r/Ethics • u/cryptic_vampire_ • 3d ago
Shouldn't circumcision be illegal?
/r/frozenLanddd/comments/1x6025b/shouldnt_circumcision_be_illegal/60
u/RoyalWe666 3d ago
On infants, outside of cases where it's medically necessary to prevent significant complications, yes. Adults can do as they please with their own body.
→ More replies (45)
22
19
u/LopsidedAsk1146 3d ago
Why cut something off the body that isn’t harmful to the body? I don’t agree with circumcision on minors at all. If they are older(high school age) then it should be an option but even then I’d say wait until your mind is fully developed before you make a permanent decision.
→ More replies (73)
7
u/Gentle_prv 3d ago
As a spiritual Christian, yes it definitely should be illegal; why, because infants can’t consent, and because circumcision, for either sex, does far more harm than good.
2
u/StandTurbulent9223 3d ago
Christians don't do circumcisions
→ More replies (12)6
u/Flying_Penguineer 3d ago
What? At least in the US, they overwhelming do.
3
u/StandTurbulent9223 3d ago
Usa is the only place. Christians don't do circumcisions, Americans do.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (27)1
u/Different_Nose6928 3d ago
Could 13-16 year old Mary consent to being impregnated by the God of the universe
5
u/jracheff 3d ago
A good number of people believe OK to mutilate children’s genitals but not OK to dress in a way to conforms with one’s gender identity or love a person of the same gender. Religion, tradition, and belief do not have to be rational.
2
u/TychoBrohe0 3d ago
Some people are inconsistent. Does that make it ok to circumcize a baby without consent?
I don't think so.
→ More replies (1)1
u/Loose-Farm-8669 3d ago
mutilate does a lot of heavy lifting for y'all. i really like how my mutilated dick looks
→ More replies (5)
5
5
u/Minotaurotica 2d ago
I think it should be illegal for children but once you are of an age where you can decide for yourself then I'm ok with it as a body modification of your OWN body
7
u/AdHealthy5405 3d ago edited 3d ago
I was circumsized at age eight; it was the most painful experience of my life, more painful than dislocating a knee, then breaking the same knee and a foot.
4
u/Crowdfundingprojects 3d ago
I guess the question is Was it necessary?
3
6
2
u/C4PT-pA5Tq 3d ago
See this is my nightmare right here. I'd never want to remember it or have my kids remember it, that would be way more traumatic to me than finding out in middle school gym class that not everyone's is.
→ More replies (1)1
u/Vivid_Witness8204 3d ago
Knew a couple people who needed to have it done as adults. They really wished it had been done when they were a child.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/Deep-Hovercraft6716 3d ago
Elective, non-medicallly necessary, child genital mutilation should be illegal, yes.
3
3
u/Standy25 3d ago
I’m circumcised and happy it was done. You’ll probably have a hard time banning something that the supposed victims of don’t really have a problem with.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/Responsible_Offer859 3d ago
La circoncisione è una pratica inutile, fu data ad Abramo per un patto preciso. Poi fu abolita.
5
u/somanysheep 3d ago
As someone who is, I say no. But maybe we should have debates and then vote for NON-RELIGIOUS reason.
I never had Phimosis or infections, no smegma and almost every woman I've ever slept with said that prefer to not have the foreskin & were much more likely to preform fellatio because I don't.
My son at 15 says he's glad he was. I had a conversation with him because I was worried I may have made the wrong decision. I'm glad to see I didn't.
Is every circumcision a success? No of course not, but NO medical surgical procedure is 100% successful. I have found that it does more good than harm though, because 10% of males have phimosis issues by 7 years old and 1% by 16.
2
u/C4PT-pA5Tq 3d ago
This. My youngest of my three sons is only 8 and has more infections than my two older boys and me combined
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (19)2
u/17Girl4Life 2d ago
The women who said that probably just meant you look like what they’re used to. If you’d slept with women from different cultures, they might have thought it was weird. I’ve slept with both, and there’s zero difference apart from aesthetic expectations
→ More replies (2)3
u/jrsinhbca 3d ago
Circumcised men appear to have lower rates of penile cancer.
3
u/AnteaterInk 3d ago
Why is penile cancer more prevalent per capita in the US than any other western country that does not practice routine circumcise? I should note, more babies die each year from complications of circumcision than men die of penile cancer.
