Germany bans circumcision, ruling that “the fundamental right of the child to bodily integrity outweighs the fundamental rights of the parents.”

[–]Legolas-the-elf 33 points34 points35 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]the-knife 8 points9 points10 points 14 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]tallwheel 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]CedMon 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Legolas-the-elf 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]GigaGrey 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ugg116 6 points7 points8 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

German here, the title kind of misleading. One court (city court of cologne) stated that it is against the law, HOWEVER, this is not anywhere near as important as the title presents it to us, because whatever the court stated will become legal right only if no one will protest against it. And this happened of course shortly afterwards, so the decision made is no longer important as the next court will deal with the question now to determine if the previous decision by the judge was indeed right. Even the both courts agree, there are still a couple more instances which each has bigger rights. This specific case will most likely reach the highest one exisiting and, ONLY if this one confirms the decision it will become legal right. This is a long way to go and will take a couple of years. Additionally, there are a lot of strong lobbist which will fight this decision (namely the "Zentralrat der Juden", the jewish organisation in germany, as well as the muslim organisation DITIB).

[–]GigaGrey4 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]JustinJamm 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]venereveritas 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ihmhi 8 points9 points10 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Ihmhi 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]leonsecure 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]bikemaul 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 14 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]Crioca 11 points12 points13 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Crioca 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PederDag 8 points9 points10 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]PederDag 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]How_Do_I_Shot_Semen -3 points-2 points-1 points 14 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]enrique15 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]GigaGrey2 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[+]leonsecure -6 points-5 points-4 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]significantshrinkage 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Irrel_M 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]leonsecure -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

I didn't want to go that far. But there is strong support for a circumcision ban in Germany. I am personally pretty sure it is related to the recent findings about very strong islamophobia (the majority of germans said they don't want to grand full religious freedoms to muslims) and also strong anti-judaism (there has been recent statistics that about half of germany's population has strong anti-judaic prejudices).

As muslims and jews are the only groups affected by a circumcision ban (jews significantly more), it lies really close to see a correlation. This of course can never be more than a subjective assessment as it is pretty much impossible to analyze this in a trustable way.

Effectively a ban of circumcision would destroy jewish life in Germany. There was NO comparison to the holocaust though by the rabby group, it was (purposely?) misinterpreted in some german papers. The sentence was "worst attack on jewish life SINCE the holocaust", this compares nothing and is simply the truth. The sentence doesn't give a hint on the motivation of the judge (who if you read the reasons for the judgment seems to not be anti-judaic, but simply anti-religious).

[–]leonsecure -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]toblotron -5 points-4 points-3 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]jubbergun 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]toblotron 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]cefarix -32 points-31 points-30 points 14 years ago (57 children) | Copy Link

[–]Snooglemunch 14 points15 points16 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Ihmhi 9 points10 points11 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]cefarix -18 points-17 points-16 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Snooglemunch 10 points11 points12 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+]cefarix -13 points-12 points-11 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I'm not a Jehovah's Witness so I won't answer on their behalf.

Cop out.

Why don't you ask me about my religion, and ask a Jehovah's Witness about theirs?

That includes teaching them about God and his religion. I would be a bad father if I did not circumcise my sons.

Yet in another post you said...

Circumcision is not mentioned in the Quran actually.

You are assuming that the Quran is all there is to Islam. You assume incorrectly. Islam is based on the Quran but it is not all in the Quran. We know of the practice of circumcision from the hadiths. You can ask in r/islam for more information. This isn't the right place for a lecture on Islamic theology.

Why can't you let themselves choose?

Parents make all sorts of decisions on behalf of their children all the time. If we didn't there wouldn't be a human race today. Children are not mature enough to make all types of decisions. Next, I'm guessing, you are going to say, "But why don't you let them do it when they are adults?" Well that's because you're not supposed to leave circumcision off until your kid is an adult. It should be done when they are young, before they reach puberty.

