To think circumcision for baby boys should be illegal if not done for medical reasons

[Tyarami]

I saw a thread on here a couple of days ago and it got me to wondering why on earth circumcision is still legal for infant males despite FGM being banned.

To me there is no difference, both practises are barbaric unless of course the circumcision is medically necessary. I'm talking about the parents and doctors who allow and inflict this because of cultural tradition.

Why is it ok to do this to an infant male even though FGM is illegal, what is the difference really? To me there is none and would be interested to hear from others about their perspectives.

AIBU to be of the opinion that parents and medical professionals should be prosecuted for inflicting this on infant boys who obviously cannot consent, because of cultural conditioning.

You’ll get some very polarised opinions OP. For me, there is absolutely no question that chopping off a part of your child just because you ‘want’ to is unacceptable.

I totally agree, I just don’t get why it’s still allowed when FGM is rightly abhorred

YANBU. It should be something that men can opt to have done, when they are adults. Or just made Illegal entirely.

Agree. Same for piercings too though for me.

Why is it ok to do this to an infant male even though FGM is illegal, what is the difference really?

Whist I think circumcision is cruel when unnecessary. You might was to understand what FGM removes.

Absolutely.

Agree and just to be even more controversial I would add ear piercing under the age of 12 to that

What do we do about the people who are hell bent on it and will do it less safely as a result? I imagine it’s difficult to track them down (apart from hideous infections at A&E)

I say that because whilst you try compare the two as like-for-like you can never argue against it

It should be illegal in it's own right, not because FGM is.

I'm not religious but if I were I'm absolutely certain I would allow my son to make the decision for himself once he was old enough to do so.

I appreciate I have no first hand experience of the pressure religious mothers are put under in families where it is the norm, but even so I could never imagine for one second considering it.

*have a balanced argument rather than just argue I mean.

Comparing FGM to circumcision is utterly wrong. But I agree circumcision should not be routinely done.

I do realise how FGM is different as to what is removed, but I still see both procedures as mutilating the genitals of perfect babies.

In an ideal world it would be made illegal and the practice would stop, though I do realise that outlawing it wouldn't deter the most determined of families and like a PP said there would be horrendous reprisals that come with that such as infections from the procedure not being done in sterile and safe circumstances.

I just find it very very sad that it may never die out and wish that as time we on parents begin to go against the grain of the cultrual pressure and refuse the procedure.

I just want to clarify no disrespect intended to the families who have had to agree to circumcision on the basis of medical necessity, that is a completely different kettle of fish and I would never, nor could i, judge anybody for that

I agree with you OP, but I guess long standing cultural practices die very hard.

Same for piercings too though for me

You think genital piercings should be banned?

OP YANBU to think circumcision should be illegal in all but medical cases. YAhoweverBU to compare it to FGM.

I don’t think British society is ready for male circumcision to become illegal. The time just isn’t right. You need a slight shift in culture and I suggest the situation in the U.K. at the moment with anti semifinal
And anti Muslim rhetoric would make this a vey foolish time to bring in such a law.

I thought with FGM they often bleed to death, it leaves you with a lifetime of intense pain, and you are very unlikely to ever enjoy sex or be able to orgasm. The whole point of it is to stop women having sex apart from with the man who 'owns' her.

It doesnt really compare to male circumcision in any of those respects. That doeant mean male circumcision is right for babies. Have there been any studies about what would happen in practice though? I expect in a lot of cases it would still be done unofficially or when people go on holiday, increasing the risks. There isn't any point banning it if it's so widespread everywhere else it would just go underground. Maybe more education is key

I agree. I can’t imagine cutting off a perfectly healthy part of my child’s penis.

If there is a medical need yes but why put a child through the pain and decreased sensitivity.

Yanbu.

And we need to stop being precious about comparing FGM to circumcision. Saying they’re not comparable is preventing people seeing circumcision for religious or cultural reasons as barbaric and unnecessary because “it’s not as bad as FGM” (or however people want to say it).

Both are genital mutilation. Both are totally unacceptable and completely barbaric. It is okay to say both are forms of child abuse.

There are 4 main types of FGM:

type 1 (clitoridectomy) – removing part or all of the clitoris
type 2 (excision) – removing part or all of the clitoris and the inner labia (the lips that surround the vagina), with or without removal of the labia majora (the larger outer lips)
type 3 (infibulation) – narrowing the vaginal opening by creating a seal, formed by cutting and repositioning the labia
other harmful procedures to the female genitals, including pricking, piercing, cutting, scraping or burning the area

This is why I feel the two things can't be compared. They are different things done for different reasons and on different levels in terms of the suffering caused. Better to have the debate without the comparison I think.

Better to have the debate without the comparison I think

Yes this.

Yanbu, it is absolutely disgusting and should not be legal unless it's for medical reasons.
I have a young son and the thought of having him go through a unnecessary operation and have part of him removed makes me feel sick to the stomach. I actually don't know how any parent could do it to their child, it's cruel.

Whist I think circumcision is cruel when unnecessary. You might was to understand what FGM removes.

FGM is a general term for at least four different levels of mutilation I believe. The first one being removal of the clitoral hood which is the same as MGM/circumcision.

Next it's worse, removal of the clitoris entirely.

A further mutilation is infibulation and consists of cutting off labia and sewing up the orifice.

If they are willing to ban type 1 of FGM (and rightly so) then male circumcision should be a banned practice too.

You are absolutely correct Summer and I do agree with the point you've made, but although the two are different I do still think that both FGM and unnecessary male circumcision are barbaric and cruel.