No, actually female circumcision includes merely removing the clitoral hood, and it was legal in the USA until 1997. Cutting children's genitals is WRONG period.
"I will speak out against MGM because just like those innocent baby boys my prepuce has been removed. Can I orgasm? Yes I can. Within about sixty seconds of sexual contact I orgasm. Sounds good right? WRONG. After I orgasm I experience oversensitive raw pain for the duration of the sexual contact. There is no hood to protect my clitoris. I may very well be the only woman out there who is looking for a partner who is a "one minute wonder" to spend the rest of my life with. Even now, years later, clothing, undergarments, contact... all of these irritate my overexposed clitoris. I also have to deal with the fact that if I choose to have a new sexual partner I will deal with the inevitable comments and questions which leave me feeling unattractive and just plain wrong down there."
Since when is surgery acceptable simply for religious, cultural and ethnic traditions though? These are the same reasons supported for female circumcision, and most westerners oppose it when it's a female child. It's not medical either. The p**is is healthy in a newborn just like the vulva is, and there is no reason to cut part of it off.