The difference is that men who are circumcised, as far as I know, still enjoy sex. Am I right in believing that when we’re talking about “female circumcision,” we’re talking about a practice that leaves a woman fairly incapable of having a pleasureable experience? If not then maybe we need to clarify what that is exactly.
Circumcision does not leave a person any less capable in any way. This is why it does not compare.
My question back to you (or anyone else) would be, if circumcision is truly mutilation and a Bad Thing, why doesn’t Amnesty International or somebody make a statement against the Jewish populations of the world for mutilating their children? I don’t seem to understand the “if it’s for your religion it’s ok, but if it’s not, then it’s mutilation,” idea. If this common practice is so attrocious, why haven’t people stood up against this form of child abuse? (Somewhat tongue in cheek there, but you get my point).
Are we all getting our Great Debates outfits on, over here?
No way is my newborn son going under any kind of knife, ever, if I can help it. What a thing to have to go through.
If it’s looks you’re concerned about… Judging by the posts in this thread, my son would end up looking like lots, if not most of the other kids in the showers at gym, too. I’m thrilled to see how many people are finally seeing circumcision for what it is – simply unnecessary.
You can argue that the chances of something going wrong with your son’s circumcision are much smaller than his chances of getting infections, or needing the rare split down his foreskin, when he gets older. You’re thinking about cutting off what might never end up being a problem. Why take any sort of risk with what will, one day, become your son’s favourite body part? You certainly don’t want him to have to deal with having a disfigured penis, just because you wanted him to look like his dad.
Oh… and, sex-wise? I’ve just come across my second uncut fella ever… And, I gotta tell you. It’s a treat. The (ahem) hand jobs are a breeze, and… well let’s just say everything goes a little more smoothly. Oh dear.
Privard: There is a difference between choosing something for yourself and choosing something for your infant child. Really, besides immediate medical issues, there’s no possible reason to circumcise before the child can make the decision himself. When the kid turns 18, they can get cut if they want. Or not. At birth, if the kid’s foreskin is fine, just don’t do anything to it. If it’s too tight, try the non-surgical treatment methods first, and if they fail, go ahead and circumcise the kid.
Luckily, for all concerned, I have never reproduced, so have never had to make this decision for another.
Observations:
Women accustomed to circumcised lovers, have commented on the more pleasant sensation of a natural penis.
I have known one child who was circumcised at age 3 or 4 due to infection - I blame the parents for not showing the kid how to wash.
I knew one H.S. student who underwent circumcision as a (quasi) adult - I was never clear on the reason for this, and, as he was killed in 'Nam within the year, it turned out not to be of great import.
Conclusion:
This is sexual mutilation - period.
Whether or not this should raise the same level of disgust of “female circumcision” is left to the reader.
Unless/until some MEDICAL condition necessitates the surgery, it would never be allowed by myself.
A substantial majority or white, non-hispanic, non-rural males in the U.S. are circumcised. The percentage goes up in correlation to income and education of the parents (I don’t have an Internet cite, but I got the info from my Dad, a doctor, who was quoting something he read in a medical journal). However, the trend in this group is moving toward not circumcising. Anecdotal: The OB-GYN told us that the rate was about 90-95% at the N. Virginia suburban hospital where she practiced among non-hispanic whites. However, I think that the medical establishment (my dad included) has a tendency to foist circumcision on parents, along with many other rather unnatural things we do in the childbirth process, like epidurals and voluntary caesarians.
I don’t post this to be pro-circumcision, but only to illustrate that many people tend to dislike the IDEA of circumcision, but when it comes down to decision time, they tend to “do what everybody else does”. However, the trend is reversing and parents are making more informed decisions in these matters, which is a good thing.
I am not sure as to why Amnesty International hasn’t condmened the practice, but I would imagine that circumcision is more accepted by AI and not particularly protested against in our society because we are so used to it. It’s easy to be against female circumcision (not to downgrade how horrific this is - we should be against it) in part because it is something our society has never engaged in.
Also, I would imagine that it would be hard to form a serious opposition to the procedure without at some point being accused of being anti-Jewish (which I most certainly am not).
I don’t think that circumcision for religious reasons is ok - although I would hope that a non-Jewish person would never do it; they don’t even have a religious reason. I would hope that eventually the practice would no longer be a part of Judaism, but I don’t see this happening any time soon.
Could you imagine the difficulties Amnesty would face if they did declare the practice a human right abuse? In effect they would be declaring a whole religion as being abusive of human rights. I can’t imagine that would go down well.
Yeah, I suppose that’s true re: accusing a religion of abusing human rights. But…
Aren’t there (and this is purely based on memories of National Geographic articles and TV programs) cultures in parts of Africa where all sorts of piercings and scarrings are performed as rights of passage? Everybody seems to be ok with them. The only reason people made a big deal about female circumcision is because it basically was a tool of male dominance over women. It seems to me that male circumcision is just another cultural practice that doesn’t do any lasting harm, so is not in fact abuse.
Eonwe: Slight difference. Rites of passage are generally performed at an age where the kid in question is old enough to say “NO DAMNIT I DON’T CARE IF I WON’T BE A MAN DON’T CUT THAT!” Also, beating your kid up but not breaking any bones won’t do any lasting harm, but it’s still abuse, isn’t it? Really, just don’t lop it off. Leave it and let the kid decide if he’d rather fit in than have a foreskin when he’s old enough.
It’s interesting to see such strong opinions here. My opinion, it’s a minor issue and hardly worthy of argument one way or the other.
I’m circumcized, as are my sons, mostly because their mother wanted them to be, for some of the reasons cited above.
I watched the ‘procedure’ being performed by the O.B. on my youngest, when he was about 2 days old. He screamed and cried when the nurse held his ankles to keep his legs still, then, after a moment, he stopped. The doctor applied the little cigar-cutter-shaped device, did a quick snip, and that was it. My son did not cry or appear to notice when his foreskin was removed. There was virtually no active bleeding, just a little redness around the penis.
I know there are some, extremely rare, exceptions and complications to this, but the vast majority are very simple, less invasive or painful than an I.V.
While he was prepping, I spoke with the Dr., who described how he had been commissioned by the U.S. Army to snip soldiers during the War (Korean, maybe?), the rationale being that they would be less likely to get STD’s if they were circ’d. He also said, though he had never done it, that if the tip of the penis is cut off as well, the resultant cry is especially dramatic. Duh.
I have no idea if there is any known genetic link concerning foreskin problems. Even if there isn’t any statistical evidence, I know that if I were in your position with two brothers having the same problem, I would not have thought twice about having it done.
Being one who was mutilated at birth, I can unequivically say that I would never subject someone to this procedure - ESPECIALLY as a baby when they have absolutely no say in the matter.
Mine was not botched, it was well done and I’ve had no health problems because of it (other than an uncomfortable dryness on occasion.) However, as the years have gone by, and I’ve come to know men who are uncut, I have come to understand that what was done to me was not natural, was unecessary and I resent it terribly.
I like the uncut look and guys that are uncut seem, to me anyway, healthier overall and are definately more interesting in bed.
Oh dear.