Cultural circumcision in babies/young boys

[junipermarten]

1 of my DS's is circumcised due to a medical issue, he was 3 at the time and it was bloody horrific.

When he was going through it, a good friend gave me tips on after care and offered the number of a private doctor. She has sons who were circumcised shortly after birth for religious reasons.

I personally don't agree with circumcision unless medically required however I respect others choices for religious reasons.

It got me thinking about the high % of boys in the US who are circumcised for cultural reasons, just over 2/3rds. Why is it so prevalent there?

I was having a look at % of male pop per country and the highest were mainly Islamic, but also Samoa was almost 100% which surprised me but apparently its cultural as opposed to religious (I think).

Well, the thread is still here. And rightly so. Nobody here is opposed to Jewish people or Muslims, just to infant circumcision. If a ban means people would emigrate, so be it.

Totally agree. It's sexual mutilation in the same way as FGM.

If anyone wants to move abroad so they can continue to legally cut bits off their baby (unless recommended to by a qualified medical professional) then that’s fine by me

So one of the costs is the loss of the UK's Jewish and Muslim communities. Any other costs?

I’m English and was circumcised as a baby for non-religious reasons. It is very common in upper class English society and it is absolutely no surprise that Princes William and Harry are also circumcised. I went to a private school in London; a lot of other boys (though not a majority) were also circumcised - some for religious reasons but many more for non-religious reasons (like me). Both my young nephews have also been circumcised.

So one of the costs is the loss of the UK's Jewish and Muslim communities

FGM is illegal but I've never heard any one from the Somali community moving abroad because of it.

All people want is for circumision to only be performed on those that can consent. That's all.

@AndyWarholsPiehole banning male circumcision is essentially banning Judaism and criminalising British Jews for practicing their religion.

I didn’t have a choice about being circumcised (for non-religious reasons). Nevertheless, I’m glad that my parents chose to have me done. My wife prefers it too.

It is certainly a Class marker in the UK @KSM87.

I have to say the accusations on this thread have upset me. I know they are unfounded and I know they are a cheap diversionary tactic , but nevertheless they have upset me.

I am solidly, vocally, and regularly critical mod anything anti semitic. If anyone cares to look at my posts on recent threads such as the one discussing the David Baddiel documentary they will see that. Two posters on this thread have used claims of anti semitism to shut down debate and criticism of a practice. Not debate around a religion, that was never mentioned.

to be accused of aggressive anti semitism for having an opinion on a practice carried out by many cultures and religions, then sea linking when asking what about my language led to that accusation, is unfair.

i can add nothing further to this thread. I note it has not been deleted, neither have any of the posts in it, which as I know nothing here to be as claims, is reassuring.

it’s not often I’m upset by being called something, wrongly, on the internet but on this occasion I am

I remember seeing posts on this on Mumsnet that would soon be full with hatred, with words like mutilation and child abuse, to soon be deleted by moderators.

It's an important debate and from the first comments I've read, it's good to see people are putting their POV/ experiences without being attacked (haven't read all the comments).

If I was researching the topic I'd start from complications in adulthood for people who hadn't had it preventatively - what are the stats on that. As a procedure like that will undoubtedly be easier to recover from physically and psychologically the younger one is. Then compare with stats on harm of doing it.

And as long as parents are directed to objective, independent research it should be up to them.

@H34th if you're going to do that, you cannot ignore looking at the data for men who were circumcised as children and are now having adverse effects from it.

We don't preventively take out tonsils or appendixes at birth. There's a reason for that - it's medically unnecessary. That's the whole point of the thread.

@TooBigForMyBoots so you are saying that religions should not ever have to change their practice? Well, so much for the C of E - they should immediately stop ordaining women. Unitarians should stop marrying gay couples. Nothing must ever change or evolve. What a ridiculous point of view that would be.

Banning doing it to babies
If men choose to do it then that’s up to them

That suggests that removing the foreskin from male babies is the most important part of Judaism and without it Judaism wouldn’t exist.
I very much doubt that is the case

Good grief! That's a bit of a stretch. Fantastic Four material.

