I reproduce my own Disqus comment to the piece here:
I can understand how different individuals and cultures may be pro-circumcision–including female circumcision-lite a.k.a. labioplasty and even more dramatic procedures. Could it be possible that certain genetic types and/or residents of certain geographical or cultural areas might have more advantages doing the procedure than others? Some foreskins practically disappear with an erection and others have to be skinned back (thank you, Little Feat). I have a hard time believing that there is one-true-way that applies to all people everywhere, which, by the way, is in opposition to the various international human rights bodies who prohibit it without exception for women.
The reasons for circumcision for females are similar to those for men and different in other ways, specifically, it reduces certain disease risk and changes sexual response. Naturally, some circumcisions are better than others and done under more hygienic conditions than others.
Not all traditions are bad however to say that a tradition should be mandatory across the board is equally absurd.
As a woman, my preference for the state of a male’s anatomy? Clean and healthy smelling, cut or uncut.