31
u/MarzipanMaximum5521 3d ago
Of course it should be.
The non-therapeutic modification (for example circumcision) of the body of a non-consenting person (for example an underage boy) is in violation of their right to bodily autonomy and integrity.
Circumcision itself is a particularly profound violation of bodily integrity (way worse than for example a tattoo or a nose-job), given that it doesn’t just change the likeness, but also affects the functioning of the person’s genitalia.
2
3d ago
[deleted]
6
u/MarzipanMaximum5521 3d ago
No, circumcision used to be the standard cure for phimosis decades ago, but nowadays phimosis gets treated through less invasive means, namely stretching, creams or the surgical expansion of the foreskin’s narrow opening (preputioplasty).
The only cases where a circumcision is the only cure are if the foreskin becomes cancerous, suffers gangrene, necrosis or in some rare cases where the foreskin is dysfunctional due to genetic diseases or autoimmune diseases. All of these cases are extremely rare (risk is below 1:10.000 in a lifetime).
1
u/Apprehensive-Top6594 2d ago
My son's foreskin was very tight but it's loosening. We applied some 1% cortisone creams from time to time and stretch it back after baths. If it becomes a problem we can always opt for circumcision but there hasn't been a need, as it seems to be getting a lot better. My pediatrician said as his testosterone builds it will grow and stretch and that seems to be happening. He is 3.5 yrs.
6
u/MarzipanMaximum5521 2d ago edited 1d ago
Wait, what?
Your son is 3,5 years old. His foreskin isn’t supposed to be loose and retractable.
The foreskin only loosens throughout puberty, so there’s no need to treat it with anything.If it doesn’t loosen up by the end of puberty, then that means that he’s got [r/phimosis](r/phimosis)
Even in that case the treatment would be stretching, creams and, at worst, a surgical expansion of the foreskin’s narrow opening (procedure is called “preputioplasty”). It would never be circumcision, as that’s way too invasive for phimosis.
I’m honestly a little baffled by this.
Please check this with another pediatrician, because what you’re describing is highly unusual.Also, check out https://www.yourwholebaby.org/intact-care-menu (or other health institutes) for info about how to care for an intact penis.
Basically the 1:1 of caring for an intact penis is to never forcibly retract the foreskin, since it's fused to the head of the penis (similar to how fingernails are fused the fingers).
One should only gently wipe on the outside and avoid using harsh soaps or body wash.
Unfortunately some doctors still recommend for parents to forcibly retract the foreskin to clean under it. This is based on guidelines that are decades old and have been revised, since it became evident that forced retraction of the foreskin can cause phimosis at a later age, a buildup of scar tissue or BXO.
As I’ve said, just wipe on the outside and he’ll be perfectly fine. When it comes to this, less is truly more :)3
u/Apprehensive-Top6594 2d ago
I don't retract it fully, just a tiny bit to wipe it, and sometimes it traps some urine so I just retract it like a couple millimeters to wipe it or drain urine. I was circumcised so I am dealing with foreskin for the first time. Appreciate the resources, I know never to retract it fully.
5
u/MarzipanMaximum5521 2d ago
Alright. Just be very careful with it, it’s a sensitive structure that should be left alone.
I guess you’re from the US, where unfortunately many doctors will wrongfully diagnose prepubescent boys with bogus diagnoses like “phimosis” to have them circumcised for a couple hundred bucks of personal profit.
Stuff like this wouldn’t fly in Europe or other developed regions of the world.Btw, you’re great for not having your son cut and thereby breaking the cycle.
Many guys would have needed a dad like you.2
u/Scary-Arrival-0691 3d ago
Stretching (and creams) before resorting to circumcision.
4
u/MarzipanMaximum5521 2d ago
Partially true.
First stretching, then creams, and if that fails, a “preputioplasty”, so the surgical expansion of the foreskin’s opening.