I actually found a copy of the Protocols in the library in Mare St , Hackney. I handed it in and the librarian said ' oh that should be upstairs in the reference section'. Dreadful libellous garbage

I thought I covered that when I said I'll look into research of harm of doing it - at any stage.

I think comparing with removing appendix/ tonsils is unfair. This is a practice well established around the world for thousands of years. Banning something like that will only increase resistance, create illegal channels and all the dangers that come with it.
Piling up independent research and directing people to it is the way to go.
I haven't researched this personally, but if you have do share links to tell what made you feel so strongly against it.

This. And the age at which we consider a boy to be a man and a girl to be a woman has changed in the last thousand years. That age is now 18. So why not let them consent and choose at 18, rather than as a baby?

I’m sure when the holy books were written, and even what was practiced socially by religious and non religious communities 50-100 years ago is very different to now. We don’t accept polygamy, slavery, the stoning to death of gay people or children who steal. So things do change and those changes are accepted by the different communities in the here and now. Why not reconsider and reframe in a way that fits the heat and now. I’ve always respected the Jewish tradition of questioning and debating. Why can this practice not be questioned when everything else should be?

@H34th just because something has been done around the world for thousands of years doesn't mean it isn't unacceptable. Forced marriage and slavery were both thousand year old traditions after all. So was not allowing women to be priests.

The comparison with tonsillectomy etc. is for people who are pointing out the benefits of prevention in a health sense - if those benefits are so great then we should be preventively removing appendixes and tonsils too, in case they cause problems later on.

And no, I have no respect for traditions just because they are traditions.

Also the word “mutilation” as in female genital mutilation, FGM, is an accepted term both politically and medically. So it can’t be hate speech.

now let’s consider the double standard at play trying to get the thread banned when applying the term to male circumcision. Trying to control what things are called to control how people respond to the debate, what they are allowed to talk about.

words matter. Terms matter. It is genital mutilation. It is also circumcision. One more evocative than the other but neither is hate speech, nor anti semitic or islamophobia.

one person is offended by the practice, another is offended that that person took offence. Where does it end?

@pointythings the CofE were not forced to change by the law or because of lobbying from non CofE members.

You are talking about legistlation that will effectively ban Judaism in the UK. You do not consider yourself antisemitic but have said you are fine with our Jewish population leaving the country (and creating 300,000 refugees for the rest of the world) and you clearly know little about the Jewish faith and history.

It is not distraction to talk about the effect of a ban on the people it will directly impact.

@pointythings

I disagree with banning this and I've given my reasons why. You seem to want that and you believe it's an unacceptable tradition that you do not respect.

I'm saying beliefs should be debated, based on research, revised as necessary. If you are going to have a strong opinion on this, I'd start reading up medical journals of people who have actually asked all the questions and done all the observations on the subject.

You may not respect a tradition but you must take into account the attitude of many other people to that tradition and think about the negative consequences of an outright ban.

Boots stretching and twisting other peoples words to suit their argument again.

if the argument is that even if banned people would do it anyway-

Why not let Men in the religions and communities that practice it consent at 18? Surely that’s a compromise worth considering. Those that want it can choose when they’re adults, following the law of the land and the requirement for religion. Then the religious convent at is entered into of their own free will and that much more powerful for it?

and no babies will be harmed.

@TooBigForMyBoots but it won't ban Judaism, it will ban an abhorrent practice across the entire population. There's a lot more to Judaism than circumcision, wouldn't you say? And if a group of people who follow a faith or a tradition are unable to look at their practices and see that they are unacceptable and need to change, then perhaps they are the ones who are the problem. All of this also applies to Muslims and to people who consider themselves to be 'upper class' in the UK.

You may not respect a tradition but you must take into account the attitude of many other people to that tradition and think about the negative consequences of an outright ban.

No, I don't have to take the attitude of people who support an abhorrent tradition into account at all. That assumes I should also have to take the attitude of people who support FGM into account.

The medical evidence on both sides is not unequivocal (nice of you to assume I have not done any reading )

I would rather not see an outright ban and instead eradicate the practice through education, but given the utterly intransigent attitudes seen on this thread that isn't going to work.