~ archived since 2018 ~

Circumcision...?

Noah4224 · 2017-07-30T21:11:03+00:00

Why is circumcision one of the no-no topics of this sub? As in, if you have a different opinion, you get downvoted to hell. I guess I don't fully...

Noah4224

July 30, 2017

7 upvotes

/r/MensRights

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	Circumcision...?
Author	Noah4224
Upvotes	7
Comments	64
Date	July 30, 2017 9:11 PM UTC (8 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/6qjxll/circumcision/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/circumcision.916837 https://theredarchive.com/post/916837

Comments

[–]WoodChucking 22 points23 points24 points 8 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]Noah4224[S] -3 points-2 points-1 points 8 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]WoodChucking 24 points25 points26 points 8 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[+]Noah4224[S] -11 points-10 points-9 points 8 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daemonicus 15 points16 points17 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]JayJayEcks 9 points10 points11 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nugymmer 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]WoodChucking 11 points12 points13 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Noah4224[S] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]rodrigogirao 15 points16 points17 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]cymrich 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Spoonwood 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah but look at the finer details and you find it's much different.

I agree that type IV Female Genital Mutilation differs substantial from male circumcision. It is not as severe as male circumcision. Type IV female genital mutilation is illegal in the United States according to federal law: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/116 There is no similar law against male circumcision.

Male circumcision is very widely practiced, with something like 3 out of 5 infant baby boys currently cut shortly after birth in the United States. Female genital mutilation of any sort in the United States is rarely practiced. And it was rarely practiced before the federal law of the 1990s. But, female genital mutilation got explicitly banned, not male circumcision.

Female genital mutilation also differs substantially in that it refers to all forms of female genital cutting, while male circumcision doesn't include things like castration, male infibulation, subincision and more.

Also, worldwide, female genital mutilation is far more often illegal than male cirucmcision. But, male circumcision is more common than female genital mutilation.

So, yea they differ. They mainly differ in the male circumcision affects far more people than female genital mutilation, yet political authorities generally discourage female genital mutilation more than male circumcision.

[–]Ascendant-Dickwaffle 16 points17 points18 points 8 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[+]Noah4224[S] -8 points-7 points-6 points 8 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]rodrigogirao 19 points20 points21 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ascendant-Dickwaffle 9 points10 points11 points 8 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]Noah4224[S] 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ascendant-Dickwaffle 15 points16 points17 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Noah4224[S] 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]BlindGardener 13 points14 points15 points 8 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Noah4224[S] 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jmg83 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RapeMatters 8 points9 points10 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]DuckHorseDuck1 points 8 years ago [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

The WHO definition of female genital mutilation, sans gender references:

All harmful procedures to the ~~female~~ genitalia for non-medical purposes

Even a pinprick is mutilation under this definition.

A circumcised penis is (usually) functional, but not fully functional, because the foreskin is a functional part of the penis. Circumcision removes the most sensitive areas of the penis, the ridged band, and usually part or all of the frenulum. A substantial portion of penile skin, and an even more substantial portion of penile nerve endings are lost.

The protective function of the foreskin is destroyed, causing the glans (head) to dry out, become rougher, and desensitize dramatically. If an intact man were to retract his foreskin and walk around, the friction of his underwear against the glans would be extremely annoying, even painful for some, and yet circumcised men can rub away all day and hardly feel a thing. The gliding function of the foreskin, which makes for more pleasurable and comfortable masturbation and intercourse, is also lost.

The surgery itself is excruciatingly painful for infants. Anesthesia is often not used, and adequate anesthesia is never used on infants because it wouldn't be safe. There are a whole host of potential complications, like bleeding, meatal stenosis, and painful erections, ranging up to loss of the entire penis or even death.

In the west, girls have an absolute right to not having their genitals damaged, even the slightest bit, for non-medical reasons. Boys have no such protection anywhere. The person doing the cutting doesn't even have to be a doctor. In the US, this is a clear violation of the 14th Amendment right to equal protection under the law.

[–]Noah4224[S] 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[+]DuckHorseDuck1 points 8 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

That number sounds way too high to me. Babies do die from it though, and any number of infant deaths from a totally unnecessary surgery not consented to by the recipient is unacceptable.

[–]Noah4224[S] 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Spoonwood 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's violent, because it involves forcibly taking a device which literally wounds the penis causing it to bleed and removing the ridged band and the frenulum permanently from the body. It's violent in that it leaves a permanent scar, if not many permanent scars, on the boy's penis. It's violent in that it leads to long-term psychological effects; see this volume to get started here: https://www.amazon.com/Circumcision-Hidden-Trauma-American-Ultimately/dp/0964489538

Note that the foreskin is fused to the glans at birth. Thus, most circumcisions are violent in that they involve a foreign metallic object penetrating the penis (which separates the foreskin from the glans). Penetration of a sexual organ by a foreign object without consent is often called rape. Most circumcisions also involve the boy's penis getting made to penetrate a clamp afterwards. A penis getting made to penetrate a foreign object also sounds structurally the same as rape to me.

[–]cymrich 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Deipnoseophist 10 points11 points12 points 8 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–]Noah4224[S] 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]BlindGardener 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]rodrigogirao 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]JayJayEcks 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]rodrigogirao 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]RapeMatters 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]rodrigogirao 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]RapeMatters 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Once again, he seems to be focusing on those who would push circumcision on the adult gentiles who were joining the Christian congregation - adding a burden onto them (and a hell of a burden at that - I can't imagine what it would have been like to get circumcised as an adult over a thousand years before the invention of anesthetic). And he was, in fact, extremely aggravated at them, because they were driving away people who would make good Christians.

This analysis seems to make several assumptions that he's talking about ritualized baby circumcision (like the Jews practiced), and that doesn't seem to be the case.

(For what it's worth, we live in a completely different age now. Even if circumcision was justifiable for hygiene reasons around 50 AD, running water has been invented, lost, invented again, lost again, and invented again since then and it's not justifiable now.)

[–]Noah4224[S] 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]BlindGardener 5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Noah4224[S] 6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]BlindGardener 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]BlindGardener 5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nugymmer 5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]93re2 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]imnotanmra 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Noah4224[S] 3 points4 points5 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ImaPBSkid 2 points3 points4 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]jmg83 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]MaxofJupiter -1 points0 points1 point 8 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[+]HasAnArchmageFetish1 points 8 years ago* [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link

Jewish men can wait until they turn 18 to revive cosmetic surgery like everyone else.

[–]MaxofJupiter -2 points-1 points0 points 8 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]nugymmer 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]a-man-from-earth 5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jmg83 1 point2 points3 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]iainmf 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Daemonicus 6 points7 points8 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]mikesteane 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Deipnoseophist 7 points8 points9 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

YOU have freedom of religion. YOU can do what you wish with your own body for whichever religion you choose. I know you probably wouldn't like to consider the thought you but absolutely have to: what if your son does not wish to follow the Jewish religion? Will you deny him the very right to religion that you ask us to respect for yourself by having a religious procedure performed on him without his consent? If you're going to ask us to respect your freedom of religion then you absolutely have to also respect that choice of everybody else. Including your son. Who, as an infant, is incapable of making that choice himself.

You are entrusted to protect his rights until he is old enough to do so for himself. Your religious choices should not mean parts of his body being removed. That should be his freedom of choice of religion that dictates that.

[–]nugymmer 5 points6 points7 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nugymmer 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]BlindGardener 4 points5 points6 points 8 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]imthewiseguy 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]jmg83 0 points1 point2 points 8 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link