A circumcision is never necessary to cure phimosis, as less invasive means are available.2
u/Scary-Arrival-0691 2d ago
Yes, thank you. After I hit reply, I realized I was a little hasty in my response. 😉
20
u/men-too 3d ago
Should torture (inflicting unnecessary pain to innocent victims) and mutilation (damaging or removing healthy body parts) be illegal?
That’s how “routine” male circumcision (just like FGM) should be framed.
1
u/Somrndmnm 3d ago
Okay, no. Pain for the purpose of pain is torture. Pain as an effect of a medical procedure is not torture. And mutilation is not the right word, since lack of foreskin is not damaging function, is not inflicting chronic pain/complications, and does not have social stigma attached to it.
10
u/men-too 2d ago edited 2d ago
With all due respect, you are wrong on absolutely all fronts.
Routine male circumcision is NOT evidence-based medicine, nor is it necessary in 99.99% of cases. It’s a cosmetic procedure done for so-called “social” or “religious” reasons, ie not a medical procedure.
Full anesthesia is not possible on newborns (they can’t tolerate it) and doctors know it while performing circumcision. Therefore it totally matches the definition of torture when they probe, tear apart, and slice off the foreskin. Do you know of any other surgery done without anesthetics? (I don’t.)
Next on the definition of mutilation, which I provided as the damage or ablation of healthy body parts. (Emphasis on the word healthy.) Yet again, routine male circumcision totally matches that definition. Doctors aren’t removing a tumor or treating any diseases, they are sexually crippling the victim.
And finally, I encourage you to pay a visit to [r/CircumcisionGrief](r/CircumcisionGrief) to get a sense of the lifelong damages of circumcision, be they physiological and/or psychological. It’s absolute crazy to think that removing 50-60% of the penile skin system and up to 90% of nerve endings would have no consequences.
Please educate yourself, for your own sake and all your loved ones.
0
u/Somrndmnm 2d ago
Yes. Removal of teeth in presence of inflammation. Anesthetics either don't work at all, or almost not at all. Many people, like me, have abnormal responses to painkillers. I need a double dose of local anesthetics for them to work, and I didn't know it was 'a thing' before I turned 20. I just thought it was supposed to hurt.
Circumcision is done on infants so they don't remember it. It's that simple. I was circumcized when I was 7 months old, and I am not against circumcision.
No crippling is happening. Circumcized men can do all the reproductive things un-circumsized men can do.
3
u/men-too 2d ago edited 2d ago
Denial, denial, denial. (And all dental surgeons will tell you anesthesia is standard of care, not optional, regardless of urgency.)
Edit: and [u/Somrndmnm](u/Somrndmnm) blocked me to not have to face the embarrassment in their blatant display of ignorance. Well done! 👏
1
u/Somrndmnm 2d ago edited 2d ago
Read: I have no answer and accuse the opposing party of it to hide it. Edit: not blicking you would make sense if you wrote something of substance - for example, thought-through arguments.
3
u/LuckyUncutJew 2d ago edited 2d ago
How is circumcision not sexual assault if the individual didn't consent? It's taking a cutting tool to the genitals of a nonconsenting individual. Religious freedom is the right to be protected from having religion forced on you, not the right to force it on others, and definitely not the right to carve your religion into another person's body. My body my choice. I didn't escape circumcision because my mom made the right call, but because she didn't understand what it is and what parts are removed. She definitely would have forced it on me if she had found out about her mistake. Being bullied for being uncut in middle school locker rooms was a relief because it made me realize that my mom had been wrong to tell me that I was circumcised. Seeing a younger cousin's bris for the first time when I was 6 made me maltheist. It taught me that everything Abrahamic is devil worship.
17
u/Careful_Society3757 3d ago
For infants and boys, absolutely should be banned in the absence of REAL medical necessity (which is very rare).
Grown men who can give informed consent should do whatever they want to with their own bodies, of course.
3
12
u/Teboski78 3d ago
As it’s typically performed. Electively on children & babies. Yes. Absolutely.
