Over 40 years ago, bra burning entered the consciousness of America. It was supposed to be a sign of defiance and a rejection of traditional female roles in western culture . . . women’s liberation as street theater. Now, it’s 2010 and women’s lib has been trumped in the multi-culti pecking order. You’ve come a long way baby . . . only to be handed a burqa, subjected to justified beatings by your husbands, and treated to a clitorectomy, expressly intended to rob you of any sexual pleasure associated with the marital act. Progress in the multi-culti jungle is relative, ain’t it?

“Clitorectomy!” You say. “That’s unfair! That’s grossly sensationalistic! That only pertains to faraway parts of the world, among backwater tribes in Asia or Africa. That’s not the United States.”

Au Contraire. The American Academy of Pediatrics is now suggesting that doctors be allowed to perform a ceremonial procedure whereby the physician (Do no harm, huh?) administers a nick to the clitoris of a barely pubescent minor. This new procedure (the banality of evil requires that we call it a “procedure”) is being recommended as a way of trying to prevent Muslim parents of Asian or African descent from sending their young daughters overseas to endure a brutal, barbaric anti-woman desecration of their God-given anatomy. It is the express hope of the American Academy of Pediatrics that the largely ceremonial procedure (after all, it’s just a nick, right?) will appease the needs of these parents to abuse their children.

This, of course, is a 180 degree reversal from the “just-plain-no-to-clitorectomies” position previously held by the American Academy of Pediatrics. The health and safety of women . . . in this case, young girls . . . has been trumped by multi-culti sensitivity to Islam. I guess it would be a PC faux-paux to insist that clitorectomies are wrong, Wrong, WRONG! And, that this procedure should be forever banned in the United States . . . piss on the sensitivities of some Muslim parents who want to maim their children for religious reasons. In fact, the better method of dealing with clitorecomies in the United States is to enforce and strengthen criminal laws against it. Parents engaged in this barbarity should be charged with sexual mutilation, serve hard prison time, and be placed on sexual offender lists. Our culture’s reaction should not be accommodating in the name of kowtowing to creeping Sharia. Our culture’s reaction should be the equivalent of Sir Charles Napier, a British general in India in the mid 1800’s. In responding to a delegation of Hindu leaders irate with the British for banning the ritual burning of widows (live ones) along with their freshly dead husbands, Sir Napier famously responded:

“You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours.”

Clitorectomies and burning widows are not our custom. Rather than accommodating, like the PC reaction of the American Academy of Pediatrics, we should instead be building a gallows. Multi-Culti be damned.

And, then of course, there’s the contemptible and completely useless National Organization for Women (NOW). The so-called modern protectors of women’s rights in the United States know their place in the progressive, liberal-left family . . . barefoot, burqa’d, and bereft of clitoris. NOW’s reaction to the recent announcement of the American Academy of Pediatrics has been a deafening silence . . . and in that silence is their tacit approval. The acronym of NOW needs an update. It needs one more “O” to signify what it really is: NOOW, the National Organization for the Oppression of Women.

Source of Information on the American Academy of Pediatrics’ announcement: Pamela Geller at AtlasShrugs.com. Please note; there are some disturbing pictures that accompany her excellent and thorough account.