Do you think that circumcision should be prohibited by law and allowed only for....?

[Gay Paul]

Do you think that circumcision should be prohibited by law and allowed only for medical or religious reasons?

Apparently, in the United States, South Korea, the Philippines and Australia, most circumcision is taking place for aesthetic, not medical reasons.

I wonder where does this desire to mutilate own children come from? I myself was circumcised, but only partially, the surgeon removed only a very small fragment of the pathologically overgrown foreskin, because I had phimosis, and the surgery was carried out when I was about 4 or 5 years old, today probably steroid ointments would be used, but I still have the entire foreskin.

In my opinion, men's foreskin should have the same legal protection as girls' and women's pussies.

Maybe the best and very simple solution would be the one that comrade Stalin once used in former USSR , and it was a very simple solution, shot in the back of the head from the NKVD, for anyone who did male or female circumcision, but that was OVERKILL :lol::D

[jamie_n5]

Yes I seriously think circumcision should be outlawed unless for serious medical reasons or religious reasons. Also I would go along with it if the person when old enough to make the decision decides to be circumcised. It should not be up to the parents at birth to do.

[Gay Paul]

Yes I seriously think circumcision should be outlawed unless for serious medical reasons or religious reasons. Also I would go along with it if the person when old enough to make the decision decides to be circumcised. It should not be up to the parents at birth to do.

That exactly my point! why remove healthy tissue if not anything wrong with it?
Even trough as little kid I go to surgery, but surgeon removed only a very tiny part of the foreskin, so I could count as uncircumcised, or uncut as someone saying, I'm uncut in 90 % :D

[SouthernDude]

No, I do not believe it should be outlawed

[Gay Paul]

No, I do not believe it should be outlawed

Why not?

[Gay Paul]

Yes I seriously think circumcision should be outlawed unless for serious medical reasons or religious reasons. Also I would go along with it if the person when old enough to make the decision decides to be circumcised. It should not be up to the parents at birth to do.

I have a question for you did you ware circumcised or not, because it seems that is quite popular in your country.

[brightlight]

I was circumcised as a baby and when I figured out what foreskin was I glad to have been. I also would dislike having smegma and I prefer it to be out of the skin, looks more natural to me in my opinion, foreskin is kind of like having a trophy but having your trophy blocked so nobody can see it. Not to disrespect anyone with foreskin but I have seen some pictures in my life of foreskin that made me sick. I think you should have the free option to get it removed when you're older and it could be donated to help burn victims if you want.

[SouthernDude]

Why not?

Well, there are some people that may want to get circumcised as a child/teen for personal reasons, there are religious reasons as to circumcision, and, in some cases, medical reasons, although you did mention the latter two. I don't see anything morally wrong with circumcision. It also does have some benefits.

[Gay Paul]

Well, there are some people that may want to get circumcised as a child/teen for personal reasons, there are religious reasons as to circumcision, and, in some cases, medical reasons, although you did mention the latter two. I don't see anything morally wrong with circumcision. It also does have some benefits.

For religious or medical only yes for aesthetic hell no, kids should not be treated as parents property, the boy shouldn't and get circumcised solely because his parents have fad to do so! And should be treated as a human being not like Rex or Lassie, that owner, by cutting their tails and ears!

And what kind of benefits you're referring too?

[SouthernDude]

For religious or medical only yes for aesthetic hell no, kids should not be treated as parents property, the boy shouldn't and get circumcised solely because his parents have fad to do so! And should be treated as a human being not like Rex or Lassie, that owner, by cutting their tails and ears!

And what kind of benefits you're referring too?

Benefits referring to lesser risk of STIs and UTIs

[Gay Paul]

Benefits referring to lesser risk of STIs and UTIs

I think minimal benefits and potential loss of pleasure sensation override any benefits :P

[heresjohnny]

Phimosis cannot be diagnosed at age "four or five." Many times, the foreskin doesn't naturally retract until puberty. If a young child can pee without pain or discomfort, there is nothing else to worry about.

