Circumcision classed as possible child abuse in draft CPS document

It should be illegal unless needed for medical reasons. I don't understand why someone could worship a god who tells them they need to chop off part of their baby. All that says to me is the god is evil.

I don't think thats a helpful comparison, that it's not as bad as another thing.

They are both awful, needless, often go badly wrong.

We are not talking about circumcision for valid medical reasons, the ones you mention, which are also very rare. I understand females can sometimes have surgery on their genitals for medical reasons as well. thats needed and evaluated properly, fine.

But frankly, I experience quite a lot of body horror thinking about the number of males penises that are ritually sliced up, without permission, understanding of generally, aesthetic. And at far higher numbers than FGM (I think, judging by population size and traditions)

EDIT to add - it absolutely does interfere with pleasure. I am not willing to go into the details why, but I assure you, it does.

Easy. Circumcision is child abuse. on males or females. It's an out dated, barbaric, dangerous, unnecessary practice.

Speaking as someone with a foreskin who is quite attached to it.

It doesn't interfere with male sexual pleasure, for a start.

There's no way that this can be known, though. The vast majority of men/boys who are circumcised either have it done as babies or small children, long before they know anything about being sexually active, and so have nothing to compare it with; or they have it done when older to remedy a medical problem, so of course they will see it as a positive development.

I don't know what the numbers are of adult men without any medical issues in that area who just, for their own personal reasons, actively seek out circumcisions; but I rather suspect that there aren't all that many opting for it. Maybe men who convert to Islam or Judaism as adults, but how many others?

It seems very strange to assume that removing tens of thousands of nerve endings, as well as something that naturally aids the smooth mechanics of sex, would have no deleterious effects.

You could technically say that surgically removing women's breasts would be no big deal either: you only need them to feed babies, but you can easily use formula for that; and you also drastically reduce your risks of breast cancer in later life by so doing (which is hugely more prevalent in women than penile cancer is in men, which is a reason often given by pro-circumcision people)... yet there doesn't seem to be a massive queue of women lining up to have it done for non-medical reasons, apart from some of those who specifically want to reject womanhood and believe it (at least at one point in their lives) to be a beneficial thing to do.

It is.

That's what happened to David Reimer, the boy experimented on by John Money, one of the inventors of "gender identity", though in his case the circumcision was done for medical reasons, not cultural/religious. He pretty much lost his entire penis, so Money decided to try and turn him into a "girl" instead, as well as other perverted experiments involving him and his twin brother...

It can desensitise the head over time so its not harmless and its nothing compared to the horror of fmg but its still wrong and child abuse imho

If a dr does it all good if an untrained religious person or family member, i would assume.
I wish they would just make it a crime for non medical reasons

I suspect it might harm sexual function if botched

I don't think male circumcision is even close to FGM. It doesn't interfere with male sexual pleasure, for a start. One of my brothers and also a boyfriend had to have it done as adults (in their 20s) as their foreskin was too tight and they couldn't have normal sexual function.

And yet FGM is being stepped down 🤔

Do they mean a skilled practioner isn't carrying out child abuse but an untrained amateur is?
I think that's the gist according to the Guardian article:

'The draft CPS guidance states that, unlike female genital mutilation, “there is not a specific criminal offence of carrying out male circumcision”.

“However, this can be a painful and harmful practice, if carried out incorrectly or in inappropriate circumstances. It may be a form of child abuse or an offence against the person,” it adds.'

How is ever not an offence against a person? Can you really argue about informed consent, then be ok with cutting skin from babies? Babies have bled to death from this. Collateral damage for a barbaric cultural practice?

We need to not pander to religions around this. It is harmful to children and if there is a god, he creates each child as intended.

Good. Gets my vote.