:dubious:
It’s still absurd to cut off part of someone’s body and then dismiss it as a silly hangup when they’re not happy about that being done without their consent.
Being angry at someone for cutting off part of your body is hardly a ‘hangup.’
At this point, my understanding is that some of you are completely unwilling and/or unable to grasp the “effects in life” angle. After all, this is only the third or fourth time I’ve needed to explain it. So, yeah, you’re right – destroying breast development is exactly the same thing as male circumcision.
The last time I looked up cites and research on it was a few years ago. As compelling as it seems to spend my evening looking up research for someone who can’t understand the practical difference between removing the breasts/vulva and removing the foreskin, I think I’m going to save myself the effort on this one and just let you call yourself the winner. Congratulations. :rolleyes:
What I find a little annoying and tiring is how we “anti-circ” folks (isn’t that cute? anti-circ. Sounds so harmless) always feel a certain way. You don’t understand why we feel that way.
How many penile cancer deaths are there in the UK in a year?
How many breast cancer deaths are there?
You’re right, it’s not the same. Breast bud removal would save a hell of a lot more lives. But no reasonable human being would consider routine surgery on infants to remove the breast buds as a preventative measure.
It’s unreasonable to cut off healthy tissue now because it might have a chance of being cancerous tissue later, right?
I think there are a few incontrovertible facts that need to be stated:
-
There is no net medical benefit from circumcision.
-
The foreskin of the penis is a significant anatomical feature in its role of covering the glans, the most sensitive part of the penis. (By way of contrast, there are insignificant anatomical features such as earlobes and appendices). Thus removal of the foreskin is likely to affect the function of the penis, however subtly.
-
Modern western society rejects certain practices as wrong and unacceptable even if they have substantial historical or cultural significance. We may tolerate otherwise unacceptable cultural practices taking place outside our sphere of control; however, a condition for participation in modern society is the agreement to respect the values of the prevailing culture.
-
Modern western society has agreed on the principle that all humans, including children, have an absolute right to control over their bodies unless some overwhelming interest overrides this right. Examples of an overwhelming interest would be preservation of the child’s health (getting the kid stitches) or protection of public safety (vaccinations).
In this context, I say again, I find it completely baffling that the vast majority of Americans consider circumcision just fine and dandy, even if they don’t practice it themselves.
Not particularly.
If I could guarentee that your infant would never develop cancer of any sort by lopping off a digit of their second toe, would you allow me to do it? I would. In fact, I’d consider it damn near criminal not to.
If someone told that they could prevent a particular form of cancer, lower the chance of contracting and transmitting a couple diseases, decrease the risk of giving his partner cancer, decrease the risk of urinary tract infections, inflammations, etc. at the cost of a part of his penis which would not (again in my experience) have an detrimental affect on his life, would I do it? I personally would but I’d understand why someone else might not.
If someone told me that they could prevent breast cancer in my daughter by completely destroying her breasts so they would never develop and never become functional, would I do it? Or if someone said they could prevent cancer by removing her vulva? No. Because the actual cost of said operation (destruction of the breasts/vulva) wouldn’t seem worth the potential benefit to me.
If someone told me they could completely remove the chance of my son contracting head lice by sawing off his skull, would I do it? Don’t be silly.
Get it yet? It’s a spectrum. And I don’t place circumcision at the same place as “chop off her breasts”. And, so far, you’ve failed to convince me that I’m wrong in that.
Thank you.
Define this. Are you arguing that there is not a reduction in incidence, that the reductions are completely offset by medical complications or that you don’t feel that the reductions justify the procedure?
I am so glad I was circumsized, I have this aversion to being looked at by women like I am an uncivilized ape-man.
Your arrogant and insulting dismissal of the religious and cultural significance of this as a Jewish ritual is so over the top as to be humorous (in an Archie Bunker kind of way) … but no, you have the wrong religion. Jews are not so concerned with God’s punishment or shunning and there is no God being offended by the foreskin involved.
I am still curious about what you all think of my previously posted
This is a real group that has been extensively studied. Are they wrong to engage in those practices?
Personally I think intactavist is cuter 
. The reason infant circumcision triggers a visceral reaction in me because I feel so violated by it. I understand that most men circumcised as infants are fine with it. If I ever have a son I will not have him circumcised. I would have a child with someone who feels otherwise (since I’m gay accidental pregnancies aren’t an issue). If he developed a medical condition such as phimosis I’d select whichever treatment option did the least amount of cosmetic damage (yet was effective) and kept his options open in the future. If he decided he wanted a circumcision later (say teenage years) I’d tell him to wait until he’s 18. I’d give the same answer if he wanted a tattoo or if my hypothetical daughter wanted breast implants. I’d rather my son be angry at me for making him his own decision than for making it for him.
Typo, that should read “I would have NOT a child with someone who feels otherwise…”. :o
So if God isn’t calling the shots here then it’s cultural, right? Well we can and do put medical limits on what parents and cultures can do to their infants, in the grand ol’ US of A and Europe, and we’re also trying to stamp out certain cultural practices in places like Africa and the Middle East.
That the foremost medical experts, in comparing the medical risks and benefits, have concluded that there is no basis to recommend for or against circumcision.
Doesn’t the Israeli Medical Association have the same view?
Well, for or against. So they agree that it’s a 50/50 choice on the parents’ part. I’m fine with that since it’s how I started my posting in this thread to begin with.
So now all we need is for the same experts to say the same thing about female circumcision and we’ll be getting somewhere 
No, they only render a verdict on the medical question. A lack of medical recommendation doesn’t mean that nothing else bears on the issue – like the kid’s rights, for example. On that the medical establishment takes no position. So if you meet a doctor who makes a recommendation (for or against) they are basing it on their own values + a scientifically meaningless sampling of their professional experiences.
However, the physician shouldn’t be making the moral decision on the behalf of the parents. So, from that aspect, it’s 50/50.
And, once again, completely uncomparable to female circumcision unless you can show that physicians make the same statements about such. Attempts to compare the two are blunted by the fact that the medical “benefits” from female circumcision are a straight negative.
Which was my point for most of this thread, anyway.
The doctor isn’t making a moral decision for the parents. Taking into consideration people’s irrational beliefs the doctor is saying “won’t help him, won’t kill him.”
Try this. Take some of the skin near the head of your penis and jab a needle through it. Hurt? Some nerve endings there? If I were a doctor my position would probably be 50/50 as to whether lopping a bit more off would be bad for you or good for you. Most of the evidence is anecdotal WRT sexual pleasure and stuff, but the more skin we lop off the less cancer you might get. How about we lop some more off? Up for it? Sorry, I shouldn’t say “up” because you won’t be.