STDs and UTIs can be prevented via safe sex (including condoms) and washing.

Amputating a perfectly healthy and sensitive part of a body unless if matter of life or death is a ridiculous idea.

[jamie_n5]

I have a question for you did you ware circumcised or not, because it seems that is quite popular in your country.

I am not circumcised and in my part of the USA I would say it's about 50/50 percent of boys are circumcised and not.

[Diable rouge]

I believe it should be only allowed for medical reasons. Not for religious reasons.

It is not different from female genital mutilation, except since male genital mutilation is also done in Western countries, it is "normal", but female genital mutilation is done in developing countries in Africa and Asia, so it is something the West has to fight against.

[Petyr]

No, I do not believe it should be outlawed

Same

[Will..]

I was circumcised as a baby and when I figured out what foreskin was I glad to have been. I also would dislike having smegma and I prefer it to be out of the skin, looks more natural to me in my opinion, foreskin is kind of like having a trophy but having your trophy blocked so nobody can see it. Not to disrespect anyone with foreskin but I have seen some pictures in my life of foreskin that made me sick. I think you should have the free option to get it removed when you're older and it could be donated to help burn victims if you want.

That is disrespectful and rude. Watch the things you say on here. Your opinion isn't always the right one.

[brightlight]

That is disrespectful and rude. Watch the things you say on here. Your opinion isn't always the right one.

It's my answer to the question. I never said anything rude just gave my opinion, everyone is going to have a opinion to this question that's not right or wrong to their opinion. If you're offended because someone has an opinion different than yours you should learn how to respect others. Nobody on this planet is going to have the same opinion as yours all the time or see things the same way you do all the time. I also said at the end to help burned victims that's not rude or a joke, if you thought of it like that. They have used skin donated medically to help people by across the world surgically. The question is pretty specific and I gave my answer just like everyone else who answered it. I even explained that it should be a decision that everyone else can decide when they're older. Medically it should be allowed in my opinion, to answer the question that is stated. Please be respectful to everyone else's answers and see that this website forum is based on differences to answers and opinions with tons of characteristics to others. It seems like a contradicting statement how you responded to me, in the sense as the question is stated and how the website is and has always has been with advice opinions and answers. I never said my opinion was right or wrong which is misleading. Respectfully brightlight! Try not to be close minded.

[benbeny]

I think it should be outlawed for minors (except for medical reasons, which we all agree that it should be okay).
After they're old enough, maybe at 16, they're free to choose whatever they want with their body.

[JamesCam]

Unless for medical need it should be illegal until a person is old enough to decide what they want to do with their own body.
No one has the right to make that decision for someone else.

[sidric8]

There’s a case to be made that being circumcised is better. So then *if* you believe it’s better, then infancy is the best time to do it. The baby isn’t walking anyways and won’t remember, plus it heals faster and better and doesn’t need stitches like it does an an older guy (babies are basically crazy growing/healing machines), and some of the benefits like less infection start immediately. Also, he learns to be at home with that kind of penis from the beginning.

If you think being cut is worse, then it’s a bit of a shame, but I definitely disagree that it’s a LOT worse. Parents make many many choices for their kids that are far more impactful than circumcision. And most guys who are cut actually do like it. It’s certainly at least OK—if I’m going to 20/20-hindsight my parents’ “mistakes”, then religion, discipline, what books they gave me, all sorts of things were more important than whether I had a foreskin or not.

Although I admit a little bias—i can see the arguments on both sides, but I’m personally glad I didn’t have a foreskin. I never knew a single other boy who had one either, and having the only one would have been weird. Plus I do rather like the look and feel and convenience this way.

[Will..]

