How do you talk relatives out of ritual circumcision of a child?

[UrbanDad]

A (non=-ewish) female friend of mine is married to a quite nice jewish DH. They have just had a baby boy and DH's parents and aunts/uncles are putting pressure on him to have their DS circumcised. DH is equivocal but my friend is dead set against it. I think it's barbaric - how would you react to a member of your family putting pressure on you to mutilate your child's genitalia? No apologies - it's child abuse pure and simple and should be criminalised. Religion is no excuse for this mediaeval, unenlightened superstitious crap.

Has anyone got any experience of talking moronic religious extremist relatives out of this stupidity? (Apologists for/proponents of/justificants of ritual circumcision please don't even bother responding to this post.)

"It's not just Jewish boys who are circumcised. My DP is Jewish and so are my DSSs and they are all circumcised, but so is my (100% British) father and plenty of Muslims I know. And Americans."

Anna - You seem to be confused about religions and nationalities.

I haven't been round the block as much as Anna so have insufficient penises/lovers on which to compare.

For me circumcision seems barbaric. A bit like having a baby's ears pierced. It's a cultural thing that I completely can't relate to.

"since none of you anti-women are going to be circumcised or have your sons circumcised why do you care if others chose to?"

So we shouldn't object to ANY child abuse or any evil in the world if we don't plan to do it.

i was about to say exactly same re: ear piercing! i wasn't in a huge rush to have dd's ears pierced but dp's family couldn't grasp why we were waiting and i gave in at 8 months, when we came back to uk i was shocked at the number of tutting and negative comments towards mutilation and freedom of choice, as the majority of females do end up piercing their ears at some time or other.
friends have told me that in spain ear piercing is offered in the maternity ward

well how many circumcised males see themselves as victims of abuse?

Can we try and get past the idea that circumcision is child abuse? Because it really isn't. You may consider it unnecessary, but it is not abuse. Unless it is abuse to perform the heel prick test, or immunise babies.

There are perfectly good reasons for doing it. They aren't good enough to convince most posters on this thread to do it, but fine, no one is trying to.

If anti-immunisers posted that immunisers were child abusers we'd have thread upon thread upon thread about it.

To the OP: It's not illegal and it's got nothing to do with you so I would butt out.

However if your friend doesn't want it done and she is the child's mother, then where's the argument? last time I checked, parents make those decisions, not grandparents so if she's set against it she should say it's not happening, end of! I have had to do this many a time with my ILs!

My own intuition would tell me that the foreskin is probably there for a reason and therefore should be left alone but I wouldn't presume to tell another parent what to do with their son.

I think if you stick needles into babies for fun and not for the purposes of immunisation that is an arrestable offense.

So if most do it for reason 3 ("pleasing god") and do it without general anaesthetic because god likes it that way and it's more interesting for the crowd watching then it isn't justified and is abuse.

Whatever one thinks about the ritual, if one reads the OP's dilemma, the issue is a bit clouded.

It's an emotive issue, but the OP's friend should discuss it with her DH. She obviously married into a Jewish family, and frankly it's a bit late in the day to be querying his religious beliefs, in my opinion.

If the dilemma was, for instance, whether to send the child for religious education as one partner wanted the child to be brought up in a particular faith, then both should respect each other's opinions.

And I think there is much more to this than meets the eye. I cannot believe that religious stuff was not discussed already with this couple.

(and I know a number of Jewish mothers who are uncomfortable when the bris is being done, but think that's fairly normal)

I am not remotely confused between religions and nationalities. Both religions and nationalities are cultures.

"So if most do it for reason 3 ("pleasing god") and do it without general anaesthetic because god likes it that way and it's more interesting for the crowd watching then it isn't justified and is abuse."

Fortunately the law doesn't agree with you. It is perfectly legal to perform this procedure for entirely religious and cultural reasons, and quite right too.

Start a petition on 10 Downing Street if you don't like it. This government is super at attempting to ban things with shoddily drafted legislation, they'll jump at the suggestion I'm sure.

Georgimama, you seem pretty set against people making duff comparisons on the thread - so why exactly do you find immunisation and heel prick tests so valid in your defence?

It's ridiculous.

Surely if it were comparable, all babies would be routinely circed at birth - oh but hang on, they're not. Does that tell you something?

...or perhaps you think they ought to be?

Message withdrawn

It is a duff comparison, that was rather the point of me making it.

The fact that all boys are not circumcised at birth tells me that this is not a Jewish country (in fact even there they wouldn't be done at birth).

At no point in this thread have I attempted to make out circumcision is an imperative for good sexual health. All I have done is try to point out to the hysterical mob antis that it is not abuse.

What bloss said.

Well done bloss.

bonsoir -- was that directed at me?

I think you should have a little bit more respect for the Jewish way of doing things.

Female circumcision is totally different and it is ludicrous to compare the two. In fact by comparing the two you risk 'normalising' female circumcision and making IT seem less barbaric.

No.

'Can we try and get past the idea that circumcision is child abuse? Because it really isn't. You may consider it unnecessary, but it is not abuse. Unless it is abuse to perform the heel prick test, or immunise babies.'

I don't see what you mean - the level of benefit in each scenario is massively distinct.

If the 'abuse' that is immunisation is mitigated by being necessary

and circumcision is not necessary

your argument just falls to bits.

I'm sorry but I do think it is - technically - abuse. Well meant abuse sometimes, yes - but still abuse.

I wouldn't pierce a baby's ears. Circumcision is a much bigger procedure with a much greater impact.

Lots of people don't think immunisations are necessary. There have been hundreds of threads about it.

Lots of people think circumcision is necessary, for all the reasons that have been spelt out here.

My argument doesn't fall to bits at all. It is one thing to say you disapprove of a practice or wouldn't do it yourself but that doesn't mean that it is child abuse.

As I have already said, and will say again, if you're that bothered about all the poor little "abused" Jewish boys, lobby your MP.

Why sit here banging on about it? You aren't going to change anyone's mind.

"It's not just Jewish boys who are circumcised. My DP is Jewish and so are my DSSs and they are all circumcised, but so is my (100% British) father and plenty of Muslims I know. And Americans."

Anna - But can't you be 100% British and still be circumcised? Or 100% American, Muslim and circumcised etc? Your post simply doesn't make good sense.

Message withdrawn

I don't know what you are fussing about. It's perfectly clear.

Anna - Well actually a lot Americans and Brits are Jewish. And your distinguishing Jewish boys from your British father seems to overlook this fact.