american male here, cant speak to female mutilation but i get the feeling that's a false equivalency. as somebody who had it done at age 6 (not for religious reasons), it pretty much sucked for about a month. but long term it's been a good decision in my view - especially useful for guys who arent the most hygienic, are hooking up in cultures where thats appealing/desirable to the girl/etc. (which honestly im all for all else being equal). i do often wonder if i lost some feeling or sensitivity as a result but ive gotten along fine as is, so ill have to live with that.

i think the most important thing to remember here is that this isn't about "choice". having it done as a baby presents minimal chance of complication or memorable pain for the baby. having it done at age 6 sucked - i can still remember the pain to this day. know somebody who had it done in their teens and it was apparently hellish. this is honestly something that, if it's going to be done, it really should be done as young as possible. pretending that you are doing a guy a favor by allowing him to do it 18+ years later on his own accord is ridiculous.

as long as there are reasonable justifications for this, which there are in my view, this is not the place of any government to step in on.