It's my answer to the question. I never said anything rude just gave my opinion, everyone is going to have a opinion to this question that's not right or wrong to their opinion. If you're offended because someone has an opinion different than yours you should learn how to respect others. Nobody on this planet is going to have the same opinion as yours all the time or see things the same way you do all the time. I also said at the end to help burned victims that's not rude or a joke, if you thought of it like that. They have used skin donated medically to help people by across the world surgically. The question is pretty specific and I gave my answer just like everyone else who answered it. I even explained that it should be a decision that everyone else can decide when they're older. Medically it should be allowed in my opinion, to answer the question that is stated. Please be respectful to everyone else's answers and see that this website forum is based on differences to answers and opinions with tons of characteristics to others. It seems like a contradicting statement how you responded to me, in the sense as the question is stated and how the website is and has always has been with advice opinions and answers. I never said my opinion was right or wrong which is misleading. Respectfully brightlight! Try not to be close minded.

You also said this:
foreskin is kind of like having a trophy but having your trophy blocked so nobody can see it. Not to disrespect anyone with foreskin but I have seen some pictures in my life of foreskin that made me sick.

Not to disrespect you, but that was disrespectful.

For your information, the thing about burn victims was not taken as a joke. I will repsect Brightlight if Brightlight respects me. I'm not sure if you understand what a contradicting statement is, but what I said was not.

I completely agree with what you said about respect, that's just the thing I'm trying to get you to do. Open-mindedness is a good thing, but not good when you express your opinions in a rude way.

[HFrint]

Personally I think if the boy wants to be circumcised then ok.,
I was as a bs y but I have no complaints. I know a guy who got it done when he was in fifth grade., he’s happy about it.

[HFrint]

Personally I think if the boy wants to be circumcised then ok.,
I was as a bs y but I have no complaints. I know a guy who got it done when he was in fifth grade., he’s happy about it. But don’t prohibit it by law

[brightlight]

You also said this:
foreskin is kind of like having a trophy but having your trophy blocked so nobody can see it. Not to disrespect anyone with foreskin but I have seen some pictures in my life of foreskin that made me sick.

Not to disrespect you, but that was disrespectful.

For your information, the thing about burn victims was not taken as a joke. I will repsect Brightlight if Brightlight respects me. I'm not sure if you understand what a contradicting statement is, but what I said was not.

I completely agree with what you said about respect, that's just the thing I'm trying to get you to do. Open-mindedness is a good thing, but not good when you express your opinions in a rude way.

Once again this website is based on a lot of opinions and my opinion isn't right or wrong. It's how I see my own opinion such as another example would be a banana has skin over it and you can't see the banana until you peel the skin off. That's a normal statement of my opinion being used, not rude at all. When I said not to disrespectful anyone with foreskin I meant it, I'm very respectful to everyone. You are able to have your own opinion as well opposite of my own, how you said that just because I have an opinion doesn't mean it's right! I had never expressed my opinion was right especially when this whole website is based on a lot of opinions. So that's why I found your comment misleading since it's just like everyone other opinionated answer. It's also not rude to get sick looking at pictures online, its what I can't control. I have seen answers to questions on here with personal opinions just like mine all the time and mine isn't any different. The contradicting statement is how you responded to my opinion, that just because I have a opinion doesn't mean it's right when that's the premise of this website with open minded people. Even know the bases of this website and purpose of this website is usually based on opinions, so you're labeling me out for having an opinion, which is the full purpose of the website. That's the contradicting part and I never included my opinion was right or wrong but you made it sound like I did which I didn't. Also here's the term for contradicting
[ˌkäntrəˈdikt]

VERB
contradicting (present participle)
deny the truth of (a statement) by asserting the opposite.
"the survey appears to contradict the industry's claims" · [more]
synonyms:
deny · refute · rebut · dispute · counter · say the opposite of · gainsay · controvert · confute · negative
assert the opposite of a statement made by (someone).
"he did not contradict her but just said nothing" · [more]
synonyms:
challenge · oppose · argue against · go against · be at variance with · gainsay · impugn
be in conflict with.
"that evaporation seems to contradict one of the most fundamental principles of physics"
synonyms:
conflict with · be at odds with · be at variance with · disagree with · be inconsistent with · clash with · run counter to give the lie to

[Will..]

