> Saddlebagging is about adopting sexual practices adopted specifically to prevent procreation
On that level it's not different from any kind of contraception, also widely done in humanity, so not really insightful there. It's interesting to me only because it's a religious "trick," a way to do something what is formally not forbidden. Like
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/thoughtful-animal/once-u...
"Once Upon A Time, The Catholic Church Decided That Beavers Were Fish"
...in order to eat their meat at the times of fasting. The rest of the article has more examples.
What I thought made it non-relevant is that FGM is cultural, not genetic or a species wide aspect of our psychology (regardless of whether it affects millions). Additionally,I don't think you made a good case as to why being born as a species that has to contend with bad conditions (but I don't believe worse than the alternative) isn't preferable to being born a species that has to contend with death at every attempted mating.
In short, it felt a bit like you used FGM for impact due to it's status in our culture, not for it's relevance to the discussion at hand. It's possible I'm not seeing a connection you thought was implied there though, so feel free to expand if you feel like it.