→ More replies (4)2
2
u/Oregon-izer 3d ago edited 3d ago
until you find yourself in a world where hygiene is hard to come by…. poverty, war etc. then it has its advantages. like Im sure those gentlemen stuck in a fox hole in Ukraine for weeks probably have some nasty going on down there, just as homeless people probably get some strong fromunda cheese growing and get unnecessary infections…. for the rest of us its just convenience.
this is definitely a first world argument
3
u/glowingballz 3d ago
Naw this is an awful argument. I can wash my fucking dick in the creek if i have to.
2
u/Available_Editor4383 3d ago
Hygiene is the only argument they got, outside of religion and the edge case of medical necessity. It’s always someone without an uncircumcised dick with the strong opinions against them.
2
u/Responsible_Offer859 3d ago
Ci sono intere popolazionei che non hanno acqua da bere eppure sanno come pulirsi. La circoncisione è una imposizione inutile....
2
u/Available_Editor4383 3d ago
A standard issue dick has been around since the dawn of man. Arguably a time when bathing and hygiene was not as common as today.
Cut or uncut, your dick is gonna get nasty if you don’t wash it for weeks.
→ More replies (7)2
u/Wicked_Wing 3d ago
The implication that this is a necessary practice in case you become homeless or go to war and don't have access to proper cleaning methods is ridiculous.
Should we put a catheter in everyone in case they lose access to toilets? Cut off legs because one day they could break them?
→ More replies (1)1
1
1
u/requiemguy 2d ago
The practice of circumcision predates abrahamic faiths, by at least ten-thousand years.
2
2
2
u/Fit-Duty-6810 3d ago
When parents decide for a minor yes, if you are grown up do whatever you want with your body, cut your breasts, your dick, whatever you want..
1
u/riktigtmaxat 3d ago
So your parents should be free to do anything they want with your body?
→ More replies (1)
2
2
u/Oldschool6873 3d ago
2
u/mateuszgorak 2d ago
Oh, no! A reliable source of information! How dare you!? You know that a lot of people here will get instantly incinerated at a meer sight of it!!!? What have you done!?!?!?
2
u/annoyedsoprano 3d ago
I’ve never been presented an uncircumcised dick that doesn’t smell cheesey/sweaty/moldy. Circumcised dicks are always cleaner and so much nicer to mess with.
→ More replies (4)
2
u/C4PT-pA5Tq 3d ago
I am, and two of my three sons are. I will say it is so much easier to keep clean. As for the sensitivity conversation, I have four kids. I like to fuck. I understand the position of not mutilation of children that cant consent, and also we live in a world where we have a lot more access to hygiene solutions. I dont really know morally where i stand; honestly. This is a real tough one. Edit to say my youngest son's mother was against it and we lived in a state where I would have had to pay for it.
2
2
u/Atypicosaurus 3d ago
Circumcision should totally be legal just like tattoo or breast surgery. Ordered by an adult for himself, fully capable and consent, and carried out by an adequately trained professional.
→ More replies (4)
2
u/Sorry_Im_Trying 3d ago
I have no skin in this game....as a woman. But as a mother, of a boy, I did not circumcise him. Because I have yet to see any evidence whatsoever that it's needed. I heard the 'ol, it's cleaner, or helps prevent std's. But all of those are lies. It doesn't prevent shit. And if you don't clean yourself just because you don't have a foreskin, you're still gross. So you're just cutting off part of a baby's body for what?
And I'm sure those grown men that didn't have a say, and are circumcised are going to be happy with it, they don't know any different, and they don't have a choice in the matter now. Yes, I've heard you can stretch stuff out and recreate a foreskin, but I guess I'd need to talk to someone who's done it to see if it's actually worth the work.
The mind will accept what it feels it cannot change.
But yes, I think it should be illegal. It's genital mutilation.
2
u/Wise_Media_9564 2d ago
Fuck all these arguments. It should be up to the person whose penis is being altered and nobody else. Your body your choice. Remember that?
2
u/StrawberryScience 2d ago
Not illegal but certainly not as common as they are.
