Belly,
The horrors of FGM are diluted by those that equate it with male circumcision. The fact is that the laws are not enforced because of political reasons and Aussie girls are being subjected to this barbaric tradition for no practical reason.

In 1994 the polys made laws in all states making FGM illegal which, no doubt, made them feel good but it was a farce because they have ignored enforcing the laws.

Unless attitudes change soon, it will take a death of some poor girl before action is taken. I suggest it is only our medical expertise that has prevented deaths thus far, but that cannot continue. At some point parents will seek medical help too late to save their daughter.

There are many injustices that need correction and FGM is one such that can be easily achieved by the enforcement of existing laws. France has shown how to do this and we should follow their lead.

There is no excuse, all immigrants are informed that FGM is illegal here before getting a visa.

Banjo, "The horrors of FGM are diluted by those that equate it with male circumcision"

With respect, that is completely untrue. It is not a zero-sum game. No-one here is diminishing the horrors of FGM.

As for any law passed to make any particular barbaric practice such as FGM illegal, there were and are already legal remedies in available law. As is so often the case, governments are prone to passing redundant laws as a sop to noisy activists and a media that uses sensationalism to sell to a dumbed down audience.

However politicians are also subject to electoral blackmail as mentioned earlier by the same groups and by a general population that are often too busy working and taking care of their families to dig deeply to find any truth in the fodder and spin that are the produce of news outlets.

It is a simple fact that where there is a wedge of determined religious believers in an electorate and they use their influence effectively as many do, religious rituals and beliefs will be reflected in behaviour, laws and in policing. As an example of the last mentioned, police are sledged for publishing descriptions of offenders that could offend cultural groups. Religions can even affect the selection of the polling date out of respect for the religion. That is notwithstanding the availability of absentee voting.

This is a secular State. But that status is constantly under challenge and so often by migrants who claim to have fled the very persecution they would instal here. Go figure!

OTB,
I strongly disagree. The argument against FGM is diluted by those that equate it with Male circumcision. A little research will reveal why this is so, they are totally different and the impact on the child is far more serious with FGM.

In the same manner that the argument against forced marriages is derailed by those introducing polygamy into the discussion. They are totally different issues. Or the illegal entrants issue being confused with immigration in general.

Oh, and male circumcision is legal and the pros and cons are debated by medical people. There is no debate about FGM as there are no advantages, it is just a wilful act of butchery that instils misery for the victims for the rest of their lives. There is every good reason as to why it is against the law.

Banjo,

You could put the same argument for turning a blind eye to any and all abuses of children outside of your favoured FGM. That thinking is more in line with gender feminism - we're alright Jack, so never you mind.

I regard FGM as an obscenity. I totally reject it and want authorities to be vigilant in discouraging it wherever it occurs.

For your part you have not addressed any of the thoughts I have put forward on the issue. You just want FGM up there in lights for funding and action, and hang other child abuse. You believe that action to reduce other abuses detracts from, you say 'dilutes' action against FGM. That is untrue. It is also unsatisfactory. There are indigenous children being raped daily and infants are presenting with sexually transmitted diseases. What about them?

Obviously you do not object to cutting male infants. But it is also objectionable cosmetic surgery which ought be discouraged, never funded from taxpayers' money and DEFINITELY NOT claimable from Medicare unless medically required. How can an infant give informed consent?

It does not come down to a zero sum game. Strength in counteracting child neglect and child abuse will come from a coordinated response. Hiving off bits of taxpayers' money to narrow, special interests and lobby groups just wastes available funds and leads to counterproductive competition, lack of coordination especially between the layers of government, and territorial squabbling.

Banjo yes and I am aware of it.
The whole reason for it is not taken in to account.
In my past job it was a ploy others used to mix up the subject so keeping on the right track and not being diverted is the way around it.
Show me however how many males die from it?
The horror of FGM should not be hidden under a lets change the subject move.
No way now but if given a chance at birth?
Jump at it.

OTB,
No, I have not addressed any of the subjects you raised because I try to stick to the subject of the thread.

I am glad you consider FGM an obscenity, as I do.
As I said here earlier there are many issues that need correction.

If you consider that some other matters need discussion you are free to post them and maybe I will contribute. Especially if someone else has not posted my thoughts.

In the meantime I think it courtesy for one to stick to the thread subject if possible.