Is Male Circumcision Just as Bad as Female Genital Mutilation?

Bolding mine.

Please do not put words in my mouth. I claim no knowledge on this subject whatsoever (regarding males or females), and my questions are not a reflection of my doubts, concerns, skepticism, or personal position, they are merely intended to generate discussion. As some have claimed that most adult males think their circumcision is no big deal, I thought that a relevant aspect to discuss. I have no idea what the actual studies on this subject reveal. Bringing those studies to light is part of the purpose of this thread.

Honestly, that kind of seems self-evident to me, unless there is very compelling evidence that it provides significant benefit. But since so many people who are vehemently opposed to circumcision equate the practice with FGM, I posed the question this way.

There are plenty of questionable practices that people just do without thinking about them. To use one less extreme example, declawing cats is pretty common in the US. I’m aware it is illegal in other countries (also curious: is male circumcision outlawed in most Western countries? Or just less common?) I was probably in my mid-twenties before I ever saw anyone say anything about declawing cats being immoral or harmful to a cat. I had no knowledge about the physical factors involved, it was just what you did – spay/neuter, vaccinate, declaw. Once I became educated, I decided not to declaw my cats. This is why these sort of threads are useful – people can educate themselves and perhaps come to similar informed decisions.

This is an interesting argument, but I’m not sure I’m convinced, because I see these issues as culturally and socially very dramatically different, therefore any solutions would have to be different. To use my example from the Pit thread, it would be like trying to ameliorate the prevalence and impact of male sexual assault and female sexual assault ‘‘in one go’’ when they really have very different root causes, impacts, and outcomes. Or to draw another example, it would be like trying to ameliorate male rape in the US at the same time as ameliorating male rape in countries with governments that use rape as a form of social control.

However horrible male circumcision may be, its purpose is not to control male sexuality. Its purpose is not to deny men the ability to feel sexual pleasure. I’m not really sure I understand, at this point, that it has any purpose at all. But at any rate, the approach to educating others must be different. You’re already at a -1 when you come barrelling into a thread about women’s issues because it’s a favorite tactic of misogynists to divert attention to themselves whenever we talk about the systemic oppression of women. I don’t believe that was your motive, it’s just a really common theme here.

But right now, we are talking about a men’s issue. So let’s do that.

[QUOTE=Schoggi]
Why does it matter what women want?
[/QUOTE]

Yeah, women’s pleasure has jack-all to do with whether we should cut an infant’s penis. Agreed on that.

x-ray vision thanks for the clarification.

Its purpose, from ancient times up until now, has been to physically mark some men as belonging to a tribe. Even among gentiles, it’s a big part of the motivation. “But how will daddy explain why his looks different?” or “What if he gets embarrassed in the locker room when his looks different from everyone else’s?” Even if it isn’t the tribe, it’s all about fitting in. And in my opinion, that just isn’t good enough.

@SpiceWeasel
At least one poster not going on about what an immoral “misogynistic” MRA euromoron I am. Well, progress.

The only issue I have with your comment is the whole sexual pleasure reduction deal. If you read up on it, you’ll find that’s exactly why it was introduced in the united states. People make up these hygiene arguments and think what society does was logically decided on at some point, the truth is american circumcision was imported with the goal of reducing male masturbation.
You know, I’ve experienced what I see here quite a few times. People might be put off of reddit and such for whatever MRA activity they, erroneously think, is going on that is full of misygony and societal hatred and all. Then you read through what most people say, or you see how on american forums people expect arguments against genital cutting, and it’s shocking and leaves you speechless.

Circumcision is a bad practice, but it is probably less bad than most FGM, and certainly less bad than the most extreme FGM.

I’m unimpressed by the supposed health benefits, since essentially zero uncircumcised men get circumcised for that reason as adults. A few do for some acute medical reason (which is fine, you can do that when it comes up) and most do because they join a religion or culture that requires it (which is fine, since they’re adults).

Basically, you’re doing a medically unnecessary and irreversible surgery on an infant for dubious reasons. Yeah, the outcome isn’t that bad, but it’s not much to hang an argument on.

Cite?

I’m firmly in the camp of “Unnecessary slicing is barbaric.” I really think even religious justification should be overruled on this one. If a religious person wants to have this cutting done, to a point they can be allowed to do so as an elective surgery when they turn 18. But cutting babies and children is barbaric. Cutting in unsanitary conditions is barbaric. Saying "But the special holy man licked the knife"is barbaric.

We. Know. Better. Now.

There is no need to continue practices that began before the availability of indoor plumbing.

I can sum up why I’m glad I was circumcised with one word: smegma. Eww, no.

Or worse.

Something that would be barely noticeable if you wash regularly. Same as women that wash their labia regularly.

I think it’s more that the word itself just sounds gross. “Smegma”, it sounds like something you hack up from your lungs when sick.

What? What the hell are you talking about?

Again, what? I am cut, and I have never used lube for masturbation.

As for lost sensitivity, that is really hard to gauge. I mean, most men who have been circumcised, had it done at a very early age and have no way to compare. I do not feel cheated, as it were, that it was done to me.

What a kindergarten-level chain of discussion. You don’t like “how a word sounds” of something that doesn’t happen if you, you know, wash yourself like any civilized person does? I don’t like sweat, should I mummify my future child?

@Ambivalid

So much this!

Kind of kills the moment when you get home after a lovely evening with your sweetheart. Things start to get intimate, then the guy has to stop and say: “Hold on honey while I go wash off my dick.”

Screw that noise!

You don’t feel cheated because as you say, you have nothing to compare it to. Other people also have nothing to compare it to and do feel cheated of knowing what sexual pleasure would feel like had someone else not make the decision for them around birth to cut off their foreskin.

If he keeps it clean regularly, it isn’t necessarily the case that he would have to clean it upon coming home from work. Again, it’s the same with the case of a woman not necessarily having to wash her labia before having sex upon coming home from work. It’s also possible to “freshen up” without making announcements that almost sound designed to turn of your partner.

Psychological bias and sunk investment/Stockholm syndrome at work. Men that justify infant genital cutting because they don’t want to wash before having sex after coming home from work.

I think that’s the lowest I’ve read in a long time.

^ You must be new here.

I don’t know why, but I read the post I was replying to as a man coming home from work. It was regarding coming home after a lovely evening with your sweetheart.

Most evenings such as that are preceded by a shower. If a man has dick cheese that shortly after showering, he should get checked out.

Lighten up Francis.

Even though many forms of FGM can be worse than male circumcision, the former does not justify the latter, nor the latter the former and if one is OK then both are OK, if one is not OK then neither are OK.

Such a thing should be a free will adult decision, not done on a child by the desire of their guardians.

No, it doesn’t work that way. It is possible that one is more beneficial than harmful (it’s OK) and that the other is more harmful than beneficial (not OK). Some forms of FGM are without a doubt less OK than male circumcision.