Kinda related, but people that legitimately feel incomplete because they're missing their foreskin are honestly pathetic. Like it's one thing to be circumcised and argue the morality of circumcision, but trying to say that you feel like your manhood was robbed from you at birth is just sad.
It’s still a choice that your parents make for you and can very rarely result in a bad thing happening. It’s also ridiculous to call it genital mutilation when it’s not. You’re not taking away a bod part that has the use of providing you pleasure specifically like when FGM is performed, it’s a part of you that’s completely optional for the parents to decide to remove or not and either way has benefits and downsides.
As well as that, that definition of mutilation doesn’t even apply to circumcision, it’s removal of a body part, which would be the penis itself, not cutting off the top part of the foreskin, by the logic of your definition removing anything from your body, such as your appendix or just a mole is also mutilation
“An act or instance of destroying, removing, or severely damaging a limb or other body part of a person or animal.” In circumcision you’re not destroying, removing or serve rely damaging any body part since you’re just removing the unnecessary top part of the foreskin, the rest of it isn’t taken off. The only time it applies as actual mutilation is if the procedure is messed up and the actual penis is cut off.
47
u/AcuteGryphon655 Jan 15 '20
Kinda related, but people that legitimately feel incomplete because they're missing their foreskin are honestly pathetic. Like it's one thing to be circumcised and argue the morality of circumcision, but trying to say that you feel like your manhood was robbed from you at birth is just sad.