To hope that we can follow Iceland in banning male circumcision

[GladAllOver]

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

Thanks for the that Alice link very interesting and this is the first thread on this subject I have engaged with.

I have just been reading an interesting piece on the effect of the subconscious on being held down whilst genitalia damaged, the feelings of powerless.. And lack of control.

Parrothead

What are the real facts?

and are these views
www.mendocomplain.com/
www.yourwholebaby.org/men-speak-out/
www.bloodstainedmen.com/
www.circumstitions.com/Resent.html

Just "strawmen"?

Or are the scientific facts that there is no real benefit to circumcision not facts at all?

I absolutely respect both peoples' rights to practice their faith in this country and to be respected for it. But I fundamentally disagree with circumcision. I also happen to fundamentally disagree with the Catholic church not allowing contraception or abortion. I also fundamentally disagree with FGM. I also fundamentally disagree with any philosophy, religion or credo that says women are not equal to men or that discriminates on the grounds of race, religion, disability, sexual orientation or age.

I find it completely possible to have these views without wishing any harm or discredit to any of these faiths or people. But by respecting their faith I do not have to agree with every single one of their beliefs or rituals.

Can I ask - given that you feel posters are anti-semitic by disagreeing with one element of Jewish custom do you equally fundamentally agree with every tenet of Islam too? And every other faith for that matter?

' But the fact remains that there a very real element of anti-semitism in more than a few of the comments,' which comments precisely?

I had this done as an teenager because I needed it. If I had a choice would I have had it done? No. To inflict such a permanent decision on a defenceless baby is barbaric.

Yes it should be banned here. Can’t understand why it isn’t.

I agree with banning it but I can't see it ever happening.

Some males have it done for medical reasons (eg because their foreskin is too tight). I suspect that if it were banned there would be some religious sympathiser doctors that would be diagnosing a lot of Jewish and Muslim boys with these conditions...

Obviously these boys/men will never know any different but I've had boyfriends who are circumcised and it does make a difference sexually as their penis is less sensitive so requires more stimulation.

It's so culturally ingrained (eg with non religious Americans doing it) I think it will take many generations to change. But Iceland bannibgbit is a good first step and hopefully other countries will follow suit, I just can't see the UK being one of them.

Foreskin reconstruction wouldn’t exist as a surgery if men didn’t request it.

If all men were completely happy with their circumcision why would anyone go through reconstruction?

givemesteel but the situation in the UK is very different to the US.

Here in the UK only 3.8% of babies are circumcised , in the USA the figure is 58%.
I can see a ban in the USA being a long way off, but in the UK we have less way to go to a ban.

Really,

Is that a serious argument? People have had surgery to look like Michael Jackson (and other celebs). And, of course, the whole trans thing.

There will be a tiny minority (what is it? Less than 1% for sure) who think the grass will be greener if they somehow look different.

Boneyback,

If you did not see it, I posted a link upthread to the American college of paediatricians, stating that the benefits of circumcision outweigh the risks.

If you click on the link there is an extensive research document, with papers correctly referenced, stating why.

This is a significant body of expert medical opinion. There are clearly benefits. Whether you think the harm outweighs the benefits is subjective. Denying the benefits in totality merely shows bias (and ignorance).

Really,

Is that a serious argument? People have had surgery to look like Michael Jackson (and other celebs). And, of course, the whole trans thing.
adults with there own free will not children with no choice but ill forgive you for making such an asinine point as it is early.

I don't see anti-semitism here at all. I am not even stopping jews or muslims doing this to sons - just instead letting the boy decide at age 13.

So I hope the UK follows Iceland's lead. I don't think it benefits babies despite what is said above about the Americans. if is so beneficial why doesn't the NHS take the same view and include it as part of a programme like innoculations that are given to babies?

larrygrylls

The risk of STIs can be reduced by using a condom. no need to cut pieces of the foreskin off.

and it reduces the risk of UTIs in the first year. So no long term gain.

So any benefits are small to nothing as they can be prevented in other ways.

and even what you quoted said
"but the benefits are not great enough to recommend universal newborn circumcision."

Is that a serious argument? People have had surgery to look like Michael Jackson (and other celebs). And, of course, the whole trans thing.

There will be a tiny minority (what is it? Less than 1% for sure) who think the grass will be greener if they somehow look different.

I think it's quite disturbing how easily you can disregard the bodily autonomy of these men. Their decision, made for whatever reason, is their decision. How on earth can you have such contempt for them? How can you respect one person's "right" to perform circumcision on another, but dismiss out of hand that other's desire to have remained intact? Is yours a serious argument???

If you did not see it, I posted a link upthread to the American college of paediatricians, stating that the benefits of circumcision outweigh the risks.

When you consider the financial side of the healthcare system in the US, it’s hardly surprising that a medical body will endorse a practice carried out on millions of males every year and where any objections can be neatly batted away using accusations of anti-semitism.

I do hope any anti semitism is being reported. MNHQ is hot on such things.

It's amazing how some people think that any form of criticism or discussion of a practice = anti-anything. It's a great way to try and stifle debate isn't it??

Larry

The AAP guidelines have been criticised for that conclusion by medical organisations in other countries. Their conclusions are wrong and every single argument for circumcision in newborns can be easily refuted. The American Academy of Pediatrics are fallible and demonstratably so in this case.

I'm quite puzzled by the argument that babies get less STIs er hopefully they aren't having sex!
And that's the point. They can choose when they are older.
But here's the thing. As stated up thread, the judgement is on the parents to raise their children in their faith. There should be no such pressure it's wrong.

A non- American response to the AAP circumcision guidelines, published in the same journal, about cultural bias:

pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2013/03/12/peds.2012-2896

And perhaps they feel by doing the op, the children are pressurised as its done now so you are and those pesky children can't be difficult and change religions. Or good parents would leave them intact until they made a decision for themselves.

A Jewish son may choose to be Christian, and remain intact. So why not give him the chance and opportunity?

Most Christian groups aren't fussed about circumcision either way though, and being circumcised wouldn't preclude him from becoming Christian.

I'm not a supporter of circumcision, I just don't think that many of the arguments on this thread are going to win the hearts and minds of those who would need convincing if a ban was actually proposed. Some would actually be counteractive.

If the cost of banning circumcision was the loss of the Jewish and Muslim community (they left the country), would you still want it banned?