Sexual mutilation is a cultural creation denounced by feminists. Unfortunately, the majority of them, driven by sexist hatred, do not respect the fact that cultures of sexual mutilation have only one term - meaning both cutting and cleansing - for female and male sexual mutilation. As a result, they fail to address male mutilation. Yet it is the great source of the former that one never meets without it. This neglect is a consequence of a Western cultural phenomenon; people do not dare to tackle circumcision because male sexual mutilation is intimately linked to religion, both among Muslims and Jews.
However, the great response to sexual mutilation is ethical. It was first stated on 14 June 2013 at the Sorbonne by Madame Christine Lazerges who, in her introduction to the founding assembly of Excision, parlons-en, declared that female and male sexual mutilation are discriminatory. Sandrine Rousseau has taken up this statement in her presidential programme. This discrimination is all the more serious because it is accompanied by an appalling claim of moral superiority. The law must treat excision and circumcision as discrimination.
As for the cultural response to sexual mutilation, the Koran provides a categorical opposition to it, cf. the article "The Koran against sexual mutilation"1; in Judaism, the response is provided by a small book: "The birth of Judaism; between exegesis and Egyptology"2.