A PR man who lives just 30 miles away from the site of one of the UK’s most recent circumcision deaths has publicly dismissed calls to tackle Unnecessary Male Circumcision.
Andrew Nott, a journalist and PR man from Warrington, hit out at male critics of Unnecessary Male Circumcision saying they had clearly never “paid any serious attention to women’s genitalia” and “should get out more”.
Mr Nott’s outburst comes just weeks after a UK midwife was charged with manslaughter and banned from carrying out male circumcisions after a baby boy bled to death less than 30 miles away from Mr Nott’s home.
Nott, a former crime reporter on the Manchester Evening News, was responding to letters about Unnecessary Male Circumcision published in the Sunday Times from three men – including one from the respected Dr Anthony Lempert who is the Director of the Secular Medical Forum.
Responding to these letters Mr Nott wrote to The Sunday Times to say:
“I was astounded that amongst your letters last week two preposterously compared female circumcision to the male version. Clearly neither of these contributors – both men – has ever paid any serious attention to women’s genitalia. Both should get out more – or ask their mothers.”
Interestingly, in 2000, Mr Nott reported on the double standards applied to male and female sex offenders. In an article on “the worst case of a woman abusing children in her care any court in the land has had to face", Mr Nott wrote that the Judge said “he was constrained by the law which only allows for specific charges to be brought when the offender is a woman” Had the offender been male the sentence would have been in double figures, reported Nott.
It is difficult to understand why a former crime reporter and professional of Mr Nott's standing, who lives just 30 miles from the scene of an alleged manslaughter where a baby boy bled to death following an Unnecessary Male Circumcision would react so dismissively to the suggestion that we address the issue of Unnecessary Male Circumcision.
For those concerned with protecting children from medically unnecessary, non-consensual, ritual genital cutting it is clearly a case of double standards to protect girls from this ritual but not boys. To read our post on comparisons between female circumcision and male circumcision click here.
As letters to newspapers are often heavily edited we will be writing to Mr Nott for clarity and to ask him whether or not he agrees with us that it is unnecessary to carry out ritual and religious circumcisions in the way that led to the tragic death of Goodluck Caubergs in 2010 just 30 miles from Mr Nott's home - and what action Mr Nott thinks should be taken to prevent such avoidable and unnecessary events happening in future.