What exactly is the advantage of circumcision and why is their such insistence?

[FrigginRexManningDay]

I was watching 'What to expect when you're expecting' last night and one of the male characters was insisting on circumcision for his unborn son,which turned out to be a girl.

One of the reasons he agreed with was making the penis less sensitive. I don't understand the reasons behind it. AFAIK its not healthier or cleaner. I understand it being done for medical reasons of course,but it just seems unnecessary to be so routine in America.

[Primafacie]

so being happy with your body means you are brainwashed?

[curlew]

"The life chances of Jewish kids in this country are pretty good, and there are almost certainly other groups more deserving of your sympathy...."

Absolutely. But this thread is about circumcision. And, as I keep saying, I am strongly opposed to performing medically unnecessary surgery on people unable to consent.

And, incidentally, the only possible hint of a justification might possibly a deeply held conviction that an uncircumcised child would be shunned and excluded. The cheerful assertion that people drop all other markers of their faith but still circumcise their boy babies is just breathtakingly awful. And just goes to show that conditioning runs hideously deep.

[curlew]

" so being happy with your body means you are brainwashed?"

Nope. Thinking you have to have a piece cut off your child's body for no reason means you are brainwashed.

[SamG76]

It does seem we can't win in Curlew's world. Either the brit is performed only by the religious and is dying out, in which case it's brainwashing, or it's performed by the secular as well, in which case it's also brainwashing. Similarly, if Jewish men are generally quite happy with their status, that shows they're brainwashed, while if they weren't, that would support a ban as well. So any evidence either way supports her theory....

[Fillybuster]

No, Curlew, I'm not. But I don't think this is the right forum, or approach, if you want to achieve an open discussion rather than a 'two sides both not budging in their position' situation.

[Primafacie]

What I am trying to tell you is that non-religious, circumcised men tend to be happy that they are circumcised. They are happy with their sex life, with the way their penis looks, with the fact they never have UTIs. They would not have their penis any other way, but they also know that adult circumcision is more painful and more risky - so they make the decision to have their sons circumcised as they believe it is in their son's best interest.

These are there reasons - they are not doing it "for no reason". I know you disagree with these reasons. That is fine, but that doesn't mean they are brainwashed. Or maybe it means you have been brainwashed against circumcision?

[curlew]

There is not rational reason for routinely circumcising infant boys. So anyone who does it is either misinformed or misguided. Of course a confident, happy circumcised man is happy with his body. This happiness in his body does not mean he is brainwashed. However, if he chooses to circumcise his son, then he is in the misinformed or misguided category. If he does not adhere to any of the other tenets of his faith, then there is no explanation but brainwashing for circumcision.

[curlew]

Oh look, now it s the ad hominem. Always happens when people realise their position is indefensible.

[Namechangingnorma]

Guessing you don't know many Jewish or Muslim people?

[curlew]

Guessing wrongly.

[Namechangingnorma]

People you consider friends? And have you had this debate with them?

[curlew]

Honestly that really isn't any of your business, is it? If I remember correctly, you're the person who considers saying that it's wrong to perform medically unnecessary surgery on people unable to consent "anti Semitic craziness" I don't personally know anyone in real life as blinkered as that.

[SamG76]

Curlew - it's not thinking it's wrong that's a problem. I think loads of things people do to children are wrong, but as they're not being forced on me I don't insist that they're banned. The effect of the ban you seem to be suggesting would be to cause immense difficulties to the Jewish and Muslim communities, damage communal relations and cause all sorts of problems for the NHS having to repair the damage done by people having it done abroad.

[curlew]

What things that you think wrong involve permanently changing, by surgery, the body of a person not able to consent?

[Namechangingnorma]

I was not being provocative, just interested as you seen very militant in your views, I would imagine it would be difficult to have relationship's with people when you areso against their culture. I am very laid back generally and am from a reform Jewish background which is very
liberal. What I said was anti-Semitic craziness was your example of belly button piercing. I am totally open to constructive debate but very unlikely to change my view. I go on how I feel and your posts make me feel that you are very very anti my culture and seem very angry. Much much more so than other posters who absolutely share your views but haven't made me feel attacked and sneered at in the same way

[curlew]

I am not opposed to your culture. I am opposed to permanently changing the body of a person unable to consent by needless surgery.