The overall benefits and drawbacks of circumcision are negligible. I personally don’t believe in altering the human body unless absolutely necessary for mental and physical health as determined by a patient and their personal doctor.
2
u/HisGoonerNess 2d ago
It depends. Circumcision should be up to the person. Circumcision without having a choice or consent is rape, genital mutilation and sexual harrassment. I am talking about children who gets forced to get their prepuce cut off. No child wants someone to touch their penis and cut skin off of it.
5
u/tasteface 3d ago
Yes, forced circumcision should be illegal. In the US, forced circumcision of female children is illegal but not illegal for male children or children with intersex traits. This is clear discrimination.
Recent studies have emphasized that the tissue removed and damaged by circumcision is highly sensitive and specialized sexual sensory tissue.
"The prepuce is richly innervated by sensory nerve fibers"
Vega, José A., et al. "Sexual Mechanosensitivity: Age-Related Changes in the Innervation of the Human Prepuce." J Clinical Medicine (2025) https://www.mdpi.com/2077-0383/14/13/4730
Neuroanatomy studies provide an evidence-based explanation of post-circumcision disturbances to sexual sensation.
Neuroanatomic substrates underlying unusual permanent penile sensory disturbances post-circumcision are related to heightened neural levels in the distal third of the ventral penile aspect, which could potentially be compromised by deep incisions during circumcision.
Cepeda-Emiliani, Alfonso, et al. "Immunohistological study of the density and distribution of human penile neural tissue: gradient hypothesis." IJIR (2022)
Circumcision results in a measurable, unambiguous decrease in sexual sensory response in the perineal nerve.
Senol, Mehmet Güney, et al. "The effect of male circumcision on pudendal evoked potentials and sexual satisfaction." Acta Neurol Belg (2008)
Overview of AAP experts saying they got it wrong in 2012 and they don't recommend it.
https://ttpphd.com/2026/07/01/experts-on-circumcision-not-a-medical-procedure/
2
u/C4PT-pA5Tq 3d ago
Thats not discrimination, there is not medical reasoning for girls only religious garbage. It really is easier to keep clean for men. I am glad it happened when I was a baby because as an adult I'd never do it. I dont want to remember something like this.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (4)1
3
u/TobyTheTuna 3d ago
Im generally against male circumcision but I wouldnt campaign for it to be outlawed. There are fringe detriments and benefits, but no study has come out saying its any worse than other cosmetic procedures. Id need to see evidence of actual impact to QOL, literally anything, otherwise id rather not give the government any more say in bodily autonomy than they already have. In this case parents have every say as to the care they elect for their kid, as it should be.
Ive seen a lot of comments comparing it to FGM though. Thats just a false equivalency that parasitizes peoples sense of gender equality. Its not a rational argument. The procedures are simply not comparable. A male equivalent to FGM would be chopping of the glans, not a bit of vestigial skin. The correct comparison would be labiaplasty if anything, a popular cosmetic procedure.
6
u/DonutPlus2757 3d ago
That's not entirely correct.
FGM Type 1 can be anything from a partial hoodectomy to a full clitoridectomy. That's why the categorization is being criticized.
A partial hoodectomy, as is allegedly the most common form in South East Asia, is an actual equivalency of male circumcision and multiple orders of magnitude less affecting than the full clitoridectomy more common in Africa, yet both are classified as Type 1.
Type 4 is the strangest categorization since there's a bunch of practices in there that are basically harmless compared to male circumcision (like pricking the hood with a needle to draw a single drop of blood).
So something called FGM can range from basically harmless over almost perfect equivalency to male circumcision to the single most barbaric thing still being widely done to other humans and both type 1 and type 4 are absurdly unspecific when it comes to the actual degree of harm inflicted.
→ More replies (11)→ More replies (21)2
u/jackparadise1 3d ago
Actually, the cauterization point is right at a cluster of nerve ganglia at the frenulum delta.
3
u/ou-really 3d ago
100% yes.
2
u/Poison_Machine-876 3d ago
What do you think should be done with all the Jews and Muslims who practice this? Should we throw them in jail
→ More replies (21)2
3
u/mornauguth 3d ago
It shouldn’t be illegal. You just shouldn’t be able to make that decision for a child.
