Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 ··· 7 8 9 ··· 23 24

Original poster

To be pretty uncomfortable with home circumcision

578 replies

EastofEast · 20/10/2013 20:31

We get on very well with our neighbours and are pretty close but I was a bit shocked today, one of those moments where you find you really have opposing views on something quite fundamental.

Neighbour has a (gorgeous) two week old boy. She knocked on the door earlier to return my car keys (went to get a new battery for hers in my car) and I mentioned her new ds was unsettled for the first time ever; joking maybe he wasn't the perfect baby after all. My baby is demanding much more vocal about her needs. She said it was because he was circumcised today. I must have looked a little put off, I don't agree with it at all, as she then said 'oh he's doing really well. We were lucky the doctor came to house to do this one, all the others had to go to a clinic'. I was stunned, I'm amazed you're allowed to do such a thing at home in such an unregulated way. Frankly I wouldn't allow any deliberate harm to come to a child that wasn't medically necessary, but considering some people do do it I thought the rules would be tighter. We're both from (different) backgrounds which circumcise, although I refused to change my son, and I knew she'd do it after a related chat about whether fgm was that bad over a coffee one day but it's still upset me a bit the way it's done. The poor little thing is grumpy with loads of adults around to celebrate the event passing him round and round at 8.30pm.

I know the circumcision vs no circumcision has been done already, and not everyone shares my strong views, but at home? Should this be ok? I can't think of other similar procedures happening in a similar environment.

OP posts:

Strumpetron · 21/10/2013 22:20

Of course I know, which is why I said it should be made illegal. Now who's not reading properly?

Maybe you could do some research. Maybe you could take a look at the forums where men and boys post secretly because they are ashamed. The same men and boys who don't make a big deal out of it in front of people but have to hide away on the internet to speak to like minded people about their feelings.

The TINY - if any at all - health benefit is not worth abusing a child and risking them harbouring these feelings. And aside from that, even if they don't it is still inherently wrong to think you have a right to take away a part of someone's sexual organs.

I think I'll hide this, best for everyone. I hope a few people read the links and maybe do a bit of reading around, open their eyes to this very real thing.

It's also sad how when you search for 'victims of male circumcision' one of the first pages that comes up is 'how women are victims of male circumsicion'

CoteDAzur · 21/10/2013 22:23

Oh please. Spare me the theatrics.

Strumpetron · 21/10/2013 22:25

Yes because men harming themselves because they've been multilated is oh so theatrical.

Sallyingforth · 21/10/2013 22:36

Saying that male mutilation is OK because it's not as serious as female mutilation is no excuse at all.
It's like saying that stabbing someone in the arm is OK because it's not as serious as stabbing them in the throat.
BOTH are wrong and unnecessary.

Mim78 · 21/10/2013 22:36

I'm not a fan of male circumcision as I said -can believe it about the calpol etc but just saying not same as fgm.

Maybe not exactly the same as ear piercing babies but really my point is I don't like this either.

thebody · 21/10/2013 23:33

it's barbaric mutulation dressed up as ok as it's a 'cultural issue'

it's not. it's mutulation of a child by adults. same as female circumcision and babies having their ears pierced.

medical reasons as with all other operations fine.

Bunnygotwhacked · 21/10/2013 23:42

It's not all that different to tail docking how come that's illegal but cultural circumcision isnt

MajorieDawes · 22/10/2013 00:58

You're doing a great job cote. I don't have circumcised sons but come from a culture where they are.

Not a big deal at all. Certainly not worth getting worked up about.

loveandsmiles · 22/10/2013 07:29

We too come from culture where circumcision is normal but choose not to have our son circumcised. It is a choice.

Bonsoir · 22/10/2013 09:25

To be as violently anti-circumcision as some posters on this thread is to be anti-Semitic.

ElleBelly · 22/10/2013 09:38

Of course it's not. There are Jewish people too who don't inflict this on their children. Is it racist to be violently opposed to FGM?

FoxMulder · 22/10/2013 10:23

Cote there's plenty of people who don't know what Muslims & Jews tend to do or not do with their penises. Most people who don't know any Jews or Muslims, I would guess (although, Jewish circumcision is more well known, I grant you).

