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

The only people I have ever heard defend FGM are women who have had it done to them, themselves and some cruel ignorant men.
Similarly with circumcision, the defenders are circumcised men and ignorant women who don't understand what it is like to have a penis.
Show me the uncircumcised man who wants this done to his baby son.
Show me the uncircumcised man who supports routine circumcision of any baby males.
Show me one who wouldn't be horrified at the thought of having their foreskin chopped off.

I know men that have had problems with foreskin and they are still strongly against this practice.

Even ones who had to be circumcised as adults, like my son who had to be last year, a horrible experience for him. HeIis still dead against it.

Would you cut off your daughters labia because of some research that said it would decrease the chance of her getting thrush regularly or contracting HIV?

I love my foreskin, would hate to be without it. As would most men who have known having one.
I would be angry if my parents had done this to me.

Some peoples attitudes on this subject make me so fucking angry.

Please leaving your baby sons' genitals alone.

It's sick

Unless it's performed in a hospital environment for strictly medical reasons it's child abuse pure and simple.

Lots of nasty vile crap is done to children under the guise of religion/custom. It's crap it's child abuse.

I have no issue with adult men/women chopping bits off their genitals that's up t

Up to them but hey they don't do they?

It's only done like this to children because they cannot defend themselves.

I simply can't understand why people allowing this to happen to their babies and the sick bastards doing it aren't arrested and charged with child mutilation/torture and abuse. At least it's grievous bodily harm.

'We cut here because it stops the women from being highly sexually active and straying'. Reason I was given to defend FGM. The fact some are using this argument for circumcision is equally bonkers.

The only people I have ever heard defend FGM are women who have had it done to them, themselves and some cruel ignorant men.
Similarly with circumcision, the defenders are circumcised men and ignorant women who don't understand what it is like to have a penis.
Show me the uncircumcised man who wants this done to his baby son.
Show me the uncircumcised man who supports routine circumcision of any baby males.
Show me one who wouldn't be horrified at the thought of having their foreskin chopped off.

I know men that have had problems with foreskin and they are still strongly against this practice.

Even ones who had to be circumcised as adults, like my son who had to be last year, a horrible experience for him. HeIis still dead against it.

Would you cut off your daughters labia because of some research that said it would decrease the chance of her getting thrush regularly or contracting HIV?

I love my foreskin, would hate to be without it. As would most men who have known having one.
I would be angry if my parents had done this to me.

Some peoples attitudes on this subject make me so fucking angry.

Please leaving your baby sons' genitals alone.

It's sick

redshifter spot on.

+1 for redshifter. I grew the whole time thinking how angry I would have been at my parents if they had done that to my body.

It's child abuse.

Of course it's child abuse, plain and simple.
But it's going on because two major religions insist on it. I have great respect for both of those religions, but this aspect of their belief is wrong.

Getting back to the OP, I strongly suspect that the reason this report comes from the US is that there is a strong Jewish lobby there looking for medical justification of the practice.

Primafacie

I understand that in some circumstances 'bollocks' is a complete sentence however before you dismiss what I said perhaps you could give explanations as to why there are published articles describing the immunological function of the foreskin.

Sorry I couldn't read your link - it didn't work.

Here are a couple, I'm sure you can find more.

www.cirp.org/library/disease/STD/fleiss3/

www.circumstitions.com/Lost.html

The AAP Policy is rejected by the Paediatric Associations of

Austria, Britain, Denmark, England, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Sweden, and the Netherlands
and by senior paediatricians in
Canada, the Czech Republic, France and Poland.

Actually the appendix does have a purpose.

Strange that the more we research the physiology of the human body the more we learn about it and things that in the past had no function actually do (foreskin, appendix, adenoids, tonsils)

What is heartwarming about this thread is that so many men and women are agreeing so closely about an intimate issue.
It's great to see that thinking people of both sexes are united on MGM as well as the more obvious FMG.
How can we influence the unthinking mutilators out there?

Shakshuka
"My dh was circumcised as a newborn. He's very happy with his situation, does not feel mutilated or abused and has no sexual dysfunction"

Some famous people that do

list

The absolute irony of someone claiming that someone is happy about being circumcised whilst being a baby and doesn't actually know what it feels like not to be circumcised is quite frankly ridiculous.

How can anyone know what it feels like to have something they never had?

Well let men ake that decision themselves! Immunising and circumcision and totally different things, one is a public health issue where if you don't immunise disease could spread and could result in death.

The idea that someone can deny someone else's experience is simply patronising.

This whole thread has demonstrated to me the extent of prejudice and need for cultural superiority.

The hyperbole here wouldn't change my mind since i am confident that i have done sufficient research on the topic, using both anecdotal and scientific evidence, that, on balance, this is not a harmful procedure so i see no reason not to do it. Therein lies the clear difference withfemale genital cutcutting for which there is no health benefit and whose overt purpose is the control of female sexuality. Therefore, if i came from a culture where female gential cutting was prevalent, i still wwouldn't do it as it is clearly harmful as opposed to male circumcision.

Those calling it abuse must live very sheltered lives. Im just glad that the lawmakers seem to have a bit more sense.

If you don't think cutting bits off babies for no reason isn't abuse Shakshuka it says a hell of a lot more about you than everyone else.

And I think that insisting that circumcision is abuse despite all the evidence to the contrary says a lot about your own prejudices. It's definitely not about the child.

It should most definitely be about the child and how exactly are people being prejudiced by resenting this mutilation?

What do you mean by 'prejudiced'?

You won't say what you think the word "mutilation" means, will you?

I agree with the definition of mutilation in the oed which is why it doesnt apply to male circumcision. Its not hard.

Who did the 'we' in your earlier post refer to? I'm still intrigued by who you represent other than yourself.

That one is easy.

mu·ti·late (myo?o?t?l-?t?)
tr.v. mu·ti·lat·ed, mu·ti·lat·ing, mu·ti·lates

1. To deprive of a limb or an essential part; cripple.
2. To disfigure by damaging irreparably: mutilate a statue. See Synonyms at batter1.
3. To make imperfect by excising or altering parts.

Who did the 'we' in your earlier post refer to? I'm still intrigued by who you represent other than yourself

I think you'll find that the vast majority of posters posting on this thread are not in agreement with you and therefore a 'we' is appropriate.

What do you think people are being prejudiced about?