UNICEF: Difference between revisions

Line 109:

== Double standard ==

UNICEF has published an article on the subject of female circumcision with the title "No child should experience such pain" on their German blog 2021.<ref>{{REFweb

UNICEF has published an article on the subject of female circumcision with the title "No child should experience such pain" on their German blog 2021.<ref name="UNICEF Blog 2021">{{REFweb

|last=Sandgathe

|first=Laura

Line 120:

|accessdate=2021-07-18

}}</ref> No boys are mentioned here. To comments in the blog that indicate that UNICEF is arguing very one-sidedly here, UNICEF replies with a standard text module in which it says:

~~<blockquote>"~~Female genital mutilation / circumcision is a serious violation of human and children's rights. It can lead to lifelong complaints and complications. For many girls, the procedure is fatal. The abolition of this practice is the goal of the international community in the Agenda for Sustainable Development (SDG Goal No. 5). We are committed to this goal, including with this contribution. We know that the issue of male circumcision is controversial and emotional. UNICEF takes seriously the concerns raised about the right to physical integrity and self-determination."</~~blockquote~~>

{{Citation

|Title=

|Text=Female genital mutilation / circumcision is a serious violation of human and children's rights. It can lead to lifelong complaints and complications. For many girls, the procedure is fatal. The abolition of this practice is the goal of the international community in the Agenda for Sustainable Development (SDG Goal No. 5). We are committed to this goal, including with this contribution. We know that the issue of male circumcision is controversial and emotional. UNICEF takes seriously the concerns raised about the right to physical integrity and self-determination.

|Author=Laura Sandgathe

|Source=UNICEF

|ref=<ref name="UNICEF Blog 2021"/>

}}

German intactivist [[Ulf Dunkel]] responded to this on his blog and wrote a comprehensive reply that proves UNICEF double standards.<ref>{{REFweb

@@ Line 109: / Line 109: @@
 == Double standard ==
-UNICEF has published an article on the subject of female circumcision with the title "No child should experience such pain" on their German blog 2021.<ref>{{REFweb
+UNICEF has published an article on the subject of female circumcision with the title "No child should experience such pain" on their German blog 2021.<ref name="UNICEF Blog 2021">{{REFweb
   |last=Sandgathe
   |first=Laura
@@ Line 120: / Line 120: @@
   |accessdate=2021-07-18
 }}</ref> No boys are mentioned here. To comments in the blog that indicate that UNICEF is arguing very one-sidedly here, UNICEF replies with a standard text module in which it says:
-<blockquote>"Female genital mutilation / circumcision is a serious violation of human and children's rights. It can lead to lifelong complaints and complications. For many girls, the procedure is fatal. The abolition of this practice is the goal of the international community in the Agenda for Sustainable Development (SDG Goal No. 5). We are committed to this goal, including with this contribution. We know that the issue of male circumcision is controversial and emotional. UNICEF takes seriously the concerns raised about the right to physical integrity and self-determination."</blockquote>
+{{Citation
+ |Title=
+ |Text=Female genital mutilation / circumcision is a serious violation of human and children's rights. It can lead to lifelong complaints and complications. For many girls, the procedure is fatal. The abolition of this practice is the goal of the international community in the Agenda for Sustainable Development (SDG Goal No. 5). We are committed to this goal, including with this contribution. We know that the issue of male circumcision is controversial and emotional. UNICEF takes seriously the concerns raised about the right to physical integrity and self-determination.
+ |Author=Laura Sandgathe
+ |Source=UNICEF
+ |ref=<ref name="UNICEF Blog 2021"/>
+}}
 German intactivist [[Ulf Dunkel]] responded to this on his blog and wrote a comprehensive reply that proves UNICEF double standards.<ref>{{REFweb