Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To Think Non-Medically Required Circumcision Is Abuse?

323 replies

BigFatBully · 02/12/2025 13:14

Circumcision of a child if not required for a medical reason is abuse. I don't believe a child can consent to mutilation and it should be for them to decide when they reach adulthood if they want such a procedure.

I don't understand how anyone could take a happy baby who is otherwise healthy and do this to them.

It's male genital mutilation (MGM).

OP posts:
LeaderBee · 02/12/2025 14:33

nomas · 02/12/2025 13:15

YABU. Male circumcision is entirely different to FGM.

You minimise the horrific nature of FGM when you compare it to male circumcision.

So just because one is objectively wrong, that means it's fine for the other one to happen because it''s "not as bad"?

nomas · 02/12/2025 14:35

Livingonbananabread · 02/12/2025 14:30

The comparison with FGM is utterly puerile. The history, impact and purpose are completely opposed, and it’s frankly offensive to align them.

FGM is about controlling women’s sexuality, intentionally destroying their ability to experience sexual pleasure and ensuring that they won’t seek sexual experiences away from their husbands. It involves extreme and deliberate damage to female bodies and is the ultimate expression of misogyny.

Circumcision evolved as a religious practice because, in a hot climate, it makes sense as a health and hygiene measure and, like prohibitions against pork and shellfish, it was easier to get people to follow health and hygiene advice if you made it religious law. If it had a significant impact on sexual pleasure or performance you can bet that patriarchal societies wouldn’t have continued practising it for centuries. It does, however, have a proven impact on infection rates and is still advised by HIV prevention organisations across Africa. It’s hugely culturally ingrained in the States, and until a generation ago was the absolute norm in the British upper classes. None of that aligns with the idea that it’s mutilation - sadly it’s all too easy to see how mutilation of women is cemented as cultural practice in a patriarchal society, but men less so.

I absolutely get the revulsion at the idea of lopping body parts off a perfect little baby - I didn’t and wouldn’t have my son circumcised. But the exaggerated outcry over it really winds me up.

💯 well said.

LeaderBee · 02/12/2025 14:37

Justlostmybagel · 02/12/2025 13:29

He thinks it's cleaner, and prefers the way it looks.

Show quote history

How hard does he think it is to wash under a foreskin?

Justlostmybagel · 02/12/2025 14:39

LeaderBee · 02/12/2025 14:37

How hard does he think it is to wash under a foreskin?

Show quote history

He wouldn't know, would he. That's just his opinion.

JamieCannister · 02/12/2025 14:40

BigFatBully · 02/12/2025 13:14

Circumcision of a child if not required for a medical reason is abuse. I don't believe a child can consent to mutilation and it should be for them to decide when they reach adulthood if they want such a procedure.

I don't understand how anyone could take a happy baby who is otherwise healthy and do this to them.

It's male genital mutilation (MGM).

100%.

Obviously (or at least it is obious based on my limited understanding) FGM is absolutely horrific, in a way that MGM is not.

But equally obviously is is absolutely outrageous that we mutilate babies (or, similarly, slaughter animals cruelly) simply to pander to religionists or people with backward cultures.

atamlin · 02/12/2025 14:41

Cannot compare the two and they’re done for very different reasons, but yes, it is abuse.

SapphOhNo · 02/12/2025 14:43

Yes it's abuse even on religious grounds but attempting to change religious culture and practice would be difficult.

JamieCannister · 02/12/2025 14:44

atamlin · 02/12/2025 14:41

Cannot compare the two and they’re done for very different reasons, but yes, it is abuse.

We can compare the two, and they are both done because the evil evil evil parent thinks chopping bits off their kids genitals is acceptable.

MrsTerryPratchett · 02/12/2025 14:46

Repulsive forced teaming with FGM.

Which I suspect the OP knew and may not be back.

Applesinapie · 02/12/2025 14:47

It’s still male genital mutilation because it’s the mutilation of a male’s genitals. It obviously doesn’t have the same impact as FGM and is much less of a horrific procedure, but doesn’t make it not the mutilation of a baby boys genitals. It is insane that people cut off parts of a healthy baby boy’s anatomy for no good reason and I can never understand why it is legal and accepted to do so in so many places.

Instructions · 02/12/2025 14:51

I think it's horrific but at the same time can see that if I believed the circumcision of my male children was a covenant with god, not doing it would be the abusive option

Papyrophile · 02/12/2025 15:00

Pretty standard in the USA; you don't even need to be Jewish. It eliminates any risk of penile cancer. Or so I was told by American XDH.

loganrock · 02/12/2025 15:01

It’s an abominable thing to do to a child who has no choice. The arrogance of the parents.

