Circumcision.

[dybmh]

Rightfully no. It is unnecessary save for rare situations, it is a willful infliction of pain and suffering that serves no necessary purpose or function, amd if there is no necessary reason then it is utterly impossible for the decision to deprive of another of bodily autonomy and consent to be ethical and right.

If I think that the child will be happy I made the choice for them at that time, it's perfectly ethical. Then when the child is an adult they can correct me if I was wrong. Send me jail, incur divine wrath, whatever... I did what I felt my child would have wanted would have requested, would have begged me to do.

I am so grateful my parents did this for me when they did it. I know 1 person, only 1, who was extremely troubled that they were not circumcised as a child and was struggling with what to do after choosing to become religious. We lost touch, I have no idea what happened to him.

Trying to compare this to gender dysphoria treatment just isn't comparable.

I keep asking, why not wait for the hormones till the child can consent? if it's a medical necessity, please detail that. What is the harm in waiting? If you can answer that, then I think it will be apparent that it is the same justification. Unless you think that a child is able to consent to infertility, then the lack of consent is not an issue.

It's something providers just will not do just because a parent says do it

Can you show me? And does this mean providers who do not follow the guidlelines as you described are unethical?

. There are no psychological evaluations, no requirements before being operated on, and no requirement for two letters of recommendation from healthcare providers who specialize in gender dysphoria (with the requirement this individual also participate in continued learning activities in regards to gender dysohoria and the trans community).

Can you show me the psychological risk of circumcision?

Just stop doing it because you're about to drive off a cliff.

I really would appreciate an answer to the question: what is the harm in waiting for an age appropriate consent to begin hormone treatment? That is where this began. I said there is a window of opportunity to get the optimal result with the least risk and suffering. And that's why it is OK to skip the consent. We've gone around in circles, but this is the root of the issue.

It's required by providers. Like surgeons who perform genital surgeries. There websites, as well as the WPATH Standards of Care, require living full time as your identified sex for no less than one year before being eligible for surgery, and that doesn't count the therapy and hormones and other treatments before going full time.

Please show me the providers who require this? And are you saying it's unethical otherwise?

Again, the difference is that circumcision is just done, without scrutiny, while a gender transition requires medical guidance and professional evaluations.

Circumcision is just done and has none of the risks of gender-affirming care, but this can happen without consent. The child is involved, that's true. But still the child cannot consent to infertility, to permanent changes in the sound of their voice. They simply cannot appreciate the long term consequences until they are... I'm thinking 16. That's the age they can drive a car and ptentially kill someone. That's an age where they can maybe begin to comprehend the long term consequences of their actions.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It's still not abuse, nor is it multilation.

It is causing intention and unnecessary harm. That is abuse.
And yes, it is mutilation. Especially when it's botched (which happens more often than it should given the widespread and unnecessary nature of circumcision). And, yes, it does cause psychological distress in some men even if it's not botched. It was not necessary, it is painful, and it was rightfully his choice alone to make and that was taken from him.

 

[dybmh]

Bodily harm? Yes.

Or bodily benefit. Case by case basis.

What about trying psychotherapy instead of circumcision?

Because the window of opportunity for the optimal result occurs before psychotherapy is possible.

Because it is commonly accepted that decisions about sex change (or other body modifications) can't be fully understood by a child younger than 16. Puberty blockers are there to afford the child/young adult all possibilities to make the right decision and keep all options open.

Sorry, i was typing too fast. I missed a word. the question should have been:

I asked why NOT wait till the child is 16 for hormones and top surgery?

Basically your answer matches my understanding of what should happen, but isn't happening here in the US. And the reason it's NOT happening is because there is a window of opportunity to begin the hormone treatment and to do the top-surgery before 16. So a fuller consent is compromised in favor of the more ideal result.

 

[dybmh]

What about tattooing an infant?

Under these conditions:

• A small tattoo
• in a location that is only noticeable when fully naked
• makes hygene more convenient
• is preferred by many romantically
• is not an aversion romatically to many
• exclusion of the tattoo prohibits from inclusion to a religious or tribal group

Or removing earlobes because the parents think it looks good?

Nope, too visible.

It is/was simply a social/cultural expectation.