I don't know what kind of Muslim my sister & brother-in-law are, but presumably they chose not to circumcise their son for all the reasons on this thread.

thebody · 22/10/2013 10:28

why are these procedures done to young children? if any mutulation is part of a faith or practise then obviously any 18 year old would gladly consent to having their genitals mutulated without anaesthetic then? yes??

of course not. it's done by adults to non consenting children because they can. children can't object or fight back.

just because something was once acceptable doesn't make it right. otherwise children would still be starving in the streets here and 8 year olds would be cleaning chimneys.

to make this anti semantic or anti ANY faith/ culture is frankly lazy.

FoxMulder · 22/10/2013 10:43

I've only spoken to one circumcised man about it, so this is hardly an extensive survey, but he says he is glad he was done as a baby so he wouldn't have to go through it at an age where he would remember it.

WorraLiberty · 22/10/2013 10:55

Fox he shouldn't have to go through it at all.

Sorry Bonsoir but I think that's utter rubbish.

There is nothing anti-Semitic about wanting to protect children from having their genitals mutilated.

FoxMulder · 22/10/2013 10:59

Well, no, but he's glad anyway. He thinks it looks nicer and that women prefer it. There's no religious/cultural element.

I would guess most uncircumcised men are pretty glad to have retained their foreskins too though.

SamG76 · 22/10/2013 11:19

Fox Mulder - the fact that you don't know what sort of Muslims your sister and bil are rather suggests they don't take it that seriously. Presumably you would know if they celebrated Eid or fasted for Ramadhan, or ate only halal food.

WorraLiberty - some of the posters are sailing close to the wind by the vehemence of their opinions. If you don't like the brit, that's your right, but to say, eg, that you'd never speak to anyone who had their child circumcised is an overreaction, as essentially it means you'll never speak to Jews, Muslims, Americans, black Africans, etc....

In a similar way, there is nothing anti-traveller about trying to ensure that people live in houses with fixed addresses. However, if you banned people from living in caravans there's one particular community that might feel victimized.

WorraLiberty · 22/10/2013 11:24

I think those people are just genuinely upset and angry that this practice is still legal and being celebrated.

That doesn't make them anti anyone or any group, it just makes them anti circumcision.

To accuse them of being anti-Semitic is imo ridiculous and perhaps an attempt at trying to silence their argument.

FoxMulder · 22/10/2013 11:30

I'm pretty sure they do fast for Ramadan & eat halal food actually, Sam. They certainly don't touch alcohol.

thebody · 22/10/2013 11:33

agree Worra,

it's normal isn't it to NOT think mutilating babies and children is acceptable or right.

I think it's very very wierd to think inflicting pain and permanent disfigurement on another human being is normal and right.

race, religion, custom has absolutely no business in defending these practises.

it's wrong to inflict pain in another human being. it's just wrong.

FoxMulder · 22/10/2013 11:33

Anyway, it's beside the point really. Do you have to pass certain tests before you can call yourself a Jew or a Christian or Muslim?

harticus · 22/10/2013 11:37

To be as violently anti-circumcision as some posters on this thread is to be anti-Semitic.

Bollocks.
It is to oppose the unnecessary mutilation of a child's genitals.
I am Jewish and it makes me puke when people wheel out the frigging anti Semitism card whenever this topic is mentioned.

SamG76 · 22/10/2013 11:43

Fox Mulder

Do you have to pass certain tests before you can call yourself a Jew or a Christian or Muslim

You could call yourself whatever you like, but whether you're taken seriously will depend on what you do that is consistent with it.

Eg I could call myself a Masai, but as I don't speak the language or keep any of the customs, real Masai might be a bit sceptical. And if my brother said "Our nephew is a Masai, but he's never been involved in ceremonies involving lion's blood", then I think people would be entitled to ask whether my DS has, eg, ever been to Africa.

BackOnlyBriefly · 22/10/2013 11:43

To be as violently anti-circumcision as some posters on this thread is to be anti-Semitic.

What rubbish. I hate everyone who harms children for their own gratification. If some of those are jews then tough.

I imagine lots of people who are not jews do it to their kids. Though perhaps they skip the party and letting the rabbi suck the blood off the babies penis.

thebody · 22/10/2013 11:46