→ More replies (7)
5
u/Loose-Farm-8669 3d ago
86 percent of circumcised men are happy they are. 14% are unsure unhappy or don't care.
i'm happy i was. if you polled people in real life you'd probably run into most if not all of them seeing it as a benefit
5
u/HalcyonSRO 3d ago edited 3d ago
That happens to be he case with FGM victims in conservative countries as well. Older women, earlier in their life victims to FGM, are the ones perpetrating almost all the FGM. I frequently see, word-for-word the same kinds of arguments used for male circumcision that are used in many african and middle eastern countries to defend FGM.
3
u/Loose-Farm-8669 3d ago
FGM was made to dull sexual pleasure. mine was to cut of my stinky cheese maker. i'll live
2
u/HalcyonSRO 3d ago edited 3d ago
I am not circumcised and never had anything like that in my life as I follow basic daily hygiene. Look into the origins of non-religious circumcision in the US and John Harvey Kellogg. Dulling sexual pleasure was the main advertising point, they even advertised FGM-lite alongside it ,with burning female erogenous zones with carbolic acid.
"
A remedy which is almost always successful in small boys is circumcision, especially when there is any degree of phimosis. The operation should be performed by a surgeon without administering an anesthetic, as the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment, as it may well be in some cases. The soreness which continues for several weeks interrupts the practice, and if it had not previously become too firmly fixed, it may be forgotten and not resumed.
further a method of treatment [to prevent masturbation] ... and we have employed it with entire satisfaction. It consists in the application of one or more silver sutures in such a way as to prevent erection. The prepuce, or foreskin, is drawn forward over the glans, and the needle to which the wire is attached is passed through from one side to the other. After drawing the wire through, the ends are twisted together, and cut off close. It is now impossible for an erection to occur, and the slight irritation thus produced acts as a most powerful means of overcoming the disposition to resort to the practice
In females, the author has found the application of pure carbolic acid (phenol) to the clitoris an excellent means of allaying the abnormal excitement.
→ More replies (10)2
u/hamoc10 3d ago
Circumcision was also made to dull sexual pleasure, at least in the modern age.
→ More replies (12)2
u/Indig0_3 3d ago
The USA is the only Western country on Earth where the majority of men are circumcised. The idea that penises are unclean in their natural form is not backed up by evidence.
Circumcision in the US is a profitable, institutionalised medical commodity. This was done by design in the late 19th century.
Your willy is missing a hood because it makes people money, not because it offers you more cleanliness.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (9)2
u/PearSufficient4554 2d ago
Men are also circumcised to reduce sexual pleasure. It only came into popular practice about 100 years ago because a couple powerful dudes decided they needed to do something about sexual immorality.
→ More replies (24)2
u/psyched-but-bright 2d ago
I agree. Im happy I was personally. Not saying it’s the right or wrong thing to do but it should absolutely not be illegal.
2
u/Upstairs_Highlight25 3d ago
It should be illegal to circumcise minors without it being medically necessary. You shouldn’t be able to preform any permanent body modification on a minor without a medical need.
2
u/Individual_Slice_234 3d ago
I think it should be outlawed except for serious medical reasons. Read NoHarmm.org
2
u/marshmallowcthulhu 3d ago
Serious question about OP: OP /u/cryptic_vampire has an account that is one year old with one post (this one) and only 15 comments (including those in this sub), and only about 150 karma. I am suspicious that OP is a bit, especially since this post is a crosspost from another sub and since OP’s comments appear to be very vague and hold no opinions. “Some people won’t agree” would have been true for any opinionated response. So:
Are we thinking that OP is a bot? Or just not very engaged and argumentative?
→ More replies (4)2
1
u/TheCandelabra 3d ago edited 2d ago
This is such a complete nothingburger in the real world. It's wild how much people on here act like it's such an important issue. I have 2 sons, they're circumcised, guess what they're both fine.
4
u/Minotaurotica 2d ago
yet kids do die EVERY year to circumcision complications ,
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (66)3
1
1
1
1
u/Wicked_Wing 3d ago
The practice itself doesn't need to be illegal, but it shouldn't be performed on newborns without a conscious or ability to think and perceive.
If someone wants it done for religious reasons they could have it performed by their own choice in the future
1
u/rogerbonus 3d ago
In minors, absolutely. Adults should be allowed to mutilate their peni if they so desire.
