WTF? "Half of all uncircumcised males will, over the course of their lifetime, develop some kind of medical issue related to their foreskin."

[missingwelliesinsd]

Question as a Brit in the USA. I just read this news article on the never-ending debate (in the USA at least) of whether it's better to circumcise male babies. Some paper just issued by the Mayo Clinic concluded that the benefits out weigh the risks 100-1 and it would be unethical to not circumcise a male baby just it it would be if you don't get immunizations for your child. WTF?

I know that circumcising can help reduce STD transmissions - but hey, just use a condom! What I can't believe is that "50% of non-circumcised males have medical issues with their foreskins." That would make 50% of most of the male population of Europe having foreskin issues at some point. Can this be right? I tend to think it's just American prejudice against foreskins after decades of snipping. I'm TTC and if I do and we have a boy, no way am I snipping the poor thing.

Here's the article:
jezebel.com/circumcision-rates-decline-in-the-u-s-1557539810

There were a few pro-circers coruskate that was my two reference.

I have a painful thumb today.

Why did I never think of chopping my thumbs off?

Quintezella because. If you posted that from your phone. Your thumbs are quite useful for interwebbing

Maybe that is why my thumbs are painful.....

Indeed. Get it sorted right away. .

At least, foreskin is no good for mobile phone use.

The first couple of replies summed up my position.

I hate having to go to the dentist so any pro-circumcision people are invited to come round while I let my mate pull my DCs teeth out with a pair of pliers. We'll have drinks and a buffet and you can all chant loudly to help cover up the screams.

I've had some discussions on here with religious people who defended it by claiming medical benefits. I generally ask them what they would do if it were discovered to be more beneficial to not circumcise. I never get a reply to that because of course they'd go through with it anyway. So for religious people at least the medical benefits argument is an excuse rather than a reason.

CorusKate people use hotdogs to turn pages whilst reading in bed?

Exactly BackOnlyBriefly people have done precisely that and throughout this thread been dismissed. Apparently 'not all evidence is equal'.

Customs: feet binding, FGM, circumsicion.

No justification( in a very small amount of males circ for medical benefit) no sense, no reason, no need.

Cruel, vile, abusive, painful in the extreme, in all cases life long mutilation and side effects and in some cases leading to death.

Fact.

Anyone who posts in favour of male circumcision puts their head above the parapet as far as MN concerned
Which is not really surprising when the audience is mainly of parents who don't understand why children should be cut about for no good reason.

It's not just on mumsnet. You will find the same attitude on most British based forums (though not religious ones, obviously). That's because most British people are opposed to (or at least don't feel the need to do) routine non medical infant circumcision.
My 1st son was born 25 years ago and I wouldn't have dreamt of having him circumcised, and no one ever suggested it to me either.

^Quite right. 100% circumcision rate in the Truffle house. Would I consider it more thoughtfully now, nearly 9 & 12 years later? Probably. But as an American, it is literally all I know (not that I know a huge amount about penises, nor am I actively gaining any more information at this point).

I gather the anti-circumcision movement has gained some traction in the US in the past 10 years.

I was done for 'medical reasons' but no-way would my son be done. Still causes me problems after too much frisky time and a I know someone who had to go in for further surgery years after he was done as a child as he had problems during sex.

It's an operation - best avoided if possible unless absolutely necessary (my opinion also extends to sterilisation too). They can and do go wrong on an alarmingly regular basis.

We'll I can't imagine sleepwalking into having any child of mine operated on unless there was a dam good reason.

And to do this without anaesthetic as happens regularly is unspeakable.

Misspixie, I don't think you understand what research bias means. Of course Shak is right in saying that not all evidence is equal - there is good and bad science, just like there is good and bad journalism. If you want to be taken seriously, at least look at serious papers, not just at activist websites. As it is, you are quoting random, questionable or discredited sources without acknowledging that they don't carry the same weight as peer-reviewed papers and meta-analyses.

I also don't think you know the meaning of "irrefutable", seeing as you used it to describe evidence that I had just refuted, in the post exactly above yours. If you think I am wrong, can you articulate where do you think my refutation failed?

And no, the fact that your ex SILs were midwives in Nigeria does not make you an expert on health economy or on circumcision.

There is no valid comparison between circumcision and FGM. Circumcision is a safe and minor procedure which does not impact on function or pleasure, and in some contexts (eg African HIV epidemic) produces known long term health benefits. FGM causes only harm, has no benefits whatsoever, and often leads to serious, permanent or fatal injury. Unlike FGM, circumcision is not an instrument of oppression or discrimination against a group.

The WHO rightly condemns FGM as completely unacceptable in any circumstance. Compare and contrast with its policy supporting infant circumcision in Africa.

Likening circumcision to FGM inevitably leads to the banalisation of FGM. This is a serious feminist issue. If we do not agree on anything else, at least can we agree on this?

Oh I understand perfectly prima. You both spent pages asking for evidence to the contrary and when presented with evidence to the contrary it readily dismissed it as being biased. That's clear to everyone on this thread.

I didn't say it made me an expert. I said that you both shouldn't be so patronising in assuming no one else has knowledge of certain cultures not an expert. I suggest you read the thread again. Properly.

Please read my posts again Prima. Particular in relation to how the same reasons are given for respective circumcision and FGM for cultural! Circs!