What do you all think about male circumcision?

The principle is not the same. FGM is done to reinforce the oppression of women as a class in certain cultures by removing their sexuality and has life-long impact on the health of the women affected. The vast majority of men who were circumcised at birth are unhindered in their enjoyment of male privilege as a result of circumcision and frankly couldn't give a fuck about it

Yes they are different operations and I agree that the female one is more serious.
But I'm talking about the principle. Both are inflicted unnecessarily on an innocent child for the satisfaction of misguided adults.

There is a difference between male and female circumcision. It is silly to say there isn't.

Cailin uncircumcised boys can and do get infections underneath the foreskin. It's most common in under 5s and is called balanitis.

DS had it when he was 1. It's not usually too serious but his infection was bad and he needed iv antibiotics for a few days. It was most likely caused by a bit of poo getting underneath his foreskin when he had diarrhoea.

We were told that if it didn't clear up, or it happened again, the Doctors would recommend circumcision.

But I agree that it's wrong if its not medically necessary.

I agree Sallyingforth that no child should have to undergo either but to say there is no difference is really minimising millions of women's experiences.

I see no difference whatever between male and female circumcision.
No child should be forced to undergo any operation unless its required for medical reasons.

What do MRAs believe that is profoundly anti feminist?
I've never met one or spoken to one.

Are you for real zippy?

LOL at the suggestion that you can be a MRA and a feminist.

Feminism came out of the genuine, systematic injustice that patriarchy has inflicted on women for thousands of years.

Men's rights activism came out of some men seeing women clawing back a tiny bit of their basic human status from patriarchy and feeling that to be an attack on their basic human right to oppress women.

There is no comparison.

TBH I don't think you need to be a feminist or a MRA to be for or against male circumcision or FGM. Lots of people are against them for completely unrelated reasons.

And yes by the nature of things, no-one is wrong on everything. MRA's are right about male circumcision, it should stop. But they aren't right on the reasons it exists. Just as they are right about men being forced into gender roles they don't want to have - MRA's never take their analysis beyond a very superficial level, they whinge about the gender roles, without wanting to tackle the source of those gender roles - patriarchy.

"Is it really necessary for everyone to choose between being a "feminist" or an "MRA"? Isn't it possible to be both?"

Nope. Because being an MRA means you have to believe profoundly anti feminist things.

Oh SGB you do realise you'll probably get deleted for that don't you.

Not tiptoe-ing round people's religious sensibilities.

All circumcision is wrong (except for medical reasons which are rare). It's one of the many reasons why I despise religion and don't tiptoe round the sensibilities of the superstitious. IF you think your imaginary friend has given you permission to mutilate your children's bodies, you are a primitive fucking barbarian and an idiot. Fuck your culture and your traditions, why should they be 'respected' any more than if they involved slave owning or human sacrifice?

Oh, I tell a lie, Mumsnet has deleted a post of mine, presumably because I called MRA's Misogynist Rapey Arseholes.

So we're not allowed to say that about MRA's anymore.

If that's not the reason my post was deleted Mumsnet, please refresh my memory as to what it said and why it was deleted.

Because I can't remember breaking any talk guidelines.

And so far, Mumsnet allows us to call groups we disagree with arseholes.

Although I'm sure the MRA's who frequent here are working on changing that...

Male circumcision doesn't exist because of Judaism and other patriarchal religions, it exists because of patriarchy. They are part of patriarchy so they bought into it. There are loads of patriarchal cultures all over the world where boys are mutilated as part of their entry into manhood but they're not Jewish or Islamic or whatever, they're just patriarchal.

I don't believe for one moment that you were pleasantly surprised by our discussion, you probably thought we'd be just like whiney MRA's and whinge about "Wotaboutthewimminz?" I'm not surprised you find "Misogynist Rapey Arseholes" very provoking and uncalled for because of course men who buy into MRA shit would call it provoking to be called on their vile attitudes.

I use the word rapey about men who espouse attitudes and values which make them look as if they buy into rape culture. If men don't want me to use that term about them, they shouldn't say rapey things. MRA's say rapey things all the time. I can understand that rapey sexist men are unhappy about the existence of the word, because it names their attitudes and what their attitudes buy into, in a really raw, straightforward way.

As for misognyist and arseholes - well yeah, I believe MRA's to be both.

Sorry, OP. Not what you wanted to hear? Maybe you should go back to your planet, do a bit more research and try again?

Male circumcision = wrong on all levels
Female circumcision = wrong on all levels
MRAs = wrong on all levels

Feminism = freedom of women from oppression

HTH

Oh, and feminism does not mean gender equality. Gender equality means gender equality.

Feminism means gender equality so that would mean male issues as well as female? Please correct me if I am wrong.

You're wrong. As AmandaPayne says, the clue is in the name.

In any event, male infant circumcision is not a "male issue" in the way that FGM is a women's issue. It's not women or matriarchal society or religion that are imposing circumcision on infant males. It is not carried out to curtail male sexuality nor to reinforce the oppressed position of men in society.

You may think that on an individual level it is just as bad for a man to be circumcised as for a woman to suffer FGM but that does not make it a "male issue" like FGM is a women's issue.

"Pleasantly surprised?" So you haven't been on this site before? One of the issues that mumsnet is almost unanimous on is the unacceptability of non medically required infant circumcision. Or were you surprised that women were able to comment on an exclusively male issue without howling "but what about the womenz"? Well that's how intelligent thoughtful people behave.

Oh and of course men are welcome to post and comment. However, the record of MRA doing so is not good, and anyone posting with that particular agend must expect to be met with at the very least, wariness.

Well, my two pennorth - my late husband was circumcised as a newborn in 1948; upper class, family (them, not me) Christian (though not strongly). The reason was because his father (RAF) was due to be stationed in the Middle East and was told it was advisable because of the climate and sand. Which, perhaps, is why the whole idea started in the first place. Unfortunately, they were not aware he was a haemophiliac.

Those would be patriarchal religions, yes.

FWIW

I strongly suspect that Zippy is utterly livid that he's come on here to complain about male circumcision expecting to be told that no-one cares about it and is taken aback and pissed off that these evil feminists agree with him, that male circumcision is crap and should stop.

It has contradicted his script of us, which is that we're awful man-haters and if only we could, we would cut the whole penis off the baby, never mind the foreskin. Afterwards, we would probably kill the baby and then eat it. Because we hate all males you see, including the babies we carried, gave birth to and nurtured with our milk.

We haven't conformed to his narrative. So now he's throwing his toys out of the pram.

This is men's rights activisim laydeez. This is how seriously we should take it. This is how much respect we should have for it.

He has not once acknowledged all the agreement he's had. He has not once acknowledged the analysis of why male circumcision exists - male violence, patriarchy FGS - it wasn't invented in a matriarchal society was it - he's ignored all that in favour of whining about the fact that TWO posters (one of them me, I hold my hand up to it) used the term whiney to describe MRA's (because using a negative adjective is OUTRAGEOUS) and quipped that it should stand for Misogynist Rapey Arseholes.

Two posts that he can take issue with in the midst of all this agreement.

If he's not here for a fight with feminists, then I'm a fucking banana. Or Ian Hislop, take yer pick.