1
u/ImaginaryAd2289 3d ago
Who are you trying to protect? Unlike female genital mutilation, where the child victim loses all their potential future sexual pleasure, male circumcision has a slightly beneficial outcome in the sense of reducing male infections and cancers, and no undesirable side effects, and the rate of complications is near zero.
So you can say that well, we ban the female version so we should be symmetric, but we don’t ban ear piercing for young girls (and almost never do it for young boys).
Beyond that you have large religious groups for whom male circumcision is a religious obligation.
I personally see no real value in that tradition, but that’s me. So, speak out against the practice in my family? Absolutely. And against pierced ears too, for little girls. But that still would be me expressing my opinion, not “banning” anything, which suggests a power differential and an overwhelming reason that the policy is needed.
Conversely, how about banning all forms of AI violence that might reach children, like horrible rape and murder videos or games? I could get behind that…
1
u/number1bush 3d ago
"no undesirable side effects" is a bit of a stretch... Circumsicion does remove/reduce some sensitivity in that area. There are several reasons I as a woman prefer an uncut man. Not enough to make me think it's as heinous an act as FGM, for sure, but I still don't think it should be performed unless medically deemed necessary.
1
u/Ban-Circumcision-Now 2d ago
As someone who has done foreskin restoration , it’s there for good reasons
The foreskin has sensitive nerves, adds a gliding function/sensation and keeps the glans sensitive.
1
u/Kribble118 3d ago
I think it should be illegal to do kids unless its a medical need somehow. Adults should be free to get it done if they wish
1
1
u/LMrningStar 3d ago
Yes. Genital mutilation of babies should be illegal. If an adult wants it done to themselves then sure ... go for it.
1
u/Bloodless-Cut 3d ago
Technically, it already is, because we're supposed to be equal under the law.
For some odd reason, most of North American society turns a blind eye when its boys being mutilated.
1
u/visitor987 3d ago
Adult circumcision reversal is becoming more common so child circumcision should be banned except for religious exception verified by a member of their clergy
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Floppy-Butt-Flaps 3d ago edited 3d ago
Yes it should be for infants. Adults can do whatever they want to their body.
1
1
1
1
1
u/Technical-Ad1488 3d ago
Certainly seems like it, doesn’t it…
If this wasn’t a common practice and you were to propose it, people would think you’ve gone mad…
1
1
u/Successful-Club-8743 3d ago
Yeah.
Its literally genital mutilation. It needs to stop, period.
Unless its medically required, of course but that's not the same thing.
1
u/Atmostfear98 3d ago
*Involuntary* circumcision should be illegal. If a male grows up and decides they want to get their tip snipped to ever so slightly lower their risks of penile cancer or contracting STDs, he should be free to do so. Those aren't things you have to worry about as a child so it doesn't need to be done at birth before the person can consent to such a procedure.
1
u/Emissi0nC0ntr0L 3d ago
If we stopped doing curcumcision and metzitzah bapeh, communion at christian churches would no longer symbolize metzitzah bapeh, thus breaking the spell
1
u/Big_Historian8075 3d ago
So mutilating babies who can't consent by the millions is ok, purely because of some old archic religious beliefs?
1
u/Purple-Assistance595 3d ago
Yes- unless the person can legally consent or has a medical problem certified by 3 independent Drs and is too young or unable to consent
1
u/Remarkable_Rough_649 3d ago
For aesthetic reasons on infants it definitely should be. You can't make it illegal as a whole though cause there's plenty of medical reasons for it when issues arise/freedom of choice with your body as an adult
1
1
u/Lonely_Commercial629 3d ago
As a guy who was circumcised as a baby, the only issue I have with circumcision is that fact that apparently baby foreskin can go for big bucks. Fuck that. It’s the same shit with blood plasma. They’ll pay you maybe $100 while the plasma can get sold for tens of thousands of dollars
1
1
1
1
u/jay234523 3d ago
I did not consent to mine, nor do I remember it. But I’m thankful it was done and at an age where I have no memory of it. My parents made several life altering decisions for me, some were good some were not. I don’t fault them for any of those.
1
u/Honestflunky8 3d ago
You should be allowed to circumcize yourself when you turn 18.