If you weren't a redditor for 2 years now I'd assume you were some throw away troll account.

I actually registered a long time ago, but I really only "discovered" Reddit a few months ago. I even went to the Dallas meetup :D But, anyways, just because someone doesn't agree with your point of view does not automatically make them a troll.

[–]chroncile 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It should be done when they are young, before they reach puberty.

I think this about sums up the justification for circumcising a child in the Muslim faith. Since the Foreskin naturally lubricates the penis and also contains 20,000 nerve endings thus enhancing sexual pleasure, it would be easy for a boy going through puberty to learn how to masturbate if he was not circumcised. Masturbation is a sin in Islam. Thus, removing the foreskin would reduce the chances of a healthy, horny male teenager to do the natural act of masturbation.

I used to be a Muslim, but then I stopped being an idiot. You cannot think logically. God created man so why would he instruct man to chop off a tip of every boy's penis? You don't even know the answer yourself. You'll just think up of something illogical to help yourself stay committed to the Islamic faith because after all, the reward after death is huge and thus worth wasting 1000s of hours of your life on it.

[–]A_Nihilist 7 points8 points9 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Thtb 14 points15 points16 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pvtmiller 22 points23 points24 points 14 years ago (36 children) | Copy Link

[+]cefarix -17 points-16 points-15 points 14 years ago (35 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pvtmiller 16 points17 points18 points 14 years ago (34 children) | Copy Link

[+]jubbergun -24 points-23 points-22 points 14 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pvtmiller 15 points16 points17 points 14 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

[+]jubbergun -16 points-15 points-14 points 14 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

Because he's the boy's parent, and human tradition dating back through time immemorial is that parents induct their children into their religious practice(s). Circumcision is part of that practice for some cultures/religions.

I expect you're going to pull out the perfunctory "but it's just like female genital mutilation" card in response to that, because it's part of the shtick, but the two aren't comparable. Circumcision, when performed correctly, carries a low risk of infection, complications, and/or death (I think one recently linked article here in /r/MensRights complained that a hundred children had died because of circumcision this year--out of the hundreds of thousands who undergo the procedure). This differs greatly from female genital mutilation, where the death rate is somewhere in the area of 10%, and complications are common. The practices performed on women are generally done to remove their ability to enjoy sex, while circumcision is performed as part of a sacred ritual and for hygiene.

Circumcision, when performed properly, causes no lasting harm. The penis still operates as intended. Circumcised men can still enjoy sex (unlike the majority of women who undergo any type of female genital mutilation) and urinate normally.

[–]Pvtmiller 12 points13 points14 points 14 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Actually I wasn't gonna pull out the FGM card, but you brought it up, so I'll say something about that. All FGM, even the type where they just prick the genitals with a needle, is banned. Yet circumcision, which removes a massive amount of nerves? perfectly fine.

Also, the hygiene issue is bullshit. As an owner of a foreskin, it's fucking trivial to pull it back and wash it in the shower. I don't remember being somehow confused by a hunk of skin when I was a child and not washing there.

And "The penis still functions as normal"? Do you know anything? There are thousands of nerves that enhance the feel of sex, and the movement is as as a lubrication. But sure, chop it off.

And besides, there is no real reason for doing it other than tradition. Fuck tradition, why cause deaths because your parents did it?

[+]jubbergun -18 points-17 points-16 points 14 years ago* (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pvtmiller 11 points12 points13 points 14 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]jubbergun-13 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Serves no purpose you agree with, you mean.

Given that I still enjoy all the benefits of having a penis, I'm not sure how you're quantifying "functions better." In fact, I'm probably better off without the foreskin you seem to think "provides lubrication" since it may have greater susceptibility to traumatic epithelial disruptions (tears) during intercourse, providing a portal of entry for pathogens [Szabo R, Short RV. How does male circumcision protect against HIV infection? BMJ. 2000 Jun 10;320(7249):1592-4.] That probably doesn't matter, however, since (despite your complaint that I "refuse to accept other points") you won't accept that there are any hygienic benefits to having a circumcision despite my having linked a CDC fact sheet referencing 42 different studies showing that there are.