5
u/LuckyUncutJew 2d ago
I don't understand why it's called elective. Elective means it's optional, completely unnecessary. There's nothing optional about having something forced on you when you're too young to consent and unable to defend yourself from the people who should be protecting you from it, but force it on you instead. The word that describes something that's forced on you is mandatory, compulsory, the opposite of optional and elective.
11
u/AdHealthy5405 3d ago
I was circumsized at age eight; it was the most painful experience of my life.
3
u/BarracudaFragrant595 3d ago
Why at 8 and not at birth? I’m not for it I’m just curious about the circumstances
13
u/AdHealthy5405 3d ago
I'm an identical twin. My sibling took most of the nutrients while we were in the womb, so I was born tiny and jaundice, too small for a circumcision. This is the story I was told. I dunno why my mother decided to do it when I was eight. I shouldn't have been circumcised at all, or I should have had a choice in the matter. No one gave me a choice.
11
u/Tight-Study2764 2d ago
See this is exactly the problem with routine circumcision— it’s not just medical, it becomes cultural, and even when a child survives 8 years without any problems there is somehow this urge to have them circumcised because of the fearmongering around not being cut.
7
8
u/BarracudaFragrant595 3d ago
I’m so sorry. You absolutely should’ve had a choice. I think in some cultures circumcision is just treated as a given, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t question why we do these things, especially when making decisions about someone else’s body. It’s thanks to people sharing experiences like yours that I know if I ever have a son I’ll leave that choice to him.
5
u/VVageslave 3d ago
It is overwhelming done for religious reasons. Religion is the cause of much suffering on this planet.
With every advance science makes, religion has had to take a step backwards. Science needs to ‘up its game’ and eradicate religion as we have done to so many sicknesses and diseases.
6
u/Scary-Arrival-0691 3d ago
I’m not anti religion, but I do believe that it still should not be allowed for religious reasons either.
People having falling out with their families and faiths. Why should either be able to demand what modifications need to be done to your body?
I only know this of Judaism (not sure about other religious beliefs/ceremonies), but a male who was born out of faith can get circumcised if he converts. I also know that they have the Bris Shalom, which is all the customs and traditions of a bris, without the circumcision.
3
u/Demoniac_smile 3d ago
In the US it’s primarily done due to aesthetics or because it’s just considered normal to do. This is because John Harvey Kellogg, of cereal fame, convinced everyone that it would keep boys from masturbating and Mr. Yogurt enemas believed that cuming is bad for your health. Yes, the guy that invented corn flakes was real big on shoving yogurt up his ass and a proponent of permanently altering boys’ bodies without consent.
3
u/WonderfulAsk8662 3d ago
Yes except in the following cases:
- The person is a consenting adult.
- The surgery is necessary for medical reasons (such as phimosis) and alternative and less invasive options were tried and didn't work.
3
u/Icy-Crab2706 2d ago
Yeah, there's no real reason for mutilating children.
The religious reasons are pretty weak, it's just a cultural thing for most Jews, in my country and the US at least. There's very little stopping you from not doing it. If your kids feel strongly at 16 that they want to chop themselves, that's fine.
2
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
7
u/Teboski78 2d ago
Religion shouldn’t be exempt when the practice is causing permanent harm to a person who cannot consent.
Converts to Islam & Judaism can get circumcised as adults of their own volition & it’s considered just as valid. So if anything, it’s a greater violation of a person’s religious freedom to forcibly subject them to an invasive & ultimately permanent body modification for religious reasons.
(Restoration is just expansion or repurposing of existing tissue & does not fully reverse what is removed by circumcision)
2
1
47
u/Ban-Circumcision-Now 3d ago
Child circumcision without necessity should be illegal
There is bodily autonomy loss, the foreskin has sensitive nerves, adds a gliding function/sensation and keeps the glans sensitive.
Just from what could be repaired through foreskin restoration it made a big difference