You've claimed we should ignore other forms of mutilation because "whataboutism."

Wrong, bitch.

I told that other user that they were doing a whataboutism... because they were fucking doing a whataboutism. They were effectively delegitimizing FGM because "well what about MGM?!?!?". 

Just because there's an effort and focus on FGM doesn't mean there is none for MGM. Yet that user was suggesting otherwise.

Its the same incel logic that states the existence of feminism and women's empowerment takes away from and harms men. It doesn't.

I think it's reasonable to argue that any kind of mutilation should be prohibited,

Except that isn't what that user was saying. It wasn't "and we should also combat MGM". It was "OH YEAH? WELL WHAT ABOUT MGM HUH?!?! WHY ARENT YOU FOCUSING ON THAT RIGHT NOW?!?!"

instead of carving out exceptions. By that logic, my question remains: do you disagree, or should we instead just try to make female genital mutilation less bad?

No, your question is still suprememly fucking stupid and your interpretation is exceptionally moronic.

FGM and MGM should both be banned, and any suggestion that my stance was otherwise is you yourself being incredibly dense.

Here's a bonus since you can't seem to get simple facta through your skull.

FGM is estimated to cause around 44.3k deaths of young girls annually

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10432559/

On the other hand:

Severe to catastrophic complications, including death, are so rare that they are reported only as individual case reports.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision?wprov=sfla1

Which again, goes back to my fucking point that you're somehow too dense to understand.

The reason there's a greater concern over FGM, is because it actually has significantly higher rates of adverse effects, including death