Circumcision should be banned.

[ArabellaScott]

https://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2025/01/judge-and-parents-call-for-boys-to-be-protected-from-circumcision

Article describes an upsetting case of two doctors performing these ops without anesthesia, and with sometimes serious side effects. One boy nearly died.

The National Secular Society is running a concurrent campaign to ban all 'religious cutting' - that includes both FGM and male circumcision. I wholeheartedly agree that no baby or child should suffer in this way. More info:

https://www.secularism.org.uk/religious-surgery/

YABU - circumcision for religous reasons is fine
YANBU - circumcision should be banned (unless there is a medical reason)

It's a difficult issue. I think genital cutting highlights the challenges of multiculturalism as being about far more than food and music. I think on one hand it is possibly wrong, and supremacist to impose my moral beliefs on others who belong to radically different cultures. On the other hand, I really really don't like it, I think it's cruel and unnecessary.

I don’t think parents should be allowed to modify their child’s body for non-medical reasons until the child is old enough to decide. It’s the parents’ religious belief in play, not yet the child’s.
When I first changed my newborn son’s nappy I remember thinking that some parents hand over their perfect baby to have a bit cut off. I can’t imagine being able to do that. (Also, so few people conform with every precept of their religion so it surprises me that they feel entitled to follow this one that alters another person’s body.)

Yep I think it's awful.

Hard agree.

I don't think FGM should be lumped in with male circumcision, even though I disagree with both.

Agree. I used to always point out on medical forms where it said Religion....well, he's only 2 so he's not made his mind up yet.

Yes, I know hospitals sometimes need to know - for diet reasons, or if someone was very ill. I do dislike this idea that the child is somehow the property of a parent who can impose their beliefs to the point of body modification.

It's dreadful and should only be done for medical reasons. If a man wishes to be circumcised for religious reasons he can make that decision himself when he is old enough to do so.

Why?

I had to be present for one ( in a nursing capacity). No anaesthetic at all. Horrific

That’s awful!
A teenaged boy I know had a nasty zip injury that scarred ( he panicked and yanked the heavy jeans zip)

He was treated by Urology dept and given a general anaesthetic.

He said when he came round afterwards and woozily checked his dressings, the lovely nurse said “ Don’t worry! It’s still there!

for a child- not unless medically needed
for an adult able to consent- personal choice but not NHS funded unless medically needed.

12% think it should be kept - any of those want to justify that? Shocking

I think that it shown be allowed for males over 16 if they choose, but not for babies.

I totally agree that FGM is in a different league to circumcision (of males, which is what the word means) and it’s important to stop saying that. I used to have a boyfriend who was circumcised and it didn’t affect his sex live at all (either in our relationship, before or presumably afterwards!)

In what way do you consider them different?

Also I don’t think it should be legal to pierce children’s ears when they’re very young - although probably the age for that could be lower.

My answer to this is above

Whilst I agree it can be difficult, I think respect of different cultures does have moral limits. Physically harming another person is a moral absolute imo.

Mutilating a girls body through FGM without consent is abuse. Why is mutilating a boys body through circumcision without consent not abuse?

Totally agree, how on earth can it still be allowed in this day and age. Tradition and faith are not reasons to mutilate a child.

Although I agree circumcision shouldn't be allowed apart from for health reasons, male circumcision doesn't cause any issues going forward once healed eg pain, sexual dysfunction etc. FGM can make sex impossible or impossibly painful and cause severe and dangerous lifelong consequences for girls and women, aside from the dangers of infection and extreme pain at the time.

That must have been excruciatingly painful for a young baby
They General Anaesthetise an adult / teen - a baby will feel equal pain, surely.

It’s like when piglets are castrated- brutal poor little things cry so hard. ( Pets are GA)

Who decides that our moral limits trumps that of others. As I said, the name for that attitude is supremacism

I can't vote as I am on the app but I don't think it should be allowed for non-medical reasons. It is frankly pretty extraordinary that it is still common in 2025.

Attempting to yoke male circumcision together with FGM is trolling, a bit. The former is a pretty small procedure with trivial hygiene/health benefits and no lifelong downsides. It’s also impractical to outlaw it whilst it remains a religious practice for two major world religions.

Unfortunately it can cause very severe issues of pain and sexual dysfunction for men who were circumcised as young children. It’s rare, but it does happen.

Actor Tom Rosenthal has talked about the problems he has faced following childhood circumcision and how he is against the circumcising of children.