Circumcision: A Social Status in the UK ?

[Amazonia]

Curiously in the UK, circumcision is now a matter of social class. While the "ordinary" folks rarely circumcise, circumcision is prevalent in the upper class as well as in the Royal family.

"the term 'mutilated' in the context of male circumcision is grossly insulting"

don't be silly, math.

Cutting off or deforming a part of the body is a mutilation. What else do you think the word means? It might be cutting off a leg; or a toe, it might be cutting off an ear-lobe, it might be cutting off a puppy's tail. Some mutilations are more severe than others.

It is not remotely insulting. You are obsessed by trying to redefine the meaning of the word to suit your own ends.

Seriously, this just has to be a wind up. One word with a specific meaning in English being unilaterally linked solely to one context. The biggest load of crap I've seen on here to date. Thank God that the vast majority of posters here see right through this obviously deliberate, provocative bullshit.

Do you know of any study involving a cohort of that size, for anything?

If you don't want a serious discussion of actual facts then why are you here?

Math. I really rated your contributions until this thread. It's not okay, this cutting of infant penises, you know. It is mutilation.

Once again, PigletJohn can't resist the insult to millions of women who have suffered FGM or to parents who have made the sound and solid decision to circumcise based on all the good evidence pointing to it as the right thing to do.

Cutting off a foreskin for perfectly sound medical reasons is not penile mutilation. FGM otoh is mutilation for no reason except to prevent women from ever experiencing sexual pleasure. It ruins their lives, puts them and their babies at serious risk of complications including death during childbirth.

Attempting to link the two by use of the term mutilation for male circumcision, a benign procedure that confers lifetime health benefits and no sexual ill effects is an odious insult to the millions of women who suffer as a result of FGM.

The cutting off of infant penises?

HAHA

No Math thatwasthat said the cutting of infant penises which is accurate.

Cutting of infant penises, Math, not cutting off.

A cohort of 350 million..
How do you think scientific research works, BaronDent?

(And once again I would like to take the opportunity to remind you that you do not have the right to make personal attacks on me.)

Scraping the bottom of the barrel now, aren't you...

How much lower can you go?

Math. I think you have been misled by people who sounded credible

Bingo

ThatWasThat, I do know what I am talking about, and I know I am not likely to be misled on matters of health.

Math, I think otherwise but am bowing out of what seems to be a pointless dialogue. I am sorry, and a bit depressed.

So just to be clear here, studies showing noticeable differences between circumcised and uncircumcised men' health don't make a difference to you? All you want is a study involving a cohort of 350 million men on the one hand and how many on the other -- 200 million?

Are there even that many men in the US or in Europe...

Even if you accept your figures, they are not arguments for infant circumcision. Why not wait til the penis owner is old enough to consent?

BaronDent -- to clarify, you are not interested in studies showing there are health benefits to circumcision unless they involve all the men of Europe and all the men of the US?

And further to clarify, you would prefer to take a chance and face penile amputation, which is the oldest and still the best option for cases of penile cancer?

Martorana Infancy is the optimal age to do it for many reasons ease of procedure, speed of recovery, far fewer postop complications.