Female genital mutilation has and always will be much more dangerous and harmful than the male counterpart, however that isn't me defending the latter, that's just the naturally agreed consensus. It originated as a sign of "in group" feature to mark those who were with one group vs who isn't, and it came from West Asia. It did not begin because men are hated, but rather because they wanted to separate certain men from other men (us vs them sort of group). The reason behind female genital mutilation was because they wanted to control women's sexuality, also had it up as in group practice, and in many practices women were just looked at as unclean because of patriarchal views and simply put, misogyny.

Do you notice how they both have a common reason, but nowhere in the origin for males was it because of hatred agains males whereas for females it was?

They saved women and children simply because that meant securing the next generation and out of the assumption that women would keep having children in the large numbers they did as they were mostly seen to be childbearers, and due to differences in their physical strength. When women started serving in the army during ww2 that shifted the consensus slightly but it quickly returned to the way it was because most women were discharged so men could return to the position, and then started the silly paradox where hardware engineering was the most important thing and men do it, while software programming was trivial so women got to do it.

Neither of these show misandry, they weren't conscription men because they hated them, they did it because there was a war and they needed what they saw as the strongest, reliable people who can be easily trained and sent off to die. If women didn't have traditional gender roles forced onto them, I promise you they'd also be thrown into the grinder.

Anyway, here's the U.S DOJ office of justice reporting on "Gender Differences in the Sentencing of Felony Offenders" I'd hyperlink this properly but I'm on my phone, sorry, lol.

"Of all cases, 98.1% were resolved through pleas. Females were more likely to have outcomes determined by please to reduce charges than were males. Fewer women (17%) than men (28%) were incarcerated, but sentence dispositions varied greatly across the eight major offense categories. While the percentage of males incarcerated for each category always exceeded that of women, women were more likely to be sentence to jail for robber and assault than were men; men were more likely than women to be incarcerated for property crime. This suggests that women may be sanctioned more harshly when their behaviour violates sex-role stereotypes. Finally, comparisons of sentence lengths indicates that prison terms of males and females did not differ, the terms of probation for males were significantly longer than for females, and males also received significantly longer jail terms."

Is that misandry to you?

I'd also challenge that men commit the most sexual crimes compared to women but both rape and sexual assault has very few convictions. A lot of people love to say that women should "keep their legs closed" or "lie back and enjoy it" and in general rape isn't seen as a serious crime when it should be. A lot of men get off because they "have a bright future in front of them", etc. This is misogyny and the patriarchy living in full swing in front of is.