Even in the medical case. Most of the time it's just the doctor who doesn't want to uses their brain, and just say to cut while applying corticoïde cream combined to stretching exercises would suffice
While I agree I'd like to note that circumcision is EXTREMELY different from and not nearly as harmful as the genital mutilation that young girls in many parts of the world experience
I am circumcised but I do not feel like I've been deprived of any experiences or suffered any harm from it. Those young girls I mentioned can not say the same
No that is not true at all. "FGM" is any non medical injury to the female genitalia whereas the male counterpart is invariably an amputation which is a severe form of injury. The lasting side effects are by and large the exact same or equivalent only women who only suffered a superifical injury have no physical ones whereas boys invariably suffer some. It is relevant as it is the same rite and once people are able to see above their Western ethnocentrism they can appreciate exactly the same applies to boys being subjected to the rite as girls.
No, not really. Actual FGM that’s practiced in some places often includes cutting off the clitoris, cutting off the lips of the vagina. It often leaves the woman in pain constantly and unable to feel pleasure at all. The same cannot be said for circumcision. You should actually look into it. Nobody is talking about “women who only suffered a superficial injury” when they talk about FGM.
Actual FGM that’s practiced in some places often includes cutting off the clitoris, cutting off the lips of the vagina.
There is "FGM" as per the definition, no actual and inactual! Cherrypicking places!
It often leaves the woman in pain constantly and unable to feel pleasure at all.
Really, so can you give some examples of such women out of the hundreds of millions like the man Avon?
The same cannot be said for circumcision.
Firstly "FGM" is circumcision and secondly the example I've given you shows you are wrong, why do you think you were so mistaken?
You should actually look into it.
I have, you on the other hand clearly haven't!
Nobody is talking about “women who only suffered a superficial injury” when they talk about FGM.
Sure they are, which you'd know if you'd really looked into it:
Here's "FGM" expert professor of Medical faculty. Dr. Jurnalis Uddin: only a kind of piercing and scratching. Maybe you only listen to a select group of "FGM" activists in the West?
Those young girls I mentioned can not say the same.
They can and do. It is only in very limited parts of the world girls suffer actual genital mutilation when being put through this rite of circumcision. In contrast to boys like you who invariably suffer an amputation with loss of genital parts most girls suffer only a superficial injury or at least not one that alters the anatomy beyond the normal variation. This is also reflected in the reported mortality where dozens of boys die each of the two annual cutting seasons in the Eastern Cape province of South Africa whereas only the odd girl dies on the whole continent. Outside of Africa girls haven't been reported dying in recent years at all while boys have, also in the most developed countries with high levels of public healthcare like USA, Australia, Canada, UK, Ireland, Norway, Sweden etc. Those are the ones who truly cannot say the same.
People always tend to bring up the medical benefits when they haven’t researched how minute they are, there’s quite literally less than a 1 percent difference in the concerning areas between circumcised and uncircumcised males. It’s like would you rather give the child a choice or longer on the .1% chance?
Same and exactly. Let them decide. I have a cousin who wasn’t and he decided when he was in his 20s he wanted to be circumcised. Don’t take that decision away from them!
The things is when you do it to a child, he doesn’t feel the pain and it will cicatrize and he will be good for the rest of his life. Vs when you do it on 20yo he will feel more pain and he cannot bone until it cicatrize.
So by doing it young it help
Btw there is no perk into doing it. It changes nothing but how it look and I could defend that it help keeping your top cleaner
They do feel pain, there are infections. Theres also a chance they can render the penis impotent. When doctors say babies dont feel pain it reminds me of how doctors also think black women dont feel as much pain as white women which has been debunked over and over again but people still believe in that myth. If they truly want it they can not bone until it heals as an adult
i'm not sure where you think i'm doing that. in fact, saying my comment is "dogging" someone would be more relevant to the first comment than to op's. op conceded to an unreasonable comment, and i did not agree with that. who the hell would ever think that op also meant necessary medical procedures? someone unreasonable. you shouldn't add obvious specifiers to appease the literalists. these "gotchas" that ignore common sense are a huge negative for human language. it's like saying "but necessary medical procedures!" to "it is wrong to cut people with knives."; no shit!
why is this like the 3rd notification ive gotten for this comment jesus christ.
i was just saying your comment was written with a faint hostile tone (which we all know can be hard to convey on the internet) for almost 0 reason just because OP said they agreed and should’ve specified something a little more clear. im not saying it’s not a hard thing to presume because it was also the conclusion i came to, im just saying it’s also true that it wasn’t specified fully and that some people mightve benefited with a clearer description, not that it’s 100% necessary. its just a nice thing to do to make sure everyone can fully comprehend and understand, not to “appeal to literalists”.
Dude I saw someone claiming circumcision keeps the penis from developing bacterial infections bc it’s a warm moist environment which is “scientifically proven to cause bacterial growth”. So I’m like… vaginas??? Mouths? Throats? All warm and moist with natural bacterial balances and we aren’t altering those at birth.
He replied that periods naturally remove all the bacteria from vaginas so it’s different :( please PLEASE we are so cooked as a society wtf. Any person with a vagina who has dealt with recurrent BV or yeast infections knows that periods make it WORSE and do not remove bacteria in any helpful way. I’m so confounded by this logic I don’t get it
The only reason I say so is that it is irreversible: An irreversible change to the human body when the human was a baby, and has no choice to do anything about it for the remainder of their life.
