Almost all of Hanny Lightfoot-Klein's work is about female circumcision, especially infibulation, where the clitoris, labia minora, and most of the labia majora are cut off and then the raw edges of the labia majora are sewn together across the midline, leaving only a tiny hole for menstrual blood and urine. Millions of women are subject to this every year in Africa, parts of the Middle East, and southeast Asia. Many of them die, or are left sterile and in constant pain. At marriage, the scar must be cut open again for intercourse to happen, and then cut more with childbirth, after which the women is sewn up "nice and tight" again for her husband's sexual pleasure. Although many Islamic countries will justify this mutilation by claiming is has religious origins, there is nothing in the Koran about infibulation, or even clitoridectomy. In many places, it doesn't have a religious justification, but every girl has it done in childhood, and respectable men won't marry women who are not infibulated. It is "tradition" and even though women understand that it causes many deaths, infertility, life-long pain, etc., they don't know how to "escape" from the traditional ritual, or they don't want to. Some women view female circumcision and infibulation as a joyous occasion, marking their daughters eligibility for marriage. Others don't want their daughters to suffer as they did, but the price they pay of not circumcising in their culture is that their daughters will be considered whores -- wanton sexual nyphomaniacs that any man can consider available at any time -- and will be unmarriageable. Until the cycle is stopped, circumcision will continue. Clitoridectomies and infibulation are much more severe sexual mutilations than male circumcision. Clitoridectomy is the equivalent of removing the head of the penis, while traditional male circumcision removes only the foreskin. Infibulation would be like cutting off half the penis and mutilating the scrotum. In the U.S., male circumcision became widespread when it was thought to confer health advantages to males and their sexual partners. Once that was shown not to be supported by medical research, circumcision continued because of "tradition" and people not wanting their sons to be the only one who was "different." Now that most insurance companies no longer pay for it, male circumcision is definitely waning in the U.S., with 1/3 of all newborn boys in California not being circumcized in the 1990s. Katherine A. Dettwyler, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Anthropology Specialist in infant feeding and growth of children Texas A&M University e-mail to [log in to unmask] (409) 845-5256 (409) 778-4513