Once again this website is based on a lot of opinions and my opinion isn't right or wrong. It's how I see my own opinion such as another example would be a banana has skin over it and you can't see the banana until you peel the skin off. That's a normal statement of my opinion being used, not rude at all. When I said not to disrespectful anyone with foreskin I meant it, I'm very respectful to everyone. You are able to have your own opinion as well opposite of my own, how you said that just because I have an opinion doesn't mean it's right! I had never expressed my opinion was right especially when this whole website is based on a lot of opinions. So that's why I found your comment misleading since it's just like everyone other opinionated answer. It's also not rude to get sick looking at pictures online, its what I can't control. I have seen answers to questions on here with personal opinions just like mine all the time and mine isn't any different. The contradicting statement is how you responded to my opinion, that just because I have a opinion doesn't mean it's right when that's the premise of this website with open minded people. Even know the bases of this website and purpose of this website is usually based on opinions, so you're labeling me out for having an opinion, which is the full purpose of the website. That's the contradicting part and I never included my opinion was right or wrong but you made it sound like I did which I didn't. Also here's the term for contradicting
[ˌkäntrəˈdikt]

VERB
contradicting (present participle)
deny the truth of (a statement) by asserting the opposite.
"the survey appears to contradict the industry's claims" · [more]
synonyms:
deny · refute · rebut · dispute · counter · say the opposite of · gainsay · controvert · confute · negative
assert the opposite of a statement made by (someone).
"he did not contradict her but just said nothing" · [more]
synonyms:
challenge · oppose · argue against · go against · be at variance with · gainsay · impugn
be in conflict with.
"that evaporation seems to contradict one of the most fundamental principles of physics"
synonyms:
conflict with · be at odds with · be at variance with · disagree with · be inconsistent with · clash with · run counter to give the lie to

Written by you:
I'm very respectful to everyone

Glad you think so, you seem to have an inflated opinion of yourself.
Also, great to see you can copy and paste off Google. There are many flaws in your banana example, the banana skin is part of the banana, if I held up an unpeeled banana to you and said: "Is this a banana?", would you say no?

I'm not an expert, but what you said about burn victims was slightly confusing. I am not sure if somebody else's foreskin would help a burn victim. Firstly, it's someone else's skin which I'm not sure if that would work and secondly, unless somebody had their foreskin burnt off then it's quite a different part of skin from anywhere else. It might work but I'm a bit sceptical about it.

I agree that everyone can have different opinions, it is not good when people express those different opinions in a way that could be hurtful. You might not think it was rude, and that's your opinion, but mine is that it is rude. I'm just wanting you to consider what you have written before you press submit. If you truly respected everyone else's opinion, then try this:
Respect the fact that my opinion is that what you said was rude, and try to be open-minded and try to improve.

By the way, Labelling has to L's not one. :)

[brightlight]

Written by you:
I'm very respectful to everyone

Glad you think so, you seem to have an inflated opinion of yourself.
Also, great to see you can copy and paste off Google. There are many flaws in your banana example, the banana skin is part of the banana, if I held up an unpeeled banana to you and said: "Is this a banana?", would you say no?

I'm not an expert, but what you said about burn victims was slightly confusing. I am not sure if somebody else's foreskin would help a burn victim. Firstly, it's someone else's skin which I'm not sure if that would work and secondly, unless somebody had their foreskin burnt off then it's quite a different part of skin from anywhere else. It might work but I'm a bit sceptical about it.

I agree that everyone can have different opinions, it is not good when people express those different opinions in a way that could be hurtful. You might not think it was rude, and that's your opinion, but mine is that it is rude. I'm just wanting you to consider what you have written before you press submit. If you truly respected everyone else's opinion, then try this:
Respect the fact that my opinion is that what you said was rude, and try to be open-minded and try to improve.

