Interestingly, it seems we CAN argue circumstances, just as long as we don’t question the OP question itself… Answer: IMO, No. An inconvenience, rather. But this answer is worthless as a datapoint of support for any side of the debate about the procedure itself.
Not a chance. The small, barely noticeable hole in my ear isn’t a problem. I’d miss my foreskin terribly.
Hence my qualifier, “significant risk”. Look, no surgical procedure, however minor, is completely without risk; I’m quite sure people have died from ear piercings that went septic, even. But what percentage of circumcisions go horribly wrong? Small enough, I think, that the risk is not significant. (To me, anyway.)
I mean, don’t get me wrong; I’m not circumcised and have no desire to be, I think it’s a pointless procedure on any practical grounds. But I don’t see any particular point in scaremongering over it, either. Does circumcision kill or injure as many people per year as, say, skiing (another procedure I consider pretty much pointless)?
I do not think it is ‘scaremongering’ to tell people to actually consider the risks of circumcision ( which the parents do not do).