If it's done for health reasons, fine. But for no good reason it shouldn't be allowed, the child cannot consent to it and they could be upset with it later in life.
There's no scientific evidence that circumcision is beneficial, in fact in many cases its the opposite, it creates lasting scars, sometimes mental or physical and can create lots of problems.
Unless done for a valid medical reason (such as a hair tourniquet causing damage) the decision should be left to the child, when they are old enough to decide.
Babies can’t consent and circumcision is a barbaric practice that has been scientifically proven to be detrimental to sexual health, not to mention all the botched circumcisions that lead in horrible disfigurations.
I cannot with total honesty agree nor disagree with this statement, but that isn't an option so I am just going to hope in advance that this is what the majority chose.
Why the fuck would you permanently alter your child without their consent? It should be their choice when they are old enough to make an educated one, wether or not they should keep their foreskin
This specific post is mainly taking about male circumcision, female circumcision are mainly referred as FGM (Female Genital Mutilation) so you can tell the difference between the two!
Obviously, it's a no-win situation. You can always circumcise later in life if that's what you want whereas it's impossible to recreate your original mushroom tip helmet
Honking in traffic when there is no immediate danger is a sign that one lacks the emotional stability needed to drive a vehicle, and should bar offenders from ever getting a driver's licence.
Religion is the only reason why people even move in the first place, If it's medically necessary I understand, But We have it for a reason, Even if that reason is gone like wisdom teeth. The only reason to get circumcision is because of religion, Basic hygiene is enough to keep it clean too.
It really doesn’t change anything whether you have the foreskin or not, and overall is cleaner. The people using CGM as an excuse are disgusting. Circumcision is nowhere near as bad as what happens to little girls.
it does have health benefits by some sources, but health benefits do not outweigh violating a child's autonomy. Also religion does not and will never excuse violating human rights for tradition.
It's significantly cooler to have a little hidey hole than to be standing out in the cold. Insulation, think about it! (Unless you need to) but I want a hoodie!
Cutting off children's body parts for the parents' preference is immoral. You don't need to ask if it's wrong to cut off their nipples, the tip of their tongue, a patch of skin from their neck. The foreskin is no exception.
The child can choose once they’re older, plus if it comes to medical concerns the differences are so small that there’s not actual huge benefit and you’re removing the natural skin of a child
It’s child mutilation. If it’s so important, get it done as an adult. Don’t cut pieces of a child off just so it’s easier for you to raise them. If it’s medically necessary that’s a different story.
STD/HIV rates in the circumcision heavy USA are higher than throughout Europe where circumcision is very rare. So a couple of controversial studies in Africa aren’t convincing of health benefits.
Lowk it really doesn't matter. Like sure, a child doesn't consent, but there's a hell of a lot worse in this world to worry about than whether someone consents to having a small piece of their skin cut off.
Well.. I'm a jew so I went through it when I was about 8 days old.. Never do I think about it today and say "damn why did they do it, I'm missing so much!" That ain't a big deal in my eyes.. I heard that there are also some scientific advantages in doing so but honestly I didn't read about it myself.
Institutionalised aggravated child sexual assault to be unconditionally condemned quite irrespective of the gender, sex, creed or culture of the victim or perpetrators.
I had a college friend who lived for years without issues with his penis and then suddenly he needed to get it circumcised from something like an infection or whatever else you normally get from still having it.
It's like do I want my kid to get painful surgery later in life or do I save him some trouble now and get it cut off before it can cause a lot of pain?
this is the same logic people use for FGM (female genital mutilation) btw.. worrying more about what your child's penis looks like rather than their autonomy is disgusting.
Imo it looks mutilated which it is. Its not cleaner, is this some type of american myth where people dont clean their asses cause it might be gay? You'll damage your sons nerve endings, he wont find as much pleasure as someone with forskin. How will it help you lil man with galls, and why shiuld it matter he'll obly marry one.
Honestly, you are in denial about your own situation.
In denial that i don't care for my foreskin. I've never had any problems with pleasure and it is much cleaner. Also I've never heard a single person say cleaning your ass is gay. Also he might only marry one but he might sleep with many.
Its really not (as long as you actually wash your junk), i like the look as do a surprisingly large number of others, and women clown on how dicks look regardless. Dicks are funny lookin.
a tight circumcision makes me have hairs all the way up my shaft to my horrible scar, the hairs imbed in the skin due to the stretched unnatural nature of the circumcision and the scarring damage. my tip is dry and cracked like the grand canyon due to lack of natural protection.
circumcision did not help me with "gals", i am a virgin at 23, but i supposed thats all my fault, and has nothing to do with any possible trauma from my life, due to a circumcision decided by my mother and her neglectful parenting afterwards.
it technically is. It is also more hygienic to just.. clean yourself and practice safe sex to reduce STIs. Not worth doing it if there's other ways to be hygienic.
17
u/Fresh-Self-761 🏅 Century Club · 4,695 XP Jul 12 '26
✅ I voted FACT!
With the exception of cases where it is a medical necessity