Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To hope that we can follow Iceland in banning male circumcision

999 replies

GladAllOver · 19/02/2018 16:10

It really is time that this nasty practice is stopped.
www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/18/iceland-ban-male-circumcision-first-european-country

OP posts:
KimKatCourtney · 19/02/2018 22:04

It was a clear question. I would say if you believe it to be abusive then you would believe pretty much all Jewish parents to be abusive parents which is certainly not my experience

GColdtimer · 19/02/2018 22:06

@TotHappy

Mutilation - Mutilation or maiming is cutting off or injury to a body part of a person so that the part of the body is permanently damaged or disfigured. Does that help?

My religion states I need to cut of my child's right earlobe. You ok with that?

SersioulycanitgetWORSE · 19/02/2018 22:06

Smith the person on the thread to use the racist language is you and I don't think you have read the thread because the US is a country that promotes it too. Bizarre. Its also been accepted that tattoo is not the best comparison because a body part isn't lost.

PatriarchyPersonified · 19/02/2018 22:07

Bluelady

It amounts to religious persecution

That was in your first post on this thread.

NewYearNiki · 19/02/2018 22:07

For anyone....especially those defending.

Watch this video from about 50 seconds in. Look what he does and even puts his mouth over the wound which is a herpes risk.

How can anyone defend it?

[Message from MNHQ: We've been asked to place a warning that this video contains footage of a circumcision being performed]

beepthemeep · 19/02/2018 22:08

The religious/cultural arguments on here are really quite something.

One poster assumes that it's just people feeling superior to other cultures - blithely dismissing the medical concerns and the issues around bodily autonomy and choice.

Another justifies it by saying it's a contract with god. Because that makes it ok to cut a small baby's flesh before it's old enough to make any sort of decision about a contract.

others say it doesn't hurt and they know that because they've witnessed it.

But not one poster who's supportive of the practice can come out with anything other than the usual "but we've always done it" claptrap. Like that's any sort of justification for continuing something for generations. How about a bit of independent thought and an actual reason?

Bluelady · 19/02/2018 22:08

Yes. And I stand by that. Next?

PatriarchyPersonified · 19/02/2018 22:09

Tothappy

What evidence is religious belief based on then?

SersioulycanitgetWORSE · 19/02/2018 22:09

Do you you feel parents taking their baby to a back street unqualified person to remove part of thier body when that baby then ends up fighting for its very life... Is a good parent.

It's a straight forward question. Do you think they good parents putting their child's welfare and wellbeing first?

If that baby is then killed or ends up with life changing injuries, were thats babies parents good parents.

TotHappy · 19/02/2018 22:09

@twofalls - well yeah i can't see its any worse. As far as i know, that wouldn't damage the hearing at all would it? And circumcision doesn't damage the penis? Doesn't make it ineffective for ant of it's functions including pleasure? So removing it s hardly mutilation

NewYearNiki · 19/02/2018 22:11

others say it doesn't hurt and they know that because they've witnessed it.

Watch the video i posted.

The rabbi rips the foreskin back with his fingers after slicing it.

There are hundreds of videos on YouTube and most of them depict the babies screaming in a way Ive never heard.

Apparently the ones that dont cry, it means they're in shock.

LynetteScavo · 19/02/2018 22:11

howrudeofme, you're right.

Current recommendations from WHO call for large-scale circumcision campaigns in countries with high infection rates of HIV, as circumcision has the potential to dramatically reduce the spread of the virus. (WHO estimates of up to 5.7 million new infections and three million deaths averted over the next 20 years)

BarbarianMum · 19/02/2018 22:12

Firstly, I'm not defending circumcision - I literally have no skin in the game. I am a bit, shall we say, sceptical, about the claims at how totally horrendous it is, mostly because it is so widely practised and yet most men who were circumcised as babies seem not to be too bothered.

If you are arguing that it is dangerous to babies, this could surely be managed by passing a law to say that all circumcisions must be carried out by a qualified medical professional in a hospital setting.

PatriarchyPersonified · 19/02/2018 22:12

Bluelady

So I'm struggling to see how your words have been twisted?

Circumcision is genital mutilation.

I'm against that.

You claimed that being against it and wanting it banned amounts to religious persecution.

KimKatCourtney · 19/02/2018 22:12

Ok - given that the vast majority are very safe no complications and are carried out by a qualified medical professional - still a bad parent Seriously?

Headofthehive55 · 19/02/2018 22:13

Self determination is a cornerstone of ethics.

beepthemeep · 19/02/2018 22:13

Tothappy - it's the principle. You either think it's ok to modify someone else's body, when they are in no condition to consent, or you don't. It's not a question of degrees.

MrsDoyleFallingOutTheWindow · 19/02/2018 22:13

I think people would be on a hiding to nothing trying to claim that legislation making assault illegal was persecution. I also really don't buy the argument that it will just drive the practice underground - making any kind of activity illegal drives it underground; that's the nature of making laws. However just because people generally try to conceal, say, murder doesn't mean that it shouldn't be illegal.

I think it would need to be brought in after a programme of education and open discussion though, in order for people to feel a sense of ownership and self direction which is how change comes about.

Change does need to come about though.

EnthusiasmIsDisturbed · 19/02/2018 22:13

I have heard a few men who felt they shouldn’t have been circumcised (talking on the radio/articles in papers)

But most men I have heard talk about it are very pleased they have been

I am not sure how many would choose to have it done when they are older

SersioulycanitgetWORSE · 19/02/2018 22:14

newyear no.

No SadSad no

Fucking hell that poor child... Sleeping so innocent no. No. Oh god why are we so fucking cruel why why why.

PatriarchyPersonified · 19/02/2018 22:14

Kim

Yes. They probably think they aren't causing any harm or putting their child at risk.

Nobody is saying it's deliberate abuse.

They are hurting their children though and scarring them for life.

TotHappy · 19/02/2018 22:15

Patriarchy - different evidence for different beliefs. For the existence of a being I caused and immutable? The philosophical necessity of causation. For particular events of religious significance e.g. The exodus from Egypt - historical evidence. For the life changing nature of religious faith - overwhelming anecdotal evidence. Certainly not no evidence, whichever way you try to spin it.

bluepears · 19/02/2018 22:15

blue lady no rights are absolutes ie their right of speech you cant shout fire in an theatre the right to religious liberty is there but that stops when it impacts the rights of another person ie the child they are mutilating so no it could not been seen as religious persecution

Headofthehive55 · 19/02/2018 22:15

Even if it's perfectly safe - it's done without consent. A parent has no right to do that.

Bluelady · 19/02/2018 22:17

Not responding to you any more, Patriarchy. It's a fruitless exercise. I've written what I think repeatedly and have nothing further to add.