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)

An example of cultural relativism is acknowledging that the animals different cultures choose to consume is often arbitrary.

Avoiding cutting a child’s genitals without medical need is a moral absolute.

That is one specific type of FGM, infibulation. Agree, of course, that it's horrific and extreme.

Its not rare for FGM though, is it? Its rather part of the point of mutilating girls. For male circumcision its a bug, for FGM its a feature.

Not justifying male circumcision, just pointing out that there are significant differences in purpose and scale.

The above was not antisemitic either, I find the influencing factors contributing to American culture fascinating!

A paper here looking at severity of FGM and changes over time in 22 countries:

'FGM is becoming less common over time, but it remains a pervasive practice in some countries: more than half of women in 7 of the 22 countries we examined still experience FGM. The severity of the procedures has not changed substantially over time.'

https://gh.bmj.com/content/2/4/bmjgh-2017-000467

I’m Jewish and I feel very strongly that this practice needs to stop. How you stop it though I don’t know. How the sign of being a Jewish male relies on having a part of the body removed, I find ridiculous. A lot of religious rules and laws are hard for me to make any sense of, but they don’t cause physically damage . If you want to avoid eating dairy after meat, fair enough, Not drive a car or carry a bag on Shabbat, crack on. But cutting parts of the bodies of babies who have no voice or choice and which may leave them with lifelong problems - time it stopped.

What I would say to that is in a country like Uganda/Nigeria, were the healthcare isn't good and expensive, you can see why it's best to do it as a newborn. Circumcision at a later age would be life threatening because of infection. Having a foreskin could be life threatening if it gets infected, STIs such as herpes is of less of a risk.
If it is banned this will be driven underground, then we have to decide punishment. Now do we remove children because of this, all (even the emotionally bonded older daughter) some (just boys)? Put people in prison? We'd have to have clear strategies.

Any cutting bits off your child and/or making holes in them should be illegal unless a Medical professional has deemed it necessary for medical reasons

Circumcision is a cruel and unnecessary procedure to put a baby or child through (medical reasons aside) and I would ban it in a heartbeat.

I was genuinely shocked to be asked by a nurse if we were going to get DS circumcised when he was only hours old. She was advocating for it and said it was part of her religion to do this (Christianity she told us). This was last year in an NHS hospital in England so maybe it’s a bigger ‘thing’ than I realise. It made me not trust the nurse to be caring for DS without DH or I present in case she took it upon herself to make the decision for us. Having just had a traumatic c-section after we both nearly died, why on earth would I then want to cut a perfectly normal, healthy part of my baby’s body off?!

The data I linked upthread said that 20% of UK boys are circumcised, although that didn't disaggregate for those who'd had it done for medical reasons.

Why do you think a baby, who likely wears a nappy and soils himself, is at LESS risk of infection from an open wound on his genitals, than a grown man who ought to know how to wash himself?

Quack quack

It would require politicians to take on both Jews and Muslims. So they'll give abhorrent genital mutilation an inexplicably fair hearing in the interests of multicultural harmony. Not to mention cynical political self-interest.

I honestly don’t think I’d have guessed that high a percentage!

While I agree this would also mean the NHS shouldn’t fund any non medically needed procedure such as ear pinning, cosmetic surgery, breast enlargement, weight loss surgery etc.

Again if these surgeries are medically needed then fine but the NHS do perform these surgeries that are not medically necessary

I don't think that poster was referring to men being able to wash themselves.
There are population clusters in Uganda for example with HIV rates of over 50%, circumcision is a significant protector against this. Infant boys grown into adult men. It could certainly be argued that infant circumcision might be the least worst in circumstances like that. The procedure is far simpler on babies than adults and adolescents.

Agree.

Mutilating a tiny child who cannot consent for religious or 'cultural' reasons should not be allowed. The boy can undergo the procedure when he is an adult if he so chooses.

Should be renamed male genital mutilation.

XH is Muslim but no way in hell would I ever agree to circumcise ds until he is at the age to consent to such a medical procedure himself (16+).

What I would say to that is in a country like Uganda/Nigeria, were the healthcare isn't good and expensive, you can see why it's best to do it as a newborn. Circumcision at a later age would be life threatening because of infection. Having a foreskin could be life threatening if it gets infected, STIs such as herpes is of less of a risk.
If it is banned this will be driven underground, then we have to decide punishment. Now do we remove children because of this, all (even the emotionally bonded older daughter) some (just boys)? Put people in prison? We'd have to have clear strategies.

@Ponoka7 No, it's not best to do it as a newborn! It's best to not do it at all, now if I am adult male in Nigeria, Uganda or anywhere else in the world wishes to take the risk of infection then good for him! A baby does not. It is mutilation. STIs?! Stop fucking people with Herpes then and it'll be even less of a risk, or, I don't know, use a condom? No condom? Don't have sex.

And yes, we would have to have clear strategies, absolutely. Anything to protect babies being mutilated in the name of religion or culture. Again, as per my first post, it is child abuse and people doing it in the name of religion or culture are brain dead.

It should definitely be banned. Absolutely sickening how common it is in the US, presumably for financial reasons with private health care as many Americans still seem to believe its needed for "hygiene reasons" as its pushed by doctors.

Worth reading Tom Rosenthal’s experience. https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2019/aug/13/tom-rosenthal-manhood-foreskin-edinburgh

i’ve not watched this video but if anyone wants to see it.

A paediatrician also told me how he had seen many poor babies in A&E with botched/infected circumsicuons. Foreskin is fused to the penis at that age so it’s like peeling off fingernails. An open would in contact with shite is a recipe for disaster!

For everything except medical reasons ban it I had it done although I was only a baby when old enough to understand I asked my parents and was told it was purely for medical reasons.

The practice of doing it for religious reasons should be stopped

Is it not quite popular in America and seen as more ‘hygienic’? I saw something about it before and gathered it was popular there