Is this what you were told by them, or is this your interpretation / guess?

 

[Apostle John]

I used to be an atheist all my life, born of Christian parentage. I knew absolutely nothing about circumcision as a religious rite. Midlife I had an epiphany/Christian awakening where I believe God spoke to me and continued to speak to me. To cut a long story short when I was out walking on a hill, shortly after this awakening, He said “you can keep your foreskin”. I thought fair enough, lol.
I then started to read and know the Bible for the first time and learned about these rites. The Jerusalem council says you don’t need to be circumcised as a Christian.

 

[VoidCat]

@dybmh
Im thinking this issue is comparable to piercing earlobes of an infant. I mean I got my earlobes pierced as a on infant That is its done as a cultural norm and as in adult folk dont remember it and it doesnt heavily impact adult life unless something goes wrong with the procedure. Am I correct on this?

Im not saying either is right or wrong yet. Im just trying to draw similarities to my own life so i can understand this issue more.

 

[exchemist]

I was circumcised as an infant, and of course had no say.
As an adult, I would rather have had it left natural and intact. Am I the victim of mutilation? Why or why not?

I have read that, for some odd reason, this has been a quite normal cultural practice in the USA, even among people that are not Jewish or Muslim. Is this true? If so, why? Are all the doctors Jewish or something?

In the UK it is rare, outside those two religious groups: United Kingdom: Circumcision Incidence

 

[dybmh]

It is causing intention and unnecessary harm. That is abuse.

Harm vs. Help is case by case basis. Whether it's abuse is risk vs. reward.

And yes, it is mutilation. Especially when it's botched (which happens more often than it should given the widespread and unnecessary nature of circumcision).

It's extremely uncommon for orthodox circumcision as long as the suction is indirect. Ideally it is a local rabbi who has a reputation in the community and will follow-up.

And, yes, it does cause psychological distress in some men even if it's not botched.

Do you have numbers?

It was not necessary, it is painful, and it was rightfully his choice alone to make and that was taken from him.

The choice to be circumsised as an infant is the parent's. That's what we're talking about. Infant circumcision is not the same as being circumcised as an adult. If it was, there would be no debate.

 

[dybmh]

@dybmh
Im thinking this issue is comparable to piercing earlobes of an infant. I mean I got my earlobes pierced as a on infant That is its done as a cultural norm and as in adult folk dont remember it and it doesnt heavily impact adult life unless something goes wrong with the procedure. Am I correct on this?

Im not saying either is right or wrong yet. Im just trying to draw similarities to my own life so i can understand this issue more.

As long as they are not upgaged by the parents it's not good comparrison because the ear peircings can grow back, completely sealed. the foreskin can't grow back, the nerve endings are permanently hacked away. It's true what they're saying, the penis is never the same after.

 

[exchemist]

I used to be an atheist all my life, born of Christian parentage. I knew absolutely nothing about circumcision as a religious rite. Midlife I had an epiphany/Christian awakening where I believe God spoke to me and continued to speak to me. To cut a long story short when I was out walking on a hill, shortly after this awakening, He said “you can keep your foreskin”. I thought fair enough, lol.
I then started to read and know the Bible for the first time and learned about these rites. The Jerusalem council says you don’t need to be circumcised as a Christian.

God spoke to you and said: "My son, you can keep your foreskin."? I see. Bet that came as a relief.

I knew a bloke at school who had to get circumcised in his teens for medical reasons. He had a horrible habit of waxing eloquent on the topic, with demonstrations, whenever sausages were on the menu for lunch........

 

[VoidCat]

As long as they are not upgaged by the parents it's not good comparrison because the ear peircings can grow back, completely sealed. the foreskin can't grow back, the nerve endings are permanently hacked away. It's true what they're saying, the penis is never the same after.

Ah just thought I'd ask.

 

[Father Heathen]

Under these conditions:

• A small tattoo
• in a location that is only noticeable when fully naked
• makes hygene more convenient
• is preferred by many romantically
• is not an aversion romatically to many
• exclusion of the tattoo prohibits from inclusion to a religious or tribal group

What if they don't want the tattoo later in life? Why not let them make the decision for themselves once they're old and mature enough, what with it being their body.

Is this what you were told by them, or is this your interpretation / guess?

