Genital mutilation or religious right?

[Kathryn]

Is everyone in agreement that male circumcision and female genital mutilation are not very similar?

 

[Revoltingest]

Is everyone in agreement that male circumcision and female genital mutilation are not very similar?

Different, but with similarity.
We still see surgical modification for a normal condition for primarily cultural reasons.

 

[Father Heathen]

How can a procedure that gives no net medical benefit be "done for legitimate and beneficial medical reasons"?

How can a procedure that's done for legitimate and beneficial medical reasons "give no net medical benefit"?

And exactly what "legitimate and beneficial medical reasons" are you privy to that the Canadian Pediatric Society is not?

Lower rates of syphilis, chancroid and possibly genital herpes.
Reduces the risk of invasive penile cancer.
Reduced Risk of Urinary track infections.
Less sexual dysfunction and more varied sexual practices.
Reduces the risk of HIV infection in heterosexual men.
More hygienic and aesthetically pleasing.

Not always, and even when anaesthesia is used during the circumcision itself, there's still pain during recovery.

It should only be performed by medical professionals in the proper environment, obviously. A lot of medical procedures have pain during recovery. Should we avoid medical treatments just to avoid potential pain, no matter how minute?

Again, not always. Circumcision creates risks of infection, complications, and problems later in life. These are risks, not certainties, and only happen in a minority of cases, but they do happen with high enough frequency that they can't be reasonably ignored.

As with any other medical procedure?

- does the fact that you have no memory of the event necessarily imply that you experienced no trauma?

Even though I don't remember it either, I probably experienced trauma during my first visit to a dentist. I've had a myringotomy done when I was a toddler, that was probably traumatising as well. Another time when I was around the age of three I accidently tipped my tricycle over and scraped my knee.

- if you were emotionally scarred, how would you know? What other frame of reference do you have to judge things but your own?

How do you know you're not being emotionally scarred by participating in this thread?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Is everyone in agreement that male circumcision and female genital mutilation are not very similar?

No argument here.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

As with any other medical procedure?

Any other medical procedure wouldn't be recommended unless the expected benefit was enough to outweigh those risks.

 

[Revoltingest]

From the penguin's linked article....

The overall evidence of the benefits and harms of circumcision is so evenly balanced that it does not support recommending circumcision as a routine procedure for newborns. There is therefore no indication that the position taken by the CPS in 1982 should be changed.

 

[dawny0826]

From the penguin's linked article....

Yet, the pros and cons are evenly balanced, even per the linked article. Though not recommended as a routine procedure, it's still provided as an option. And therefore, parents should be given the option and provided the opportunity to weigh the pros and cons of such a procedure.

After giving birth via c-section, a woman is usually provided an option as to whether or not she wants to try for a vaginal delivery or opt for surgery. For an uncomplicated pregnancy with no medical reason for surgery, it's never RECOMMENDED that she have surgery, but she's still provided that option. She must weigh the pros and cons of such surgery for herself and her unborn.

When presented options, we do what we feel are in the best interest of ourselves and our children. Sometimes, it boils down to personal choice and conviction.

 

[Kathryn]

Since we continue to discuss male circumcision, I'll just chime in and make it clear that I chose NOT to have my two boys circumcised. They have had ZERO issues with this, and taking care of them when they were babies and toddlers was not difficult or gross in the least.

They have told me that among their friends, it's about 50/50 and no one really gives a damn one way or the other.

 

[Revoltingest]

Yet, the pros and cons are evenly balanced, even per the linked article. Though not recommended as a routine procedure, it's still provided as an option. And therefore, parents should be given the option and provided the opportunity to weigh the pros and cons of such a procedure.

They already have that option.
But should the baby have an option?

 

[Father Heathen]

It would be interesting to see a poll of the males here on their position on circumcision, and if they themselves are circumcised.

I'll make it if someone doesn't beat me to it.

 

[Kathryn]

They already have that option.
But should the baby have an option?

OK now wait a minute. Circumcision for a newborn is not as complicated as it is for an older child or an adult. If it's to be done, it's best done at that early age.

 

[Kathryn]

I'll make it if someone doesn't beat me to it.

Is it supposed to prove something? Because you know it won't - one way or the other.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yet, the pros and cons are evenly balanced, even per the linked article. Though not recommended as a routine procedure, it's still provided as an option. And therefore, parents should be given the option and provided the opportunity to weigh the pros and cons of such a procedure.

I'm supportive of the Canadian approach: it's not illegal, but routine infant circumcision is recommended against by the medical association, it's not covered by government health insurance (which doesn't mean you can't get it done, just that if you do, you have to pay for it yourself, just like any cosmetic procedure), and it's apparently getting rather difficult to find a doctor who's willing to do it.

 

[Revoltingest]

OK now wait a minute. Circumcision for a newborn is not as complicated as it is for an older child or an adult. If it's to be done, it's best done at that early age.

True, that is the best time to perform a needless surgical procedure.
But if the child later decides to avoid circumcision, then there's no problem....except for the parents who really wanted it.

 

[dawny0826]

They already have that option.
But should the baby have an option?

Should the baby have the option to live when people consider later term abortions? Some people don't think so.

For that matter, should the baby be immunized? Should the baby be given a life-saving surgery - god forbid they regret the scar later on in life.

 

[Father Heathen]

Is it supposed to prove something? Because you know it won't - one way or the other.

No, it's just to satisfy a curiousity. And here it is.

 

[Revoltingest]

Should the baby have the option to live when people consider later term abortions? Some people don't think so.

Of course, an aborted fetus wouldn't have an opinion later.

For that matter, should the baby be immunized? Should the baby be given a life-saving surgery - god forbid they regret the scar later on in life.

The benefits of immunization are demonstrably greater than circumcision.
Life saving surgery to correct a malady is quite different from surgery for primarily cosmetic, religious, aesthetic & cultural purposes.

 

[dawny0826]

I'm supportive of the Canadian approach: it's not illegal, but routine infant circumcision is recommended against by the medical association, it's not covered by government health insurance (which doesn't mean you can't get it done, just that if you do, you have to pay for it yourself, just like any cosmetic procedure), and it's apparently getting rather difficult to find a doctor who's willing to do it.

A pediatrician will advise against the procedure if it's not in the best interest of the infant.

 

[Songbird]

Lower rates of syphilis, chancroid and possibly genital herpes.
Reduces the risk of invasive penile cancer.
Reduced Risk of Urinary track infections.
Less sexual dysfunction and more varied sexual practices.
Reduces the risk of HIV infection in heterosexual men.
More hygienic and aesthetically pleasing.

Not to jump aboard here, but much of what I've read says most of these benefits are only in developing countries where access to water and proper hygiene is an issue. Many of the studies were also quite questionable and conducted with apparent biases in making sure people circumcised baby boys. Spreading the word that it lowers the risk of a host of diseases didn't hurt that message, not to mention it was also the historically popular recommended cure for masturbation. Not to say there aren't benefits, but I think more studies need to be done. Relative to other procedures, it's a quick and simple deal, but IMO still unnecessary.

How do you know you're not being emotionally scarred by participating in this thread?

That IS a risk.

 

[dawny0826]

Of course, an aborted fetus wouldn't have an opinion later.

The benefits of immunization are demonstrably greater than circumcision.
Life saving surgery to correct a malady is quite different from surgery for primarily cosmetic, religious, aesthetic & cultural purposes.

Sorry, but I find your argument to be a bit asinine. As a parent, we make decisions for our young. And even if such a decision was made for aesthetic and religious purposes, when the risks balance the benefits, it's a parents right and choice to make.

We defend the right for people to choose far more heinous actions.