[–]Pvtmiller8 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]jubbergun-9 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Reaperdude977 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]jubbergun-10 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]7 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

That seems fairly subjective. Maybe I think I have better sex because I last longer and fulfill my partner's needs better since I don't finish more quickly due to being over-stimulated by additional nerves.

Except studies show no difference in the lasting time between cut and un-cut men. Again you show your ignorance. The male sexual response does not work the way you think it does. When you cut off the foreskin your brain accomodates the decrease in sensitive. It changes the sexual response so that you finish at the same approximate time frame.

Having sex with a cut penis is like watching a black-and-white movie, while an uncut penis is like watching a colour movie. Both movies last the same amount of time, but one is more detailed.

The actual difference in pleasure is difficult to measure, but there's no doubt that there's a decrease in sensitivity. What it comes down to is that you should let the child decide for themselves which they'd prefer.

[–]jubbergun0 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]3 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

First of all, let me say that I don't think the difference in pleasure is that significant at all for cut vs un-cut, that's what most studies tell us. I still think the kid should be able to decide.

Regardless, I'll explain a bit better. The sexual arousal for men is more complicated than you think. Just because it is more sensitive does not mean that you will reach orgasm quicker. Your brain accommodates the less-sensitive penis so that you reach orgasm with about the same amount of stimulation. The difference is that if you are uncut you have more nerve endings. So you can "feel" more. Like compare your fingertips to your back. One has much more nerve endings.

And an cut penis is more sensitive than a cut penis. That isn't even arguable. It's not like there's some way to gain nerve endings when you cut off a part of your penis. It's more sensitive by definition.

You can argue about whether or not circumcision decreases or increases sexual pleasure. It's really hard to know. But how about we let our kids decide for themselves?

[–]jubbergun1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted]6 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]jubbergun 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]jubbergun0 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

My logic isn't flawed, your analogy is. You say you're using my logic to justify something most people would consider absurd, but most people do not consider circumcision absurd; you're in the minority. Your "analogy" isn't so much an analogy as it is a flawed comparison, like the one feminists developed to justify calling all sex rape, and goes something like this:

Consensual sex is a penis in a vagina. Rape is a penis in a vagina. Therefore consensual sex is exactly the same as rape.

Cutting off ears removes a body part. Circumcision removes a body part. Therefore circumcision is exactly the same as cutting off ears.

Your "logic," like that of a feminists, is flawed, because you're focused on a part to the exclusion of the whole. Your purpose is not to find something analogous to circumcision that explains it more simply, but is instead an attempt to connect circumcision with practices that would be considered freakish or out-of-the-norm. What you're doing isn't analogy, it's propagandizing.

[–][deleted]3 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

lol, it's getting hard to tell if you're trolling, but I will respond normally:

You say you're using my logic to justify something most people would consider absurd, but most people do not consider circumcision absurd; you're in the minority.

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA

You do not understand the analogy! lol

Ok, I will explain it to you. Some guy asks you why parents should get to permanently modify their child's body through circumcision. You reply:

Because he's the boy's parent, and human tradition dating back through time immemorial is that parents induct their children into their religious practice(s). Circumcision is part of that practice for some cultures/religions.

Here you have justified the practice by claiming that it is part of tradition, culture and religion. I pointed out that the exact same argument could be used to defend cutting off child's ears when they are young.

You could argue that human ears are mostly vestigal, and aren't really needed. So it would be a cosmetic difference. But the children would also be able to hear better what's going on behind them.

So do you understand the analogy now? lol. I hope so, because if I get another nonsense response then I will not respond back.

Cutting off ears removes a body part. Circumcision removes a body part. Therefore circumcision is exactly the same as cutting off ears.