It's what I was told.

 

[Father Heathen]

I have read that, for some odd reason, this has been a quite normal cultural practice in the USA, even among people that are not Jewish or Muslim. Is this true? If so, why? Are all the doctors Jewish or something?

In the UK it is rare, outside those two religious groups: United Kingdom: Circumcision Incidence

Good question. It's just something that is/was done because it was expected, completely arbitrary and cultural. My conservative christian inlaws were bothered by the fact we elected to not have our son circumcised.
Fortunately I believe that the practice is falling out of favor. there's no rational justification to vivisect a baby's penis.

 

[dybmh]

What if they don't want the tattoo later in life? Why not let them make the decision for themselves once they're old and mature enough, what with it being their body.

Hypothetically, with a tattoo, you're right. Circumcision is unique in that the healing is much better, the pain and suffering is much less, and the results are over-all much better if done as an infant. The list I gave has far more pros than cons.

It's what I was told.

Well, I think that is a terrible reason.

 

[Apostle John]

God spoke to you and said: "My son, you can keep your foreskin."? I see. Bet that came as a relief.

He didn’t say “my son” and I didn’t laugh out loud at the time. I was ignorant so I thought huh?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If I think that the child will be happy I made the choice for them at that time, it's perfectly ethical. Then when the child is an adult they can correct me if I was wrong. Send me jail, incur divine wrath, whatever... I did what I felt my child would have wanted would have requested, would have begged me to do.

Thinking isn't good enough.

I keep asking, why not wait for the hormones till the child can consent?

That's what they do. A parent just cannot say do it and have the child started on hormones. It definitely requires the child's input.

Can you show me?

You have to be show to be shown that a provider just will not do a gender change on an infant because the parent wants it?
Sounds like this myth in circulation years ago about a man hating lesbian who gave birth to a son and wanted him changed.

Can you show me?

Vaginoplasty / Vulvoplasty

Gender affirmation surgery for a transfeminine person is sometimes called bottom surgery. Learn about three surgical options and which one is best for you

healthcare.utah.edu

Criteria for Vaginoplasty Vulvoplasty in Transfeminine Patients​

1. Persistent, well documented gender dysphoria;
2. Capacity to make a fully informed decision and to consent for treatment;
3. be the age of majority in a given country;
4. If significant medical or mental health concerns are present, they must be well controlled;
5. 12 continuous months of hormone therapy as appropriate to the patient’s gender goals (unless the patient has a medical contraindication or is otherwise unable or unwilling to take hormones);
6. 12 continuous months of living in a gender role that is congruent with their gender identity.

Transgender Surgeries & Gender Affirmation | Mount Sinai - New York

Learn more about the full range of transgender surgeries performed by the expert surgeons at the Center for Transgender Medicine and Surgery.

www.mountsinai.org

We follow the guidelines from the World Professional Association of Transgender Health (WPATH) and the Endocrine Society. Our pre-surgery process is meant to provide all necessary pre-procedure care, and to satisfy your insurance company’s requirements. Typical standards require letters of recommendations from a health care provider. Generally, you need one letter for facial surgery, one for chest surgery, and two for genital surgery. Letters should come from a psychologist or psychiatrist working in the field of transgender health care. Our mental health professionals within our center can work with you and write your letters.

The WPATH require the same time as Utah site.

And does this mean providers who do not follow the guidlelines as you described are unethical?

That's how it typically works in healthcare.

Can you show me the psychological risk of circumcision?

Circumcision’s Psychological Damage

The CDC’s new recommendations for genital cutting of boys of all ages ignored the research on psychological harm. We review the evidence.

www.psychologytoday.com

Pain from Circumcision in Infancy Alters the Brain

Research has demonstrated the hormone cortisol, which is associated with stress and pain, spikes during circumcision (Talbert et al., 1976; Gunnar et al., 1981). Although some believe that babies “won’t remember” the pain, we now know that the body “remembers” as evidenced by studies which demonstrate that circumcised infants are more sensitive to pain later in life (Taddio et al., 1997). Research carried out using neonatal animals as a proxy to study the effects of pain on infants’ psychological development have found distinct behavioral patterns characterized by increased anxiety, altered pain sensitivity, hyperactivity, and attention problems (Anand & Scalzo, 2000). In another similar study, it was found that painful procedures in the neonatal period were associated with site-specific changes in the brain that have been found to be associated with mood disorders (Victoria et al., 2013).


