You're right, and in fact a lot of my objections to female genital cutting apply to infant male circumcision as well - done at a young age, no health benefits, may damage the genitalia. Of course, as it's practiced in the West, male circumcision is more hygenic and less dangerous than FGC, so there's that consideration as well.

I guess I should have expanded my post to include this subject, because of course it's related. The major difference for me, though, involves the cultural roots of the respective practices - FGC is caught up in fears of female sexuality and a desire to control women's behavior, while labiaplasty is part of the cut-yourself-up trend that pushes women into a narrower and narrower "ideal" image created for the pleasure of (male) others, regardless of the damage to women's pleasure/health. Male circumcision, on the other hand, isn't about restricting male power or pleasure, and the pressure to be circumcised is less prevalent than that to have a vulva that isn't "ugly."

I do, however, oppose male circumcision performed on infants without their consent. That's definitely a choice to be made by the penis-owner in question.