> How can one compare completely cutting a sex organ off-- to taking a little skin off??

Firstly, it isn't merely skin, it is flesh with nerves.
Secondly 'completely cutting a sex organ off' in the female case would be removal of not just the external flesh bits but the internal flesh bits as well (the vagina).

I think that it is in fact a fair analogy.

> A female that has gone through genital mutilation will NEVER have an "O" -- ever-- it's gone!

That isn't true. Females have at least three erogenous zones that can lead to orgasm (and there is arguably another). Most women find it easiest to orgasm in response to clitoral stimulation, that is true, but there is also a spot inside the vagina (that is not removed with female circumscision) and (arguably) another one further up, and one in the %#@&#! as well.

> There is absolutely NO comparison of male circumcision to female genital mutiliation!!!

Not when you call one 'circumscision' (which has positive connotations for some) while calling the other one 'mutilation' (which has negative connotations for everyone).

Now I'll admit that I'm fairly sure that it is in fact possible for a female who has been circumscised to have an orgasm in response to internal stimulation but I'm not 100% sure... On with the research ho...