3. Infant Circumcision has Psychological Consequences for Men

Over the last decade there has been a movement of men who were circumcised as infants and have articulated their anger and sadness over having their genitals modified without their consent. Goldman (1999) notes that shame and denial is one major factor that limits the number of men who publicly express this belief. Studies of men who were circumcised in infancy have found that some men experienced symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder, depression, anger, and intimacy problems that were directly associated with feelings about their circumcision (Boyle, 2002; Goldman, 1999; Hammond, 1999).

View of Social and psychological effects of circumcision: A narrative review

janh.candle.or.id

There is strong evidence that circumcision is overwhelmingly painful and traumatic. Behavioral changes were observed in circumcised babies sixmonths after circumcision. The physical and sexual loss from circumcision is increasingly recognized, and some men have a strong sense of dissatisfaction with circumcision. The potential negative impact of ircumcision on the mother-child relationship is evident in the distressing reactions of some mothers and the behavioral changes of infants. The disrupted mother-infant bond has far-reaching developmental effects and may be one of the most damagingeffects of circumcision. The long-term psychological effects associated with circumcision can be challengingto detect because the consequences of early trauma are rare and,under exceptional circumstances,noticeable to the survivor. However, a lack of awareness does not mean that there is no influence on thinking, emotion, attitude, behavior, and functioning, which are often closely linked. In this way, early trauma can change an entire life, whether the trauma is consciously remembered or not.

And that's why it is OK to skip the consent. We've gone around in circles, but this is the root of the issue.

It is not ok to skip consent, and the going in circles has been your trying to extensively downplay the role of medical guidance and consent involved in a gender transition.

But still the child cannot consent to infertility, to permanent changes in the sound of their voice. They simply cannot appreciate the long term consequences until they are... I'm thinking 16.

Why not take some time to actually learn about these things rather than speeding towards a cliff with your assumptions?

That's the age they can drive a car and ptentially kill someone. That's an age where they can maybe begin to comprehend the long term consequences of their actions.

Actually it's widely been bumped up to 18 these days, with heavy restrictions for a period of time. But we don't really train or teach people how to drive that much, we don't have a more experienced drivers providing guidance as we learn, and it's nostly figuring it out on our own.
Again, just not comparable.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

the pain and suffering is much less,

Tattoos generally don't really hurt, and if they scar it's likely because the tattoo artist wasn't trained and didn't know theres more to it than poking someone with a needle and drop of ink. Otherwise they don't generally scar and heal up just fine.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

2. It is better for hygiene in an environment where daily showering or bathing isn't possible - like in ancient times in a desert/arid land.

"Because we can't keep people's bodies properly clean, we should do cosmetic surgery on newborns and leave them with a wound that needs managing"?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

As long as they are not upgaged by the parents it's not good comparrison because the ear peircings can grow back, completely sealed. the foreskin can't grow back, the nerve endings are permanently hacked away. It's true what they're saying, the penis is never the same after.

That too scars and I know some transmen who really hate having that scar there because it means their ears were pierced, and all of them without consent.

 

[VoidCat]

That too scars and I know some transmen who really hate having that scar there because it means their ears were pierced, and all of them without consent.

If the reasons I think that my folk pierced my ears are correct and I don't know if the reasons are then my case might be different then these transmen. As mine may have been due to being native and historically dont know if this is the case now both boys and girls would have ears pierced. Also I've always assumed my ears were pierced as an infant but I really dont know. It's possible they were pierced when i was 5. But I don't know tho as I haven't asked my parents. It's just my ears have been pierced my whole life.

This thread has now given me pause and i have questions for my mom now.

But thats off topic. I brought up the comparision because it's often done as a cultural thing in many native tribes like how circumcision is regarding Jews. I was wondering if it was similar.


Edit: nevermind about the possibility that my mom might've had them pierced cuz of us being Lakota Sioux. I just asked the reasoning and when it was done. My mom did it cuz it's pretty and had it done when we were infants because infants are less likely to pull them out.