By the way, Labelling has to L's not one. :)

I did copy ad paste the term because you seemed to not understand the definitions and still don't? I wasn't scrutinizing anyone for not being circumcised or not. Everyone can be the person they want to be if it makes them happy. I just expressed my view and with my personal life I was circumcised but I am not bothered by it. I expressed my view very clear. I am guessing you might be younger and it is going to be hard for you to comprehend but hopefully someday you more ardent to be understanding. If you really think opinions are rude then maybe try finding a different website that's more tolerant to your level? Respectfully Brightlight!

[Will..]

I did copy ad paste the term because you seemed to not understand the definitions and still don't? I wasn't scrutinizing anyone for not being circumcised or not. Everyone can be the person they want to be if it makes them happy. I just expressed my view and with my personal life I was circumcised but I am not bothered by it. I expressed my view very clear. I am guessing you might be younger and it is going to be hard for you to comprehend but hopefully someday you more ardent to be understanding. If you really think opinions are rude then maybe try finding a different website that's more tolerant to your level? Respectfully Brightlight!

To my level? This website is about sharing views and doing it respectfully. That's what I'm on here doing and that's what I'm trying to get you to do. You always seem to cover up the things you say that aren't true or aren't respectful whenever they're brought up. How you said about me being 'younger' which I am not sure what you define that as but I am not unless you happen to not be a teen is a perfect example of the rudeness and lack of respect you were showing when I called you up on it. I don't think opinions are rude, I think the way you expressed yours was. From somebody that you 'guess might be younger' GROW UP and SHOW SOME RESPECT.

[brightlight]

To my level? This website is about sharing views and doing it respectfully. That's what I'm on here doing and that's what I'm trying to get you to do. You always seem to cover up the things you say that aren't true or aren't respectful whenever they're brought up. How you said about me being 'younger' which I am not sure what you define that as but I am not unless you happen to not be a teen is a perfect example of the rudeness and lack of respect you were showing when I called you up on it. I don't think opinions are rude, I think the way you expressed yours was. From somebody that you 'guess might be younger' GROW UP and SHOW SOME RESPECT.

I think you're trying to find something to use against me when I did nothing wrong besides express myself on here with an opinion you thought was rude but wasn't. You can disagree with people all you want to express yourself. I said you might be younger because you were not realizing the premise of my opinion and the website purpose you're able to express yourself however you'd like though. Statistically really young kid's have a harder time understanding. I don't know if you follow the ratio of those people that's why I said that. I don't have a problem with anyone on here.

[ska8er]

All of the above is way out of hand.
Parents have the option of their baby
being circumcised or not. If the boy
later on wants to b cut and wants to
go through with it then it is his option.
If u r cut or not cut u should b satisfied
with how u r. I think it would b crazy to
try to have it prohibited by law.

[Will..]

All of the above is way out of hand.
Parents have the option of their baby
being circumcised or not. If the boy
later on wants to b cut and wants to
go through with it then it is his option.
If u r cut or not cut u should b satisfied
with how u r. I think it would b crazy to
try to have it prohibited by law.

I agree. With how it is out of hand and that it shouldn't be prohibited by law.

[george05013]

I agree

[german_boy]

It is not different from female genital mutilation, except since male genital mutilation is also done in Western countries, it is "normal", but female genital mutilation is done in developing countries in Africa and Asia, so it is something the West has to fight against.


Sorry, that's absolute b**ls**t (sorry for my words, but it truely is). How can you compare removing the clitoris with circumcision? That would be as if they cut off your glans.

[Adamant]

Going to make a totally different point and hopefully not too controversial.
Since its so important to lots of peopel for religious reasons banning it might mean people take their kids to be done by people who are even less qualified or trained than now. A bit like abortions when they were illegal were so dangerous.
if your skin has got to go,( and mine is for health reason) make sure you don't lose anything else as well!