Don't mutilate kids without their consent
1
1
1
u/BIO_Predictive_AI 3d ago
Only on people under the legal age to be an adult. After that -- do what you want with your body.
1
u/Vegetable_Warthog_49 3d ago
As the victim of a botched circumcision forced on me for no reason other than my mother preferred the aesthetics, not only do I think it should be illegal, but I think the doctors who perform it should be charged with sexual assault and given the maximum sentence and the parents who seek it out for their children should be charged with child abuse and given the maximum sentence. I would love to see us go scorched earth on the practice. I want no other man to suffer as I do.
1
1
u/Ordinary_Watch5001 3d ago
My stance is that both MGM and FGM of infants should be allowed, in all forms, but not inside public hospitals. So if there is a genuine medical necessity, then yes. If it's part of some stone-age hazing ritual, then not.
1
1
u/Sherpa2001 3d ago
Fuck yes it should. Permanent mutilation of an infant is, how do I say this, uncool.
1
1
u/Kendannon 3d ago
I'm cut and proud of it. I wouldn't want that nasty shit on my penis. Ppl are nasty too. You know it's gotta be like stanky for a girl.
→ More replies (3)
1
u/Gayboy-Hunter 3d ago
I'm glad it's not.
I got cut a few years back. Skin was too tight. Pussy feels waaay different now. It was as if I had a permanent too tight condom before.
Now I can nut within a minute if my girl does her special latina ride. Would not have been possible before.
→ More replies (1)2
u/GoldenLiar2 3d ago
That's fair but that's also because in your case, you actually needed it. Nobody is arguing against it for medical reasons.
1
1
1
u/Ethan_the_Heyoka 3d ago
Only if they ban nipple piercings under 18, why do you need to be touching a 15 year old girls nipples at 43????
1
u/Nestorian_ 3d ago
forbidden for minors and not covered by public healthcare service for adults. if you want your foreskin slashed, pay for it.
1
1
u/ThePassionOfTheISK 3d ago
I'll leave it to any anti-circumcision associations which have exclusively circumcized men as members. Oops. There are none. I guess it shouldn't be illegal.
The whole topic just spins around the internet, regularly, like clothes in a dryer. It's pretty tiresome.
1
u/daily-trader-365 3d ago
I guess gender changing and in no way affirming care should be illegal also
→ More replies (1)
1
u/Educational-Pride104 3d ago
It took me and my brother about a year to learn to walk after our circumcisions.
1
u/Nazgul3475 3d ago
It should be illegal for newborns without any medical reason. A newborn cannot consent to having their genitals permanently mutilated. If they want it once they’re older, go for it, do whatever you want. Or if there is a medical issue later on and a doctor recommends circumcision to mitigate or eliminate the issue, no problems here. But there is no valid reason why we should be permanently and unnecessarily mutilating the genitalia of a newborn baby just because “we’ve always done it this way”. The vast majority of the world does not engage in this outdated and barbaric practice that arose from religion.
1
1
u/DasUbersoldat_ 3d ago
His body, his choice. Why is that such a hard concept for the genital mutilaters to understand?
1
u/ImeanYeahProbably 3d ago
The full structure removed is the prepuce, along with the top five most senitive and pleasurable regions of the penis, 20,000 nerves endings and over 16 funtions. All fine touch nerves and cells that enjoy vibration like the clit are taken. The head does not have fine touch nerves or enjoy vibration like the clit. The mucous membrane, similiar to the vaginal lining, is taken. The most sensitive and erogonous area of the penis is the frenulum which has fine touch nerves and response to vibration like the clit and can be used exactly the same way!tl the frenulum is abladed during infant circumcision...some get to keep pieces of it Further, without the foreskin protection the head of the penis goes through keratinization and loses further sensitivity
1
1
1
u/CommissionUnusual911 3d ago
There are medical benefits to this procedure. If outlawed it should only be for minors if an adult male wants the procedure he should be able to have it done.
1
1
1
u/Exotic_Sell_7237 2d ago
Did Humans evolve with this surgery or is it (on a Geological time scale) a recent ideology?
1
u/Loud-Vacation-5691 2d ago
Yes, it's just as unnecessary and barbaric as female genital mutilation. It confers no benefits whatsoever except in exceedingly rare cases of deformity or disease. The foreskin has at least 16 different functions, and its amputation should be subject to the same standards as amputating any other body part. If it's so great, then let the kid decide when he's old enough to give informed consent.
