Can we please talk about Male Circumcision?

[KaseyM]

It seems to be an undeniable truth that whenever there is a thread about, well anything to do with the inustices that women face in the world, it will usually turn back into a conversation about the injustices that men face in the world, one of them being male circumcision.

I get the impression that those coming on here saying "well what about male circumcision" in that lovely WATM way actually believe that feminists either a) invented male circumcision or b) approve of it.

So, just for the record and so that in future we can direct any further derailings to this can we state categorically once and for all each of our individual positions on Male Circumcision.

So I'll start: I disagree with it 100%.

Anyone else?

[FloraFox]

So you don't mix with Jews or Muslims? Nice.

[TreaterAnita]

Interesting that you brought the religious reasons into this Thunder. So God designed a bit of the male child that could be whipped off at birth in order to set them apart as followers of that faith? But they don't have any part in that pact do they? It's entirely based on the beliefs of their parents. Why doesn't your faith require that they do it at 13 or 16 or 18 or 21, when they have decided what they want to believe in and sacrifice a bit of themselves accordingly? That's surely acceptable isn't it? Surely you must believe that a child should be entitled to self-determination?

[Sunflower49]

What does God do if you're son isn't circumcised?Does he get really mad?

I agree with onesleep, unless medical, needless.

[BasilBabyEater]

Your DS is in a covenant with God whether he wants to be or not. Much like catholics baptised in the Roman Catholic faith - once a catholic etc. But self-determination of children in the face of patriarchal religion is a huge topic and perhaps a bit of a de-rail here? Dunno.

It's all patriarchal bollocks anyway isn't it. It is a hangover from patriarchal religion and if you want it to stop, you need to lobby the current day followers of patriarchal religions, not feminists, because it's not feminists who have the power to stop it, it's the patriarchs.

[initialname]

Here are some recent thoughts and info on the topic

freethoughtblogs.com/hetpat/2013/11/21/the-horrors-of-home-circumcision-and-why-intactivists-share-the-blame/

[AmyMumsnet]

Hi everyone,

Thanks for your reports. We understand that this topic is a bone of contention for many of you, but we'd really appreciate it if you could avoid personal attacks and generalisations which are beyond the pale.

We have been through the thread but please report anything you'd like us to take a second look at.

[BasilBabyEater]

Can you specify what is beyond the pale?

Is it considered beyond the pale to speak insultingly about the patriarchs who first hit upon this idea? Or is that considered offensive to people's religious sensibilities?

[AmyMumsnet]

We generally welcome robust interrogation of religious beliefs, we just think that these discussions are best kept civil, which means avoiding generalised accusations against people who adhere to any particular faith or group of faiths.

For example, we think it's beyond the pale to suggest that every single person who has their baby boy circumcised for religious reasons is committing child abuse.

We understand this issue raises lots of strong emotions but we'd ask posters to take a step back and remember that that accusation will be very deeply felt by some of their fellow MNers.

[SabrinaMulhollandJjones]

Improve, girls are mutilated or cut in order to oppress her sexually. FGM removes sexual feeling and causes lifelong pain and suffering during sex and childbirth as a matter of course. Male circumcision does not do this and is not comparable.

[CaptChaos]

Girls aren't mutilated for religious reasons. They are mutilated for men's pleasure.

Please don't bring false equivalencies back into this.

[improveprofilee]

But mutilating baby boys is fine as long as it's done for religion?

Manchester baby boy 'bled to death after circumcision'
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-20503660

[improveprofilee]

The foreskin has thousands of nerve endings and removing it causes the head of the penis to gradually become desensitized continually rubbing against the underwear. Of course it removes sexual feeling.

[improveprofilee]

The title of the thread wasn't "let's compare the procedure done on boys v girls" the title said "can we please talk about male circumcision"?

So can we talk about it without any "oh but FGM is much worse" derailing?

[SabrinaMulhollandJjones]

It's not fine in my opinion, except for medical reasons (which do arise).

It's just not comparable to FGM - which is never medically beneficial, and always damaging and oppressive.

[improveprofilee]

There you are doing it again.

And anyway there are different types of FGM each with their own severity. Only the most severe (and rarest) could be described as "mutilation". The rest are in fact comparable to MGM. Or circumcision if you want to call it that.

[SabrinaMulhollandJjones]

What you're not aware of, improveprofilee, is that this thread was started as a result of a male violence against women thread being derailed by someone raising the topic of male circumcision.

[SabrinaMulhollandJjones]

You can see, improveprofilee, that the majority of posters here are against male circumcision, even though they don't see it as comparable with FGM.

In fact, the main contention here is religious reasons for MC - and we all know that the major religions practising MC are patriarchal, don't we?

[CaptChaos]

Perhaps you missed previous comments stating that circumcision is not felt to be acceptable by most of us, but that, given that there are bigger fish to fry, it's not really a feminist issue? RTFT?

As Sabrina has said, boys tend to be circumcised for religious reasons, none of which are perpetuated by women, so maybe you need to look to men and specifically religious men if you want the practice stopped. Not huge amounts women can do to help to be honest.

Do you have a view on the fact that circumcision contributes to reduced chances of men catching HIV from positive women, and that, based on that fact, many organisations, including UNICEF advocate circumcision and run clinics where it is performed for free? If you feel so strongly about it, maybe you could lobby UNICEF and get them to stop their acts of 'mutilation'

[improveprofilee]

Well even if that was true, so do the use of condoms.

[SabrinaMulhollandJjones]

Hmm. Not exactly the point, is it, improveprofilee? Yes indeed, we would agree with you that condoms reduce the infection on HIV - but do you actually understand the thread? I don't think you do.

[Merel]

You know babies with no appendix tend not to suffer from appendicitis, so should all children undergo this surgery too? I think you will find that UNICEF only offer circumcisions in countries that are suffering from AIDS epidemics (African countries) but are open about the fact that it is not a cure and only part of AIDS prevention campaign in targeted countries. These are countries where condoms are not easily used or affordable.

[scallopsrmissingAnyFucker]

Only the most severe (and rarest) could be described as "mutilation". The rest are in fact comparable to MGM. That's just not true.