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

I do believe it can be bad when circumcision goes wrong, I don't need to see pictures to believe it. It would be too triggering for me to look as I'm an abuse survivor.

Back street circumcision should definitely be illegal, surely it already is, though? If the law isn't enforced then a change of law isn't necessarily what's needed.

I would have thought it would be easier to implement a blanket ban on circumcision if the Jewish and Muslim communities were on board. Otherwise you may get more of these horrendous accounts of it going wrong, or families going to America to have it done.

I asked what powers children's services would have? Of course I could google that, but if there is a social worker on here they might just be able to tell me?

people arguing for circumcision do not understand that the right of religious freedom, like all rights are not absolute, you cant just do anything based on your religious freedom. so yes the right of their children do come above parents religious freedom rights

Bluelady, how about if a religion is against circumcision? Would disagreeing with that religion be seen as religious intolerance too?

Why would it matter if a GP did it? It's really quite a simple question:

• did the baby consent?

The next question is for the parents:

• which do you value you more, your child's bodily autonomy and rights, or what your community/culture/religious book says you should do?

• If you're going with community over baby, why? Why would it make a difference if you waited until say bar mitzvah age?

There are some very interesting articles online about how joyful religious parents felt on the day, as they indoctrinated their son into their religion. It's noticeable because it's all about THEM and how THEY feel.

The only way to discuss this without going down rabbit holes is in terms of consent, without mentioning religion, or mutilation or any of the emotive stuff. Babies can't consent so don't perform non medically required surgery on them. It's quite simple really.

Conscious that I'm one of the worst culprits for being sucked into religious rabbit holes, but I agree with BertrandRussell completely.

It's about consent.

Your son may choose to be intact. Why take that choice away from him without his consent?

It's all about consent.

How would a parent feel if their son turned to them as an adult and said he was upset that they had done that to him as a baby? As per several on those support groups for men abused as babies. Can you contemplate that? How do you look yourself in the mirror each day?

Head - I can look at myself quite happily in the mirror, thank you. There are lots of decisions we've taken for the DS's that they might later grumble about - it's one of the hazards of raising kids. But this is one I'm happy with. All my family are Jewish and most of them seem pretty happy about it. By contrast, it would be a bit difficult all round if they hadn't had it done.

Sam I have no words.

How anyone can be so blasé about mutilating children is absolutely out of my comprehension.

Wow, what a choice

Let someone cut my baby boy with a knife and leave a permanent mark on a very private part of his body, or have things be a "bit difficult" with the family.

I don't believe in circumcising children. But I think there are all sorts of problems with making it illegal, including a) driving it underground and b) exacerbating religious tension.

I also find it interesting that adults who had it done to themselves are often quite happy to do it to their own children. That is true even in the US, where it's not a religious obligation. So those men must think that the impact on them hasn't been that bad, whatever the rest of us think.

Hackmum - but how would they know any differently?

You'd have to ask a range of man who'd had a full sex life before and after circumcision to get a proper sense of it. (purely based on the small pool of my partners, there is a big difference in sensitivity, but the two who'd been circumcised had been done as young children so knew no different. I practically needed a wrist brace with one of them, without going into too much detail!)

Sam-setting the religious element aside, how do you resolve the consent issue? Can you think of anything analogous?

sam it makes me sick thinking about what you have done to your son.

It's truly disgusting.

Head - I can look at myself quite happily in the mirror, thank you. There are lots of decisions we've taken for the DS's that they might later grumble about - it's one of the hazards of raising kids. But this is one I'm happy with. All my family are Jewish and most of them seem pretty happy about it. By contrast, it would be a bit difficult all round if they hadn't had it done. why would it be difficult surely your family would respect your decisions and you should read the torah more carefully in particular 'Do not cut your bodies for the dead or put tattoo marks on yourselves. I am the LORD.' or 'So God created the human beings in [the divine] image, creating [them] in the image of God,' and your logic dosnt hold your saying i dont care what my children think im going to mutilate them because all my family have done it and its my religion.

There are lots of decisions we've taken for the DS's that they might later grumble about - it's one of the hazards of raising kids.

Funnily enough, none of the decisions we've made for any 4 DC, however hazardous, have resulted in permanent removal of a body part. It's amazing we've managed to get this far without such a decision being undertaken

Thanks, Bluepears - I have read the Torah a number of times, pretty much every year, in fact, and have attended a number of talks on the subject. I hadn't realised you were a Hebrew scholar (I assume you are, and haven't just found the quotes on a website!). I don't have tattoos nor have I cut myself or anyone else for the dead - this is a prohibition on scarification.

That actually doesn't follow, @hackmum a lot of women who have been through FGM are still very willing to put their daughters through the same procedure. It's because they see it as a religious obligation, and also because they would be judged by all their relatives. They could be completely ostracised, especially in religiously orthodox communities. That, I think, is changing now, but change never happens quickly.

I think it's very difficult for us to understand that mindset. We don't have those kinds of pressures on us, so it's easy to judge from behind a keyboard. That's not to say you're not right to oppose it of course.

So it's only cutting your own body that's prohibited? So cutting someone else's is OK?

My tolerance of other people's religious beliefs runs out when they try to impinge them on people who don't share those beliefs. I don't believe anyone has the right to force their beliefs on anyone else. Which is what pretty much everyone here is trying to do.

I 100% agree with the first part of this statement, but the second part is what we are trying to prevent. The first part of your statement should apply to parents forcing their religious beliefs onto children, should it not?

people arguing for circumcision do not understand that the right of religious freedom, like all rights are not absolute, you cant just do anything based on your religious freedom. so yes the right of their children do come above parents religious freedom rights

and it's easy to define where the right stops. I think you should have absolute right to religious freedom when it comes to your own body. but your rights end at someone else's body.

Thanks, Bluepears - I have read the Torah a number of times, pretty much every year, in fact, and have attended a number of talks on the subject. I hadn't realised you were a Hebrew scholar (I assume you are, and haven't just found the quotes on a website!). I don't have tattoos nor have I cut myself or anyone else for the dead - this is a prohibition on scarification. im not a Hebrew scholar but i can read and you can not answer if people are created in the image of god why mutilate it?

I used to be hugely against it except for medical reasons. Then one of my DS needed it for medical reasons after trying for 3 years many conservative approaches. His case would have been life threatening had he not had it (very rare) as he was often admitted through A&E for urinary blockages/severe infection/bleeding. He had no pain whatsoever afterwards which surprised me although could be relief in his case as he can now wee. Also he never had a 'normal' foreskin so maybe that affects it?

I do feel bad when I hear people say things like mutilation and denying them a full sexual life etc even though I know we had no choice. The NHS will only do extreme cases now. Hopefully my son will understand why he had to have it and not feel too deprived!

It has made me more understanding and less judgemental of other people who decide on it. I'm not sure why but like I say I was very against it previously. I try to be a bit more open-minded now.

It's child abuse and should be banned.

The fact it's illegal to dock a puppy's tail but cutting off small boys' foreskins is allowed is just MENTAL.