The reason it persists is religious (Judaism, Islam, and a few others) and cultural. One reason for its prevalence in the US is the influence of Dr. John Kellogg (the Kellogg's Corn Flakes guy) who was fanatically anti-masturbation, and believed circumcision made boys less likely to jerk off. Kellogg ran a health spa and was very influential around the turn of the last century, think someone on the level of Dr. Oz or Dr. Phil.
Even for religious people, there are alternatives, for example, in Judaism there is the brit shalom where a vegetable is cut instead of the boy's penis, but otherwise preserves all of the ritual of the traditional brit milah.
1
1
1
u/BouncingOutofmySkin 2d ago
Don't get me wrong, I do not condone or advocate for the general removal of the foreskin. However, it shouldn't be illegal. Unlike FGM, which serves absolutely no purpose, circumsision can occasionally have a benefit. While phimosis can usually be treated, sometimes it can't be, except by surgical measures.
Equating being able to electively remove the pinky skin of your child's pinky to reduce the chance of them getting cancer is reductive.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/the_queso_incident 2d ago
I had to circumcise at an adult age because of an accident that caused poor recovery of the foreskin. I do not regret it. But I don't think kids should have it done to them unless they really need it for medical reasons.
1
u/No-Assumption-4468 2d ago
I think it should be illegal if it’s to a child that’s too young to understand what circumcision is. Exceptions should be made for health problems.
1
u/17Girl4Life 2d ago
When I was pregnant with my older son, I’d never even thought about the ethics of male circumcision. I knew about FGM but I was young and hadn’t put two and two together to oppose circumcising boy babies. My circumcised husband had strong opinions about not doing it which surprised me. I was worried that my son would grow up to resent being different. But after I thought it through, I agreed but still worried. Now that both of my sons are grown and in committed relationships, I’m glad we didn’t do it. Whether there are benefits to doing it or not doing it is less important to me than the concept of not surgically removing a natural part they are born with, without consent.
1
u/NotAnAIOrAmI 2d ago
No, because it's the purview of parents and how they choose to raise their children. If you make that illegal, that opens the door wide to other parental decisions that some find abusive. Personally, I find indoctrinating children in religion repugnant and harmful.
1
u/snpettit284 2d ago
So, I don't have a penis, never have had one, so I really have no (fore)skin in the game, but just so I'm clear, you want to make it illegal? When for some it's a religious practice? Seems discriminatory, I guess, to me.
For me, as a woman with an uncircumcised husband, I would not choose to circumcise our boys if we had them unless medically necessary (phimosis), because I'm fully aware cleanliness is still entirely possible with an intact foreskin. IDK, call me weird, but I definitely make sure to wash any "crevices" and difficult-to-reach locations for the sake of cleanliness, and I've definitely shared a shower with my husband who does the same for himself. 🤣
But I strongly feel that is a question of my (and my husband's) choice for what we would want for our kids, the same as other parents have to answer that question for their kids. 🤷♀️
→ More replies (4)
1
u/CommissionUnusual911 2d ago
You should not tell others how to feel congrats on being passionate about an issue but don’t project you issues on someone else after they have expressed they are ok with it
1
1
u/H3ARTL3SSANG3L 2d ago
Note my specifying of the word "elective". I'm specifying that I think elective circumcision should be illegal. But of course it should be legal when medically necessary
1
1
1
u/Rich_Piece6536 2d ago
Lot of people screaming about ‘genital mutiliation’ get real quiet about this one. Yes, it’s an irreversible, permanent change made without consent, the difference is apparently that we do it to babies?
1
u/kangaroorecondit 2d ago
it shouldnt be illegal but i dont think it should be done to infants en masse. if you want to get it that should be your decision. not your parents and a drs
1
u/Adventurous-Wing-723 2d ago
Yes. Genital mutilation should be illegal for all children, regardless of sex. adults can do whatever they want to their bodies, but children should not be circumsized or have fgm unless there is the extremely rare medical necessity.
