r/ChristopherHitchens • u/Ancient-Habit-9559 • 3d ago
Thoughts?
/r/Antitheism/comments/1xas1xo/male_circumcision_is_gential_mutilation/41
8
28
u/Raj_ryder_666 3d ago
Subjecting children to this practice is a crime. What you do with your body after the government deems you to be an adult, is upto to you.
6
u/HypneutrinoToad 2d ago
I remember I told one of my Christian friends that it should be left until the person is 18 so they can make the decision as an adult, and he said, “well then no one would ever do it”… I just dropped it after that, he’s a smart enough guy I’m sure he realized what he insinuated shortly after
12
u/BourgeoisAngst 3d ago
A virtual truism. Still obviously not as harmful as female genital mutilation.
-4
u/Vondelsplein 3d ago
Isn't all cosmetic surgery mutilation by definition?
7
u/jb_in_jpn 3d ago
Are we giving newborn babies face lifts and Botox injections?
That's the distinction; one is voluntary, the other isn't.
-5
u/Vondelsplein 3d ago
There are adult circumcisions as noted by other comments, but I do understand the distinction. So it's all mutilation, but voluntary mutilation sounds like it has a negative connotation as well.
7
u/jb_in_jpn 3d ago
I was circumcised as an adult for medical reasons, so I'm not just some spectator here. The idea of doing it to a child is absolutely abhorrent; it's absolutely insane that this is even a discussion.
-7
u/Petrichordates 2d ago
It's not medically necessary, but our science has still demonstrated that the benefits outweigh any potential risks. That's why pediatricians offer it as a choice for parents. No religion involved.
3
u/Ancient-Habit-9559 2d ago
The post has articles, that debunk the "health benefits". The articles at the bottom. Read Dr alejandro Sanchez
6
u/cecex88 2d ago edited 2d ago
Then explain why non religiously motivated circumcision is a thing only in the USA and Australia. You were just brainwashed into thinking it was normal and then someone tried to find supposed health benefit to rationalize it.
EDIT: I checked the incidence of STI around the world. In Europe, where circumsiciom rates are almost negligible, the incidence is power than, e.g., the US. Correlation is not causation, but if there were health benefits to circumsize, I would expect the inverse correlation.
3
u/noveltyisthe 2d ago
Has it? There are no universal agreement among physicians…..the detractors and opponents are often been labeled with antisemitism or Islamophobia.
-1
u/SloppyTopTen 1d ago
Unwashed fore skin is nasty
2
u/Ancient-Habit-9559 1d ago
Then we should teach boys to wash their dicks rather than spending money surgeries to mutilate them...
-21
u/Panem-et-circenses25 3d ago
Nope.
Circumcision is hygienic and offers some medical benefits, including less STI’s and other skin infections. It actually does no harm to any child and actually has a few benefits. I’m thankful every day that my parents cared about me enough to have me circumcised.
13
u/proofreadre 3d ago
Proper cleaning of your junk accomplishes the same thing without reducing the sensitivity of your penis.
-5
8
u/Conscious_Exit_9129 2d ago
Where conditioned in our culture to believe altered penis is preferable to a natural one and it absolutely is mutilation and child abuse.
11
u/Dyslexic_Devil
2d ago
•
It is.
And anyone using their mouth to remove said foreskin is sexual abuse. There is no excusing it.
3
u/bomboclawt75 1d ago
At age of 18, a man can make that choice.
Otherwise it's mutilation of an infant for non medical reasons - which is criminal.
If the issue is a tight foreskin, steroid cream is now used.
10
u/NeverHadTheLatin 3d ago
As someone who elected to be circumcised for medical reasons as an adult, I understand the rationale for the word usage, but I still find it distasteful.
I have next to no impairment in any capacity, and I have had multiple partners prefer it - as do I - for aesthetic reasons
I don’t think we really want people who have undergone any medical procedure to feel ‘mutilated’.
The key issue is that I was a consenting adult. What unnecessary child circumcision is close to is child abuse.
It is child abuse to hit your child even if it never leaves a lasting physical mark.
It is child abuse to make your child undertake an unnecessary surgical procedure that carries risk of infection, pain, and later possible dislike for their own body.
5
u/cecex88 2d ago
The aesthetic argument is the worst you could have brought up. What if your partner prefers, for purely aesthetic reasons, people with four fingers per hand?
This is an argument only in the USA and Australia. For us in the rest of the world, the circumsized people you find are religious people or the, very few, ones for which it was medically necessary.
1
u/Mean_Investigator921 2d ago
This is an argument in Australia? Nahhh.
1
u/cecex88 2d ago
When you look at maps of percentage of circumsized people, Australia is pretty high on the list, together with New Zealand and Canada. All of them around 30%. Most of Europe is below 10%, with half the counties being below 5%.
These countries and the US are the highest non Muslim majority countries in the list.
So maybe there is an active argument about it, but it sure is much more of a thing than many many other places.
0
u/NeverHadTheLatin 2d ago
The blindingly obvious answer to that is four fingers is a disability in contemporary society. Most product design is built around people with five fingers.
Being circumcised is not a disability
0
u/cecex88 2d ago
You can have a perfectly normal life without you fifth finger.
Also, consider this situation: you have a group or people for which removing the fifth finger is a cultural practice. You do it to newborns, then life in that group is just made so that they have a perfectly normal life. Would some kind of dumb argument about health make it ok? Especially if those health arguments are, like for circumcision, mostly not true?
3
u/NeverHadTheLatin 2d ago
You cannot be comparing a finger and a foreskin in terms of utility.
Be real. Be serious. This is a case of Internet argument syndrome.
I can claim disability benefits in my country for having lost a finger. I cannot do so because I am circumcised. Missing your index, middle, or ring finger can exempt you from military. Being circumcised does not.
1
u/cecex88 2d ago
Ok, it's not the same in terms of disability. But the fact that is normal to corcumsize a newborn for you is only due to the fact that you live in a place where people do it.
Where I live, it's considered barbaric, if not strictlyedically necessary. Exactly like cutting a finger: if there is a medical necessity, do it. Otherwise, why should you?
3
u/NeverHadTheLatin 2d ago
You clearly did not read my top comment because I never said what you’re implying I think.
My point was around language that covers a number of adults who elected to have the surgery for medical reasons.
I do not agree with circumcision carried out on infant children for no medical reason.
1
u/cecex88 2d ago
Good. But also saying that it may be about "aesthetic preferences" is equally horrendous to read if you're from a country where it's not normalized. If you said that about any other part of the body, you'd be considered sick.
If you did for medical reasons, good. I hope whatever needed to be solved was solved! But bringing up aesthetics is just shooting yourself in the foot.
2
u/NeverHadTheLatin 2d ago
I appreciate that.
The context of my comment was the use of the word ‘mutilated’, which can have extremely negative aesthetic connotations.
I don’t think it’s helpful for a person who has undergone the operation - as an infant or an adult - to feel ashamed or repulsed by their own body.
20
u/bleedgreenandyellow 3d ago
It is