Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Original poster

Why is child circumcision not treated like FGM?

222 replies

MyMabel · 15/08/2021 19:19

Unless there’s a medical need for circumcision.. why is it ok to cut off part of a male baby genitals?

Just scrolling through tik tok and saw a video of a lady’s baby who she waited until he was 1 years old to do it instead of a newborn and it “didn’t go to plan” whatever that shall mean.. and the comments about people doing it because it’s ‘cleaner’ and ‘he won’t miss what he can’t remember having’ just shocked me.

I just can’t understand why you would want to multilateral you baby unless necessary for medical reasons.

Is there a legit age reason behind it being ok for male babies? - genuinely wondering if anyone has anything factual based behind this?

OP posts:
Spongeboob · 15/08/2021 22:53

@GeorgiaGirl52

Am in the US. Had my son done in the hospital on Day 2, before he was released. Three doctors recommended the procedure (one female and two male.) Reasons were cleanliness and less likelihood of penile cancer. He is an adult now and there have been no complaints or complications. It doesn't really compare with FGM - more like docking a puppy's tail.
So who gives the informed consent, the baby or the puppy? Oh wait, neither can. If someone in the hospital recommended that you remove a part of your body at the same time for the same reasons would have gone along with that? You're okay with that being done to your newborn on someone else's advice, as an adult with a mind of your own. Without question. That beggars belief. He won't remember it so no harm done? Fancy causing a newborn pain because someone else said it's okay, and you're female so would never have had to have this choice made for you. Fucking backwards.
Postdatedpandemic · 15/08/2021 22:55

Are there any other parts of new born children we are allowed to legally remove?

How does a man who was circumcised at birth know what damage has been done? The few where it goes wrong, guess they just keep quiet or get raised as girls.

Those of you in favour of MGM, what level of FGM do you think is acceptable? Just trim a few loose bits?

noraclavicle · 15/08/2021 22:56

There's little to compare between the two. As the major religions are pretty much all ruled by males, you can be sure male circumcision would not exist if it had damaging and life changing effects as female circumcision does.

I can’t go with this - there are a number of men who’ve been through it who have been damaged. The degrees of damage vary - most men who’ve been through it have sufficient sensitivity to say it hasn’t damaged them, but tradition and cultural pressure is a powerful thing. Many men - like my DH - don’t want to think about it because of the power that tradition holds over them. I agree that FGM is physically more damaging and done deliberately to destroy any pleasure that the girl subjected to it would have from sex, but I hold that both are wrong. Both are done without consent, both are wrong.

Namenic · 15/08/2021 22:57

I don’t think fgm is the same as male circumcision as the types and rates of complications are different. For example males would not have the potential effect of periods and childbirth. They may have other effects - like hypersensitivity in the area, but the complications are are not the same (because the anatomy is different).

I believe historically there are different cultures where male circumcision has been practiced. Just because it is religious/cultural and historic doesn’t make it right - eg foot binding. However I believe that in certain circumstances male circumcision has some benefits - eg reduced rate of hiv and hpv in some groups. Hygiene may have been important 150 years ago - when some places didn’t have running water (and still some places today do not have this). Perhaps now in high income countries the situation has changed and we need to think hard about norms and practices - what are the benefits and the risks? I don’t think it is straightforward.

Spongeboob · 15/08/2021 23:03

Tbh what gets me about either issue is that the boys are often "done" to match their dad. With FGM the female family members force it because it was done to them. I'm far more horrified by this as the root of this is a male perspective perpetuated by the female victims upon their own daughters knowing the suffering they'll endure. In that way it's incomparable with circumcision but the mothers who choose to have their sons circumcised for any reason other than medical are not without blame. And certainly should give it a second thought beyond "tradition" or "it was recommended". Not your bits, not your choice.

OhHolyJesus · 15/08/2021 23:10

Generally I accepted circumcision as a religious practice but now I'm a mother I have thought about this much more.

I have seen videos of babies being strapped down like a spatchcock chicken, screaming in pain. It is barbaric. I don't give a fuck what your religion is, no one should do that to a baby, or an older child, and it would have to be pretty particular medical circumstances to justify it, though it can happen and I would agree it should be done if medically necessary.

Anyone who says it's cleaner implies that a boy and learn to clean his own body genitals. Kids learn to wipes their own bums, girls learn to wipe front to back, boys can learn to wash their penises on the bath or shower to prevent infection.

gogohm · 15/08/2021 23:19

I was shocked when I moved to America and found out they routinely mutilated their baby boys - I thought it was a stupid religious ritual until then. Friends there asked me what it was like to have a partner who was whole because nearly all adult men were circumcised as babies (usually in the hospital before discharge) I've heard it's a bit less common now though

WitchBaby · 15/08/2021 23:34

not now there isn't, more than 2000 years ago, there was....

Yes they had no cloths or water to wipe the baby's penis so it just had to go in the bloke's mouth. No doesn't sound like paedophillia, nope not at all.

IveGotASongThatllGetOnYNerves · 16/08/2021 06:24

Docking a puppy's tail is also a bloody disgusting thing to do fyi.

Why on earth do so many people think it's ok to mutilate any sentient being for no valid reason, without their consent? It's crazy. Chop bits off your own body if you're that into it, FFS.

