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)

And how many baby boys have to die before enough is enough? One is too many in my book. If someone said I had to allow someone to cut off my DS's foreskin without anesthetic I wouldn't be responsible for my actions. My little boy is perfectly clean, I make sure of it! He was born with a hydrocele and even then they rarely operate on those.

Well you couldn't read a graph title properly, I obviously couldn't assume you had anything close to an educated opinion.

It's the opposite. It decreases sensitivity, like walking barefoot toughens up your feet.

@MrsPeregrine By that reasoning then let’s also ban ear piercing on babies and young children then

Well yes, lots of people would support that ban because a child can't consent to a piercing. It makes no sense to subject a child to potential risks for no benefit.

And it’s much easier to keep clean down there because there’s less area for bacteria to accumulate and multiply.

Penis is literally the easiest part of the body to clean because of where it is positioned.

From that comment, it looks like you don't think too highly of men's ability to keep themselves clean, and it would also make me question how the men in your life are able to clean the parts of their body which are much more challenging to clean.

I agree it should be criminalised.

My DD is a paediatric nurse, circumcision is performed and paid for by NHS.

Religion is responsible for so many hideous acts.

@AliasGrace47 I read in a Gloria Steinem book that circumcision can increase sensitivity by exposing more of the sensitive area.

It sounds like you and Gloria Steinem both have very limited knowledge of male anatomy.

Feel you on that. They couldn't get a cannula in DS's hand so he had one in his foot and a feeding tube because he wasn't eating. They took him off to the SCBU when he was two days old. He's alright now but that was tough and I was so scared for my little boy.

FGM frequently causes long-lasting problems with bleeding, pain, urinary problems and loss of sexual pleasure.
Circumcision doesn’t.

It's pretty gross that the thing that occurs to you on a thread about the mutilation of infants is whether or not women might want to touch your dick ffs.

Astonishingly, this is true.

https://www.who.int/teams/global-hiv-hepatitis-and-stis-programmes/hiv/prevention/voluntary-medical-male-circumcision

There's an established loss of sensitivity, which I think explains the American obsession with anal sex. And then there's the need to use lube for satisfactory masturbation.

Common life long problems with circumcision, reduced sensation, burning pain due to too much skin being removed, pain during erections that lead to erectile disfunction. Inclusion cysts, urinary problems due to the urethra being permanently damaged. Bleeding, infection and death.

As for profit in the US health care system -- perhaps at one time but not so much anymore. One way rates have dropped is if Medicaid stops covering it. The rates dropped in Canada when provincial plans stopped paying. (This has much less effect on religious circumcision as it's not done within the health system.)

The major driver in the US today is parental preference and whether the father is circumcised or not. You can see this even more strongly by regional trends. Circumcision is higher in the South and Midwest, low in the West (under 25%) and in the middle in the Northeast. States with high immigration, especially Latino (see: Texas and Florida) have lower rates. I would not say circumcision is dying, but the trend is absolutely downwards.

I agree that ear piercing in babies/children should be banned, yes.

Note that almost everyone here has said they are discussing circumcision that is medically unnecessary.

Here's the FGM graph, shocking imo. As I said it's happening in the UK nowadays and we have a court dedicated to dealing with it. Unlikely to stop it here when some migrants come from countries where 100% of girls experience it. Why import a problem we never used to have?

I gave birth in the USA and you can request circumcision as part of the newborn health checks. I had a daughter so irrelevant and bring British it would have been a no but the leaflets cited hygiene and protection against certain conditions

Not common at all.

These girls will be at risk whether they are in the UK or Africa, stopping migration isn't going to help them. In fact they may have a better chance of escaping in a country where its illegal.

If men want to get this amazing sensitivity that Gloria's suggesting, there's nothing stopping them paying to have their foreskin lopped when they're old enough to consent to other modifications such as a genital piercing or a tattoo.

Equally, if men think it's worth getting their foreskin lopped to lower their risk of HIV, they can pay to have it removed when they're old enough. With the advantage that they'll also be old enough to consult with the doctor re: how much they want removed.

If a man wants to show his commitment to the covenant with his deity he can pay to do so when he's old enough to consent to such a radical procedure. Arguably it would be a more valuable sacrifice since it would be freely given rather than taken.

Aesthetics are wholly inappropriate to this discussion.

I’m impressed that you know better than the medical community.

I don't think there's any evidence that the practice is spreading to other cultures in the UK. The daughters of immigrants to the UK are simply at risk in the UK the same way they would be at risk in their parents' country of origin. We haven't imported a problem. We've just said we aren't going to turn a blind eye to this barbaric practice just because little girls from certain immigrant communities are the only victims.

Whereas encouraging condom use instead protects both men and women.

So on a practical basis the outcome might be different for most (but not all) recipients. I say not all because, although I appreciate it’s rare, some men do suffer life long complications due to circumcision. Are they morally so different though? Given in both cases there is zero benefit to the person the procedure is inflicted upon?

And protects against unwanted pregnancy and other STDs.