, 3 tweets, 3 min read Read on Twitter
Since Detroit case, more & more bioethicists arguing Western countries should tolerate "ritual nicking" of girls' vulvas, using tolerance for male circumcision, which is more invasive and non-consensual, as part of reasoning for why. Latest example here: buff.ly/2L0un9q
See, e.g., arguments such as the below. Why I argue moral case should not be based in benefit-to-risk but rather child's right to decide whether their own genitals should be exposed to any type/degree of risk from cutting when mature & can consent
More here, commenting on the @AmerAcadPeds support for 'ritual nicking' in 2010 which they explicitly premised on its being less harmful than male circumcision which is tolerated. The AAP bioethicist on the male circumcision policy - Douglas Diekema - advised on this paper.
Missing some Tweet in this thread?
You can try to force a refresh.

Like this thread? Get email updates or save it to PDF!

Subscribe to Brian D. Earp
Profile picture

Get real-time email alerts when new unrolls are available from this author!

This content may be removed anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!