PufferFishGoneWrong · 16/08/2021 08:26

@ParityJ

I can it keep posting the same relies to people. If you read my other posts, go Google.
I know about it, read an article a few years ago. Where the rabi had the herpes coldsore and gave many baby boys herpes for life due to this practice. Utter vile!!!!!
PufferFishGoneWrong · 16/08/2021 08:30

@GeorgiaGirl52

Am in the US. Had my son done in the hospital on Day 2, before he was released. Three doctors recommended the procedure (one female and two male.) Reasons were cleanliness and less likelihood of penile cancer. He is an adult now and there have been no complaints or complications. It doesn't really compare with FGM - more like docking a puppy's tail.
WTAF a puppies tail for comparison. Jesus H Christ.
happydays2345 · 16/08/2021 08:41

[quote Shmithecat2]@happydays2345

Eh? indeed. Read up on it. It's a thing. Google 'oral suction circumcision'. Fucking vile.[/quote]
Horrifying

anon12345678901 · 16/08/2021 08:47

@GeorgiaGirl52

Am in the US. Had my son done in the hospital on Day 2, before he was released. Three doctors recommended the procedure (one female and two male.) Reasons were cleanliness and less likelihood of penile cancer. He is an adult now and there have been no complaints or complications. It doesn't really compare with FGM - more like docking a puppy's tail.
But it was not your tail to dock so to speak.

My ex wanted it done to our child, told him not a hope in hell. It's not my body to take pieces away from so I won't, unless for medical emergencies.

Mummasdiary2021 · 16/08/2021 08:55

I wholeheartedly agree with you! My son had it done for medical reasons (his issue was severe so it was necessary) and wow! The pain he experienced was heart breaking. How anyone could ever put their child through that is beyond me

samG76 · 16/08/2021 10:52

MN really is a white middle class echo chamber, isn't it? I remember at our very diverse NCT class fifteen years ago it turned out out that everyone was having their child done if a boy. Some Jewish, one mum from Nigeria, a Filipina, an American and a couple of Muslims. Some of them came to our brit. If only we'd seen this thread....

Hoppinggreen · 16/08/2021 11:15

Yes, only White Mc people object to children’s genitals being mutilated for no medical reason.
It’s solely because we are racist snobs

Kanaloa · 16/08/2021 11:18

@GeorgiaGirl52

Am in the US. Had my son done in the hospital on Day 2, before he was released. Three doctors recommended the procedure (one female and two male.) Reasons were cleanliness and less likelihood of penile cancer. He is an adult now and there have been no complaints or complications. It doesn't really compare with FGM - more like docking a puppy's tail.
I agree it doesn’t compare with fgm but comparing it to docking a puppy’s tail doesn’t really make it better - you’re not even supposed to do that anymore, or clip ears. Most people agree it isn’t best practice.
WitchBaby · 16/08/2021 11:33

@samG76

MN really is a white middle class echo chamber, isn't it? I remember at our very diverse NCT class fifteen years ago it turned out out that everyone was having their child done if a boy. Some Jewish, one mum from Nigeria, a Filipina, an American and a couple of Muslims. Some of them came to our brit. If only we'd seen this thread....

Yes if only you had - your beautiful little baby boys wouldn't be mutilated for life.

DoucheCanoe · 16/08/2021 11:37

@samG76 I love the assumptions but I'm afraid you're incorrect on my part atleast Wink

NCT classes are the epitomy of the middle classes so I'm surprised that you were t met with any of the "echo chamber" there!

FanFckingTastic · 16/08/2021 11:40

Am in the US. Had my son done in the hospital on Day 2, before he was released. Three doctors recommended the procedure (one female and two male.) Reasons were cleanliness and less likelihood of penile cancer.
He is an adult now and there have been no complaints or complications.
It doesn't really compare with FGM - more like docking a puppy's tail.

Docking a puppy's tail was made illegal back in 2007.

In my opinion all forms of circumcision should be made illegal, unless there is a medial need. I can't fathom why a parent would want to have bits of an absolutely perfect baby chopped off.

Leavesofautumn · 16/08/2021 12:00

Genuine question, why is it such a widespread cultural norm in the USA? In other Western countries, it's mainly found in minority religious groups but really rare in the general average population as a whole. So, where did this USA-only cultural norm come from amongst non-religious people?

ancientgran · 16/08/2021 12:03

@myohmywhatawonderfulday

Not factual just anecodotal.

My DH is circumsised and he prefers the look of it and tells me it is easier to keep clean. His friend was circumsised as an adult for a medical reason and he prefers his 'new' penis - again, so he says.

Where as FGM is a much more intrusive, dangerous and does really cause pain and problems. So whilst on the surface level they are the same - the modification of the body, I think they are different.

I think there is no way men would perpetuate male circumsison if it were not good for them in some way. Tradition isn't enough - men are wimps and so there must be something about it that serves them.

Your husband knows no different. If his friend needed it for medical reasons then one would hope it is an improvement but that isn't the same as subjecting a helpless child to an unnecessary operation.
FrippEnos · 16/08/2021 12:04

GeorgiaGirl52

Can't say that I am surprised that three doctors that would get paid for doing the procedure would advise that it should be done.

MissyB1 · 16/08/2021 12:07

Haven't read the whole thread so sorry if this has already been mentioned, but I've always found it interesting that religions that advocate male circumcision don't seem to believe that their God had designed Humans perfectly. Doesn't it say in the bible that God created man in his own image - or something like that? Do they think God said "yeah I will make this deliberate mistake to see if they spot it and do something about it".

ancientgran · 16/08/2021 12:10

@GeorgiaGirl52

Am in the US. Had my son done in the hospital on Day 2, before he was released. Three doctors recommended the procedure (one female and two male.) Reasons were cleanliness and less likelihood of penile cancer. He is an adult now and there have been no complaints or complications. It doesn't really compare with FGM - more like docking a puppy's tail.
Did they think you were incapable of keeping your baby clean? Or teaching him how to keep himself clean as he got older? How insulting, you must have been mortified that your child had to go through that rather than you just keeping him clean.

You realise that your son is lucky if there were no complications, as to complaints - do you really think he is likely to discuss his penis and any problems with it with you?