But could you not justify it through tradition and religion? Ears are mostly aesthetic. Some people look cooler without them!

Your "logic," like that of a feminists, is flawed, because you're focused on a part to the exclusion of the whole. Your purpose is not to find something analogous to circumcision that explains it more simply, but is instead an attempt to connect circumcision with practices that would be considered freakish or out-of-the-norm. What you're doing isn't analogy, it's propagandizing.

I quoted exactly what you said and then justified something that was more obviously a violation of rights. If everyone in your country had their ears cut off, you'd probably be arguing to cut off your son's as well...

[–]jubbergun1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Embogenous2 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

Backing up seabass here because I've had this argument a few times;

You said that circumcision is okay because;

he's the boy's parent, and human tradition dating back through time immemorial is that parents induct their children into their religious practice(s). Circumcision is part of that practice for some cultures/religions.

What you are saying here, the argument you are making is that "the choice of the parent's, and ancient human tradition for religious practice, are sufficient conditions for a procedure to be acceptable". See? You're saying that circumcision is okay because those things apply, which means you're saying that those things make a procedure okay. That's your argument, your logic.

But - that argument applies to other things. The exact same logic, the exact same argument, applies to things you find wrong; such as, for a hypothetical example, my religious practice of removing the ears of children. This is wrong - which means that the argument can't be used to justify a practice - which means the argument is invalid.

In order to dispute the analogy, you would have to refine your argument so that cases like the cutting ears are no longer included, or argue why it already isn't; so that the argument applies to circumcision and not cutting ears.

[–]jubbergun2 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I understand what your saying, but again, my objection is this: there is no religion in which it is common for practitioners to remove their ears or the ears of their children. It doesn't exist. The purpose of the other individual's "analogy" was not for the purpose of demonstrating anything, it was, as usual, simply another attempt to make a guilt-by-association argument tying circumcision to practices that are either unusual or actually morally objectionable, and I assert that is specifically because none of you are capable of making a reasoned argument against circumcision based on its own merits and/or detriments. That there are so many insults being directed toward other posters because of their religion leads me to believe that few of you seriously object to the practice for any reason other than your own bigotry.

[–]Embogenous1 point 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

understand what your saying, but again, my objection is this: [1] there is no religion in which it is common for practitioners to remove their ears or the ears of their children. It doesn't exist.

That doesn't matter.

The point is, if one existed, then in order to be consistent you would have to approve of it. Would you approve of it? No? Then you're hypocritical.

The purpose of the other individual's "analogy" was not for the purpose of demonstrating anything

Yes it was, it was to demonstrate that your argument was invalid.

assert that is specifically because none of you are capable of making a reasoned argument against circumcision based on its own merits and/or detriments.

The superdefining rule, that trumps all others. You do not have the right to modify another person's body from its natural state without their consent. You don't get to tattoo a friend when they're unconscious. You don't get to break a young girl's feet. You don't get to slit the nostrils of your baby girl. And you don't get to cut the foreskin off your baby boy. I think people have the right to decide what permanent modifications to their body occur.
There is a risk of complications. Metastudies have found rates of 0.2-0.6% and 2-8% (most likely owing to different standards for complications). These studies do not include problems that don't show up until later in life, mostly due to too much skin being taken ("hairy shaft" or a deformed penis), forming skin bridges. There are other problems like aesthetic issues with scarring or the frenulum being damaged/severed (resulting in a severe reduction in pleasure). Just take a look at the pictures on this site (NSFW). That could happen to your son.
Removal of the foreskin results in a reduction in sensitivity, and a loss of the mechanical function of the foreskin; the sliding motion is pleasurable (especially so with condoms) and it increases a partner's pleasure too. It also reduces issues with friction/dryness. It also increases the chance of erectile dysfunction.
Because if a boy isn't circumcised, and he grows up and wants one, he can choose to get one. If he is circumcised but doesn't want to be, you've fucked him. People can be pretty traumatized by the knowledge they were mutilated (even if you disagree, it's how they feel) without their consent.
The common arguments for circumcision are bunk. The HIV studies are crap, it doesn't cause infections (they are a result of tearing the foreskin away from the glans - it is attached at birth), and it isn't cleaner (foreskin does antibacterial shit and nothing gets under there anyway).

