Was just talking at dinner with family, and it seems a logical action to ban circumcision, as in most cases, doesn’t have consent, and is a major (genitals are important) body modification. Can we ban it at the state level? Just a thought.

  • AuroraZzz@lemmy.world
    24416·
    10 months ago

    Circumcisions should be banned because they are mutilating children’s genitals without consent. At least trans medical procedures have consent.

    I think it’s just religious people being hypocrites again. Hard to convince delusional people of facts when they make up what they believe based on the circumstances. The decisions of religious cults shouldn’t have more power than the decisions of individual people. Completely crazy what this country is devolving into

    • Jojo@lemm.ee
      829·
      10 months ago

      Trans surgical procedures have some of the best outcomes of any major procedures. they are performed on consenting individuals who are always well informed and at or very near adulthood, and only after many other interventions have been ongoing. People who receive these interventions show incredibly low rates of regret (compare for example the percent of people who regret knee replacements or probably circumcisions), and enjoy increased happiness and satisfaction by almost any metric.

      Basically every major medical organization in the world (and certainly in America) agrees these interventions are medically useful and should be performed. While there are doctors who dissent, they are in the vast minority and almost never actually work with any trans people, but rather insist all the doctors who do work with trans people must be wrong. It’s not a controversy in the medical world, just the political one.

    • adONis@lemmy.world
      321·
      10 months ago

      Then we shall ban dentists too. They never had my consent to touch my teeth.

      • humorlessrepost@lemmy.worldEnglish
        7·
        10 months ago

        Did they remove your perfectly healthy canines because a bronze-age book said dogs are unclean? If not, get the fuck out of here with your infant penis mutilation apologetics.

    • Shirasho@lemmings.world
      16120·
      10 months ago

      There is scientific evidence that circumcision results in the area being cleaner and easier to maintain. I’m not denying it is child mutilation, but you also shouldn’t just sweep it under the rug as religious bullshittery.

      • forrgott@lemm.ee
        776·
        10 months ago

        Honestly such a weak argument. Having helped my uncircumcised son learn to keep himself clean, I can probably say this myth needs to be laid to rest already. It’s just not true.

        • Thwompthwomp@lemmy.world
          2·
          10 months ago

          I dont get it either. However the American pediatric association and a couple others keep suggesting it’s “cleaner.” I think it’s based on some large global datasets and there are less STIs with circumcised penises? Even WHO recommends it. It seems like recommended people clean themselves would be much easier…

      • livus@kbin.social
        632·
        10 months ago

        I’m sure there are many body parts we could amputate to help with maintenance.

          • akakunai@lemmy.ca
            162·
            10 months ago

            No. But, if they were to I reckon if I’d have the dentist look at them and decide what to do then…rather than rip 'em all out preemptively.

            • Eyck_of_denesle@lemmy.zip
              214·
              10 months ago

              Well one is done precautionary as it doesn’t have any big life altering side effects while removing all your teeth does. I understand your enthusiasm but a little medical knowledge wouldn’t hurt no one. It’s also more difficult to get circ done after growing up.

              • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
                101·
                10 months ago

                Well one is done precautionary as it doesn’t have any big life altering side effects

                I mean, reduced sensation, higher rates of some kinds of sexual difficulty later in life, and like anything that causes pain and stress to a neonate there are signs that it can have long term psychological effects.

                • Eyck_of_denesle@lemmy.zip
                  16·
                  10 months ago

                  You would only notice it if you get it done after growing up. I don’t understand the logic here. Have you been circumcised?

                  • pinchcramp@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                    21·
                    10 months ago

                    Many men lose sensation over the course of their life. Circumcised men seem to be affected by this much more severeley (anecdotal experience).

                    I’m in my mid thirties, circumcised at birth, and feel virtually nothing on my glans. Any form of intimacy that involves my dick is more of a chore than anything else. And no, the problem is not that I wank too often or have some unhealthy porn consumption (pretty much non-existent).

                    Do you think it’s okay to burn a clitoris if the girl hasn’t had sex before? Can we blind babies because they will never know what they have lost?

                    Can we violate anyone’s bodily autonomy as long as they will not remember what life was like before the violation?

          • Cethin@lemmy.zipEnglish
            71·
            10 months ago

            Most cultures in the world don’t circumcise and it doesn’t cause much issue. It’s only the US where it became so common, because the wacko Kellogg had enough money to push his weird ideas, and somehow people still follow it. You should follow his other “preventative” ideas if you think circumcision is such a great idea.

            Here’s a good video to get more ideas from. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZ4ES8mOzYg

      • Baggins [he/him]@lemmy.caEnglish
        427·
        10 months ago

        If god wanted my parents to cut part of my dick off why did she put it there in the first place? Are you saying god made a mistake?

        • frickineh@lemmy.world
          233·
          10 months ago

          Maybe it was on purpose. The Abrahamic god is a sadist who apparently fucking loves killing and maiming people, so maybe he was like, “yoooo, you know what would be funny?” and then convinced a bunch of people they should cut part of their babies’ dicks off.

          • Grass@sh.itjust.works
            132·
            10 months ago

            Wasn’t there also that weird ass bible tale where some dude brought another guy 200 foreskins so he could marry the guy’s daughter? If I don’t have one, at least nobody will kill me and take it from me to give to a potential father in law…

            I still have to give the little fucker a good scrub to not stink though so the cleanliness thing has got to be bull.

            • frickineh@lemmy.world
              111·
              10 months ago

              Yeah. I get that it’s supposed to represent how many enemies he killed, but why foreskins, Saul? Could’ve asked for a lot of other things besides dick skin. Like, idk, their weapons or something.

              • Schadrach@lemmy.sdf.org
                3·
                10 months ago

                Because you could buy or steal their weapons, but there’s only one way you’re going to end up with a piece of their dick. Also means you don’t get to count enemies who were Jews.

      • fine_sandy_bottom@discuss.tchncs.de
        253·
        10 months ago

        It’s not really about the evidence though.

        45 years ago my parents genuinely thought they were doing the right thing by asking the Dr to circumcise me.

        They weren’t great at critical thinking and have made numerous poor decisions in their lives as a result of vibe-based reasoning.

        You can say I was “mutilated” if you like, but I don’t feel like a victim.

        My parents also supported my education, where I learned to be skeptical, and challenge my preconceptions.

        As a result, I didn’t have my son circumcised.

      • Bytemeister@lemmy.worldΕλληνικά
        112·
        10 months ago

        I don’t think cleanliness is an excuse for lopping off part of a non-consenting infant.

        It would be a lot easier to clean your head if you didn’t have any ears. Should we cut those off of babies too?

        • Jojo@lemm.ee
          312·
          10 months ago

          So, yeah. To paraphrase, “When reviewed by people without the same clear and obvious cultural bias, circumcision only conclusively provides an incredibly marginal benefit, with evidence lacking for other supposed (and still very marginal) benefits.”

      • Neuromancer@lemm.ee
        873·
        10 months ago

        Not just cleaner but you are also less prone to certain infections. I am circumcised, but it was done as a child. Knowing what I know now, I am glad since it decreases the risk for certain cancers and infections.