Male Circumcision good or bad up to the individual?

[Curious George]

I've already posted my opinion about medically necessary procedures a few pages back. Take the time to read it before you ask hard-hitting questions that hit air.

But to answer your question: yes, it is still a mutilation.

An amputation of a gangrenous leg is a mutilation as well. A hideous if unavoidable one.

I just find such disrespectful. Moreover, it is an incorrect usage of the word. I just wondered if insensitivity paralleled ignorance.

 

[DallasApple]

I think that might be a good benchmark for considering whether something warrants the accusation of child abuse or mutilation.

Does it cause the person pain? Does it effect the normal functioning of the body part? Does the person feel as if something is wrong with their body?

Things like female genital mutilation, foot binding, lip plates, and neck rings cause permanent damage to the body which directly effects its ability to function normally. These people are permanently crippled or lead a life in pain or are unable to do normal physical activity due to these bodily alterations.

Circumcision just doesn't compare. Circumcised men go about their business without issue. A case can even be made that there are benefits to the alteration.

In a perfect world would we not do any of these things? Perhaps. But I don't think that circumcision is that great of an evil in the bigger picture.

What about the men who go back and try to have foreskin put back on? Even though it will never be the same?(the same as if there foreskin had never been removed)? Are they just looking for something to complain about ?(not saying they aren't because those types exist..can't be happy even when they are)

 

[vtunie]

Moreover, it is an incorrect usage of the word.

You are flatly wrong when you say the usage is incorrect.

Mutilate:
(1)to deprive of a limb, essential part, etc; maim; dismember
(2) to mar, expurgate, or damage (a text, book, etc)

mutilation - WordReference.com Dictionary of English

 

[Curious George]

Nope, a foreskin is not a limb or an essential part. A circumcised child is not the same as a maimed child or a dismembered child. A child is not a book or writing and neither is a penis.

I get it. You are trying to vilify circumcision to create this horrible image of some heinous procedure which no sane person would condone. But, you cannot change the fact that the physical problems do not outweigh the medical benefits. So we have a procedure which parents can choose for aesthetic reasons, ease of cleaning, and, for some, religious motivation. The question is whether a parent ought to make such a decision given the relative permanence of the clinical procedure.

So let the romanticized version go: Besides, everyone knows gross exaggerations are evil and glorify the meat while suppressing the spirit.

 

[vtunie]

Since there's no clear consensus among the world's medical establishments on whether or not the foreskin is "essential", I will treat it as essential indeed.

And you are very wrong. I am not vilifying circumcision. I am vilifying circumcisers.

 

[Curious George]

Since there's no clear consensus among the world's medical establishments on whether or not the foreskin is "essential", I will treat it as essential indeed.

And you are very wrong. I am not vilifying circumcision. I am vilifying circumcisers.

Even better.

 

[Curious George]

What about the men who go back and try to have foreskin put back on? Even though it will never be the same?(the same as if there foreskin had never been removed)? Are they just looking for something to complain about ?(not saying they aren't because those types exist..can't be happy even when they are)

I get that you would not make the decision to cut over again, and I understand your feelings of betrayal. But given that the benefit risk analysis is done before the surgery and the majority of medical risk that weighs into the "problematic to circumcise" occurs during or immediately after the procedure, you might have made the best decision. Again, I am by no means advocating circumcision, but you will never know what complications could have arose if you had acted differently. You did take a risk, but if your boys are happy and healthy you should be happy with the decision you made. If the worst part of their life is that they are missing a foreskin, then that is a pretty good life.

Have you ever asked your boys if they would have preferred you didn't have them circumcised?

 

[DallasApple]

or an essential part.

Our ear lobes aren't "essential" but I don't then think that means they should be chopped off our infants because we decided it looks better.

 

[DallasApple]

Have you ever asked your boys if they would have preferred you didn't have them circumcised?

How would they know ?They have never had the benefit of having foreskin.What would they have to compare it to?

 

[Curious George]

How would they know ?They have never had the benefit of having foreskin.What would they have to compare it to?

What exactly is the benefit?

 

[Curious George]

Our ear lobes aren't "essential" but I don't then think that means they should be chopped off our infants because we decided it looks better.

But if someone did have an earlobe missing, I would not think of them as a mutilated person.

 

[Curious George]

How would they know ?They have never had the benefit of having foreskin.What would they have to compare it to?

I would assume you would value their opinions on the subject, regardless of whether they remember what it felt like to be intact.

 

[Aquitaine]

Your zero-sum is not good enough. Zero-sum acknowledges that any problems do not outweigh the benefits.

Whilst it also acknowledges that any benefits do not outweigh the problems. Ergo it is zero-sum.

So the question should be "why do it?" rather than "why not?".

 

[DallasApple]

What exactly is the benefit?

That's the point.You cant ask a person if they regret being circumsized if they were circumsized at one day old if they regret it..they have nothing to compare it too.Whatever benefits to being in tact have never been experienced...lost forever.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I keep hearing this word mutilation. When you see a circumcised penis, do you think of it as mutilated?

Yes. A part of it has been cut off.

 

[Aquitaine]

That's the point.You cant ask a person if they regret being circumsized if they were circumsized at one day old if they regret it..they have nothing to compare it too.Whatever benefits to being in tact have never been experienced...lost forever.

As Penumbra said earlier in this thread, it would be interesting to listen to those who decided to get the snip as an adult, so they themselves have a proper sense of comparison.

 

[DallasApple]

As Penumbra said earlier in this thread, it would be interesting to listen to those who decided to get the snip as an adult, so they themselves have a proper sense of comparison.

I agree..it makes no sense to ask a circumsized at birth individual if they "regret it".

 

[Aquitaine]

Yes. A part of it has been cut off.

I wonder if he'd share the same opinion if it was a girl's clitoral hood that had been cut off.

Everyone goes ape (rightfully so) over meddling with little girls' bits, yet so many people are lenient when it's the little boys' bits getting messed with. I don't get it.

You either support unnecessary alteration of all infant genitalia, or you don't.

 

[DallasApple]

I would assume you would value their opinions on the subject, regardless of whether they remember what it felt like to be intact.

The entire point in asking would be in CONTRAST to experiencing life (including sex) as in tact.

 

[DallasApple]

I wonder if he'd share the same opinion if it was a girl's clitoral hood that had been cut off.

Everyone goes ape (rightfully so) over meddling with little girls' bits, yet so many people are lenient when it's the little boys' bits getting messed with. I don't get it.

You either support unnecessary alteration of all infant genitalia, or you don't.

That was weazled around and ignored.I think someone said "there is a difference in cutting "the clitoris off" and the foreskin of a penis.When i clarified not all just a "piece" there was no response..Not only that as I mentioned what if we found some benefits to not having as "much' labia ?Should we start trimming that off too?And just because we like the way it looks better ??????????????????