make it imperfect.
You cut off or maim in order to permanently destroy that which you are attacking (a limb, for instance).
This is synonymous with crippling, disabling, incapacitating, making lame, or maiming.
None of this happens when you circumcise (unless it goes horribly wrong: still not a circumcision problem).
It does happen when FGM is performed (hence: the "M").

Still subjective, given that "imperfect" is incredibly subjective.

but you agree with the rest of the paragraph, right?

I agree with this

And this

I won't agree with the rest because they're just opinions and they aren't relevant to discussions about definitions.

I do, however, disagree that this point even ****ing matters. Number 3, guys.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...eement.svg.png

Cutting off the most stimulating part of the penis probably makes it more perfect. Because cutting off things that inhibit sexual stimulation is good, right? That's why nobody has a problem with Female Genital Mutilation.

Oh.

As one of his biggest shit-givers, I totally agree.

He sounds like a dirty ****. Tell him to take two showers and call me in the morning.

*genius