The list in the bill actually includes quite a few things that can be done do males, such as castration. It also isn't exclusive, it's listing particular examples. I could argue in court that male circumcision is included.
I could see that argument -- my main concern is that it's not explicitly listed as a form of genital mutilation in the paragraph where they define "genital mutilation."
Unless I missed something, which is entirely possible because it's written in legalese.
The list in the bill actually includes quite a few things that can be done do males, such as castration. It also isn't exclusive, it's listing particular examples. I could argue in court that male circumcision is included.
I could see that argument -- my main concern is that it's not explicitly listed as a form of genital mutilation in the paragraph where they define "genital mutilation."
Unless I missed something, which is entirely possible because it's written in legalese.
Yeah, generally speaking, "including" isn't exclusive in legalese, but it's up to interpretation.