Coconutter24 · 02/12/2025 15:03

CurlewKate · 02/12/2025 13:16

Yes I do.But I do think direct comparison to FGM is inappropriate.

Edited

Op didn’t do a direct comparison, they only mention MGM not FMG

user1471538275 · 02/12/2025 15:06

Male circumcision without medical needs is harmful and carries unnecessary risks.

It doesn't matter that FGM is worse. MC is something different but is still harmful and needs to stop.

Cutting off a finger and cutting off a hand are different but I don't think we should accept either.

Crushed23 · 02/12/2025 15:09

Hoppinggreen · 02/12/2025 13:16

Unecessary surgical body modifications of any kind in children is abuse and should be illegal

This.

MrsTerryPratchett · 02/12/2025 15:10

user1471538275 · 02/12/2025 15:06

Male circumcision without medical needs is harmful and carries unnecessary risks.

It doesn't matter that FGM is worse. MC is something different but is still harmful and needs to stop.

Cutting off a finger and cutting off a hand are different but I don't think we should accept either.

Edited

I believe the same of ear piercing on small girls but I wouldn't compare the two!

Because it's offensive.

JamieCannister · 02/12/2025 15:13

Instructions · 02/12/2025 14:51

I think it's horrific but at the same time can see that if I believed the circumcision of my male children was a covenant with god, not doing it would be the abusive option

I think it's horrific but at the same time can see that if I believed the circumcision of my female children was a covenant with god, not doing it would be the abusive option.

This is precisely why religious beliefs are irrelevant when making the law

JamieCannister · 02/12/2025 15:16

Papyrophile · 02/12/2025 15:00

Pretty standard in the USA; you don't even need to be Jewish. It eliminates any risk of penile cancer. Or so I was told by American XDH.

I am fairly sure I could get the breast cancer rate significantly down by performing double mastectomies on all post pubescent teen girls, but on the other hand I think maybe that would be horrific and appalling.

NemesisInferior · 02/12/2025 15:16

user1471538275 · 02/12/2025 15:06

Male circumcision without medical needs is harmful and carries unnecessary risks.

It doesn't matter that FGM is worse. MC is something different but is still harmful and needs to stop.

Cutting off a finger and cutting off a hand are different but I don't think we should accept either.

Edited

Absolutely this.

"Because God told me" is a fucking shit excuse for causing completely unnecessary harm to a kid.

Maestoso · 02/12/2025 15:17

nomas · 02/12/2025 14:20

Other posters have also understood OP was equating male circumcision to FGM by calling it MGM. Because that’s what happens when you use a recognised term for something that happens to females and apply it to men.

Do I take it your ears aren’t pierced?

Edited
Show quote history

My ears are pierced. As an adult I gave informed consent for that procedure.

Perhaps more pertinent is that none of my children had their ears pierced until they were old enough to do so without my consent. It wasn't up to me to chose what unnecessary permanent body modifications I might like them to have when they were too young to give informed consent.

JamieCannister · 02/12/2025 15:17

LeaderBee · 02/12/2025 14:37

How hard does he think it is to wash under a foreskin?

Show quote history

Theory - MGM started because it was easier than persuading fathers to explain to their sons how to wash their genitals.

spinningplates2024 · 02/12/2025 15:18

Generally agree but it does reduce hiv infection risk which is very relevant in certain contexts and makes me a bit conflicted.

Applesinapie · 02/12/2025 15:18

MrsTerryPratchett · 02/12/2025 15:10

I believe the same of ear piercing on small girls but I wouldn't compare the two!

Because it's offensive.

Show quote history

But I don’t think people have compared them and said they’re the same. They can both be a type of genital mutilation with one being much worse than the other. That doesn’t make the unnecessary circumcision of a baby not a genital mutilation. It obviously is. It’s not offensive to point that out.

JamieCannister · 02/12/2025 15:19

Justlostmybagel · 02/12/2025 13:17

It's a tricky one. I agree, but my husband is circumcised and says he's glad he is.

We only have a dd so far, but I don't think we would get our son circumcised.

I think that your husband's opinions are more about his sub-conscience not wishing to allow to think of himself as a genitally mutilated man who was abused by his sick sick parents, than the fact that he rationally believes that he is better off than had he not had part of his penis cut off.

Swipe left for the next trending thread