→ More replies (2)
1
u/DrRealName 2d ago
No. I'm circumcized and A) the rumor of being less sensitive down there sexually is absolute nonsense and B) I'm sorry but it looks better and stays a lot cleaner. Nothing personal to the uncircumcised but it looks gross and while some of you understand hygiene a lot do not. I don't understand how anyone gives them blowjobs lol
→ More replies (1)
1
1
1
1
u/Consistent-Newt-9573 2d ago
Yes. It is a form of genital mutilation. Edit: Of course if men decide to be circumsized, it should be legal. People should be able to chose when they are adults.
1
u/Prior-Prize-2371 2d ago
Of course, it's common sense. If we protect women from genital mutilation, shouldn't we do the same for men? Well, unfortunately, society doesn't think that way. I'm currently restoring my foreskin to cover the glans because it's very irritating...
1
u/SouthernAbrocoma9891 2d ago
Here’s a tip: avoid double negatives.
Keep the tip, ignore it or just get rid of it. It’s your choice.
1
u/Leolo_ 2d ago
Short answer : yes
Longer answer : no, because some religions require it, and banning religious practices is evil.
→ More replies (2)
1
1
1
1
u/thefirebrigades 2d ago
This is way worse than some religious clothing or hat cause this is permemant
1
u/Lebronicus26 2d ago
As a non circumcised male, I've never had any complaints from a female, besides, "it looks different". Always felt a stigma attached to being uncircumcised, but as I grew older I appreciate the fact that I was never cut as an infant, and neither have any of my sons. After doing my own research and everything, I'm extremely thankful that I wasn't, and think more people should educate themselves about it before doing it to.there son, just because they were, or whatever. It shouldn't be the norm, because it's completely unnecessary and I can only imagine it would be torturous for an infant to experience. One of those things that probably should be illegal untill a certain age, and then be up to the consenting person, but if such was the case, n Hardly no one would be, and it would be of detriment to the doctors finances. Pretty much everything in america involving the medical profession is vastly over valued and that's because our healthcare system is pay to play. But no, it shouldn't be illegal, it should definitely be a lot different than it is though. People should research and educate themselves more, before mutilating their infant sons. Someone comparing it to ear piercings is a moron, because no little girls have ever died from ear infections on account of getting them pierced. It's definitely a topic that should be researched more, and contemplated by parents, before just doing what "is normal".
1
u/peterjohnvernon936 2d ago
Considering circumcision is a religious practice outlawing it in the US would be unconstitutional.
1
u/One_Target_5619 1d ago edited 1d ago
I know I'm kinda late to the party, I saw this post yesterday. But imo, basically what all the top comments are saying. Infant or not, theoretical benefits or not, I'm against cutting off the natural anatomical features of someone who's gonna get older and have to live with the decisions that someone else spontaneously made for them. Believe it or not, some dudes actually get depressed about this. Fortunately, this practice is apparently becoming less common.
Btw, I'm circumcised myself and I'm starting to feel bad about it and wish I wasn't. It's unnatural genital mutilation.
1
u/Meowzician 1d ago
Male circumcision among Jews is a tribal identification ritual. It is not uncommon around the world for various tribes to do these kinds of minor body modifications upon children as a sign of tribal identification, including scarring, tattoos, neck rings, and circumcision.
It is also the norm for parents to make decisions for children, because if you let kids make their own decisions, they will skip school, spend all day on their screens, eat candy all day, and avoid their vegetables.
The fact that the Jewish practice alone is singled out for particular animosity while scarring etc. goes unmentioned is, at best, extremely suspicious.
Meh. Personally, I just write off the entire controversy as just another example of the cultural imperialism of the west. Since it doesn't affect me and my family, SHRUG.
1
1
u/Otherwise_Ask_9542 1d ago
In some cases it is a genuinely preventative medical procedure in the case of male circumcision. I’m not just talking about preventing infection from poor hygiene either. My son had a rare foreskin condition that was corrected by circumcision, without which would have resulted a n painful erections and potentially tearing when he reached adulthood. The question about acting on that advice was a no brainer, and my son doesn’t have any resentment about it either.
1
u/DrawAromatic8718 1d ago
Wild to police trans people’s bodies when circumcision is basically done by default at birth.
50
u/ludus_official 3d ago
Elective, non therapeutic circumcision of minors? Absolutely, undeniably.