I don't care what they call it. And I'm not saying the activity called "female genital mutilation" is morally equivalent to male circumcision just because supporters of FGM have called it "female circumcision".

What I'm saying is that male circumcision is cutting off part of an infant's genitals without his consent. (Obviously, since he's eight days old.) It's been fairly standard in American hospitals for decades, for reasons people believe are health and hygiene based.

But the way it's practiced among Hasidic Jews is pretty gruesome when you read the details. I can't honestly say that what they do is worse than "nicking" the clitoris in a ritual manner.

If the procedure described in this new language is morally unacceptable, then so is brit milah. If you don't think so, it's only because you have been raised in a society that considers circumcision to be "normal".