Here's a list of everything lost during circumcision.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]cefarix -24 points-23 points-22 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

You're being incredibly ethnocentrist. Your argument against circumcision is at its core the same as the argument of feminists that say that Muslim women should not be allowed to wear the hijab or niqab because it "oppresses" them or is "forced" upon them by a misogynistic patriarchal society. I consider the consumption of alcohol, something that is widespread in Western cultures, to be incredibly offensive, yet I'm not going to force an alcohol ban.

Next, are you going to suggest that I cannot teach my kids my religion - teach them about God, about the Prophets, have them memorize the Quran, have them pray five times a day, etc, too? There are over 1.6 billion Muslims in the world. They all teach their kids Islam too. And yes, half of them, over 800 million, are circumcised males. The vast majority have no problem with it. In most cases, they are circumcised shortly after birth, but in some cultures they are also circumcised at various other ages all the way up through puberty. Just go to r/islam ask the male Redditors there if they feel their rights were stolen from there because they were circumcised.

And I'm assuming by "your old book" you mean the Quran? Circumcision is not mentioned in the Quran actually.

[–]Pvtmiller 15 points16 points17 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] -8 points-7 points-6 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Celda 8 points9 points10 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Pvtmiller 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]rvaen 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Eryemil 11 points12 points13 points 14 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]shadowmyst 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Eryemil -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I know that many MRA are very strongly against circumcision [...]

No surprise there since it is one of the key issues of the whole fucking movement; look to the sidebar or go and take a look at what our "leaders" have to say on the subject. The fight against genital mutilation is not just a fringe issue for the MRM but one of the fundamental founding principles.

but there are others here who are not.

And they are wrong. There is also a very vocal minority of misogynists and anti-egalitarians in the MRM but that doesn't mean that the movement is misogynist or anti-equality as a rule; it just means that some of the people that count themselves among our numbers are misguided.

Completely alienating people who don't agree with you in every single matter will help no one.

I am more than willing to educate people that are ignorant on this particular subject and have spend many, many hours of my time and quite a bit of my money doing so.

As someone who has spend so much effort on the matter, I know from experience that most of the time, you cannot hope to convince religionists that they should not mutilate their offspring in the name of their blood-thirsty deity. This is particularly relevant when it comes to Muslims like the cunt I was replying to who tend to be more dogmatic and less educated than their Jewish counterparts who also practice MGM.

The only way to deal with savages like him is to alienate him utterly and hope his memetic insanity doesn't spread and infect others. Think of them as carriers of a deadly, ravenous virus—and treat them accordingly.

[+]cefarix -24 points-23 points-22 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]FOADSASCUM 19 points20 points21 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]Eryemil 14 years ago* [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

You are free to call yourself whatever the hell you want, just expect to be repudiated by the community and used as an example of the people that gives us all a bad name.

I am an MRA and I will stand up for men's right [...]

The MRM is not just about the rights of adult men but all males regardless of age.

We believe that the rights of boys should also be safeguarded and you've basically admitted that you will violate your own offpsring for the sake of your backwards religion—you're damn right there's no place for you among us, you are everything we wish to destroy.

[+]jubbergun -17 points-16 points-15 points 14 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]cefarix -26 points-25 points-24 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]hiphophippopotamus 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]ulrike_meinhof0 points 14 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[+]windynights -21 points-20 points-19 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[+]MaunaLoona 14 years ago* [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

Perhaps you're thinking of Sweden?

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]grundhog 6 points7 points8 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Thtb 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Comments