[curlew]

I honestly don't see why my belly button piercing example is any different. I suspect the reason you find it so offensive is that it hits a little close to home. Any rational person must know at an intlellectual level that performing needless surgery on a person unable to consent is wrong. It is only when clouded by "faith" that is can possibly be acceptable.so when the argument is reduced to the absurd, as in my analogy, there is really no place to go but personal attacks.

[SigmundFraude]

Recommended reading on circumcision myth busting. Particularly the myth that the foreskin is a 'flap of skin', well so is the eyelid......

www.circumstitions.com/

[Primafacie]

I wrote a long post but it went poof. Gah.

Anyway: their reasons, not there.

Any rational person must know at an intellectual level that we make thousands of decisions for our children, before they are able to consent. We do that on a risk-benefit assessment basis, even though this doesn't necessarily rise to a conscious level. Should I let my baby cry to sleep, or go and pick her up? Should I give my child a dummy or not? Should I drive the baby to the supermarket, or walk there? Should I send my kid to a nursery or a childminder? Which if these is safest? Which will procure the most long-term and/or short-term benefits? We do this, literally, ALL the time. Many of these decisions will have an impact on our children's physical appearance: what we feed them will impact their weight. A dummy may impact their teeth. Letting them climb, cook, ride a scooter may improve their physical skills, but they may also hurt themselves in the process. The BCG vaccine will leave a scar. We assess risks and benefits, and make the decision that we think is right. That different parents make different parenting choices is a consequence of the fact that they face, and perceive, risk and benefit differently, and that they are influenced by their community, upbringing, personality, etc. What seems a good parenting choice for a person will be deemed a risk not worth taking by another.

Scientific evidence shows that the benefits of infant circumcision outweigh the risks. Therefore making that choice is not immoral, unreasonable or misguided. It may not be what YOU would do, but you are not walking into everyone's shoes.

But of course this won't matter to you Curlew, as your mode of argument can be reduced to the following: if someone disagrees with you, they are misinformed and brainwashed. If someone finds you offensive, it's because you "hit a little close to home". How does it feel to always be right?

[curlew]

Scientific evidence shows that the benefits of infant circumcision outweigh the risks.

No. Scientific evidence shows that if you are going to circumcise the safest time to do it is in infancy. And anyway, I don't think anyone is arguing that the procedure is particularly risky are they?

How does it feel to always be right?

I have no idea. I also have no idea how to respond to this. I believe that permanently surgically changing the body for no good medical reason of a person unable give consent is just wrong. Ethically, morally, every way. And so would everyone else if religion wasn't involved. What do you want me to say? "I believe this to be morally and ethically wrong- but only sometimes?"

[TheRealFellatio]

" so being happy with your body means you are brainwashed?"

No, sorry I think you've got confused. Being NOT happy with your (or your son's) body with the way God clearly chose it to be is the issue here, isn't it?

[OliviaMMumsnet]

Hello
Understandably this is a topic which is provoking debate but we want to remind you of our guidelines
Thanks

[curlew]

Olivia- please could you clarify?

[TheRealFellatio]

I think loads of things people do to children are wrong, but as they're not being forced on me I don't insist that they're banned.

Oh, the irony. So it's ok for you and your religious/cultural community to force circumcision onto your sons, but only when someone tries to force something onto you does it become a potential concern.

The effect of the ban you seem to be suggesting would be to cause immense difficulties to the Jewish and Muslim communities, damage communal relations and cause all sorts of problems for the NHS having to repair the damage done by people having it done abroad.

Really? I thought you all seemed to be quite vociferously in agreement that it was perfectly safe, relatively painless, and with very few damaging side effects.

Or should we amend that to 'Circumcision in the UK in 2013 is perfectly safe etc.' because clearly you seem to be implying that it is a potential problem everywhere else.'

So it's ok to cut your sons so long as you do it in a nice cosy first world country. OK. got it now.