[Confused_panda]

Going to make a totally different point and hopefully not too controversial.
Since its so important to lots of peopel for religious reasons banning it might mean people take their kids to be done by people who are even less qualified or trained than now. A bit like abortions when they were illegal were so dangerous.
if your skin has got to go,( and mine is for health reason) make sure you don't lose anything else as well!

I agree - this should be an education thing, not a legal one

[Zika]

That is disrespectful and rude. Watch the things you say on here. Your opinion isn't always the right one.

Without getting into the issue itself, his post was neither disrespectful nor rude. Your comment "Your opinion isn't always the right one" demonstrates your lack of understanding of the difference between opinion and fact. There are no right opinions and unlike you, he was accepting of the idea that others may have a different opinion.
I don't know you and don't know what your angle is, but you're way out of line on this.

Written by you:

I'm not an expert, but what you said about burn victims was slightly confusing. I am not sure if somebody else's foreskin would help a burn victim.

His answer was sort of correct, albeit incomplete.
One "source of new skin comes from a source that's usually designated for the waste bin: the foreskin of a circumcised infant. A piece of foreskin the size of a postage stamp can produce approximately 4 acres of skin tissue in the laboratory. Artificial skin derived from foreskins is thought to be successful when donor skin is not because the newborns' cells don't rouse the host's immune system; if they did, mothers' bodies would reject fetuses. Foreskins are also sometimes used to create the structural framework for the dermis."

If you truly respected everyone else's opinion, then try this:
Respect the fact that my opinion is that what you said was rude, and try to be open-minded and try to improve.

Well, that's more than a bit self-righteous.

By the way, Labelling has to L's not one. :)

haha if you're going to criticize one's spelling, at least show you have the literacy to use the proper words. It's "two L's," not "to L's." I guess if the word processor doesn't underline it for you, you're lost.

Sorry, that's absolute b**ls**t (sorry for my words, but it truely is). How can you compare removing the clitoris with circumcision? That would be as if they cut off your glans.

Absolutely. I can understand those who disagree with circumcision, but this comment lacks common sense.

[Zika]

Going to make a totally different point and hopefully not too controversial.
Since its so important to lots of peopel for religious reasons banning it might mean people take their kids to be done by people who are even less qualified or trained than now. A bit like abortions when they were illegal were so dangerous.
if your skin has got to go,( and mine is for health reason) make sure you don't lose anything else as well!

Very valid point. A thumbs up if I could.

[vandilization]

It’s done not so much for cosmetic reasons but also to lower the chance of certain health issues worth it. It’s also cleaner and it really isn’t mutilation like some of you think it is.

[onyx]

if it ain't broke don't fix it

[Confused_panda]

It’s done not so much for cosmetic reasons but also to lower the chance of certain health issues worth it. It’s also cleaner and it really isn’t mutilation like some of you think it is.

Ok, so here is my personal opinion, which other people are fine to disagree with.

I was cut as a baby, which is pretty bloody rare in the UK, but it was done because it was causing actual medical issues. From what I've read from people on here though, the main reason a lot of people seem to get cut in certain places - especially north America - seems to be "because the rest of my family is cut and it's fine". The "health benefits" usually aren't mentioned at first.

Those health benefits studies though usually show a tiny change in how likely you are to get some things - I mean, my appendix could go pop at any time, but they aren't cutting them out of everyone when they are born because the risk of an issue is just so small. Cutting off the foreskin as soon as a boy is born, just for a, like, 1% less chance they might get an STI in later life seems mad - especially since people who still have theirs tell me they feel quite nice... :)

As for the cleaner thing, and I'm obviously no expert here, but I live in a country where pretty much the entire male population still have their penis intact and have easy access to clean running water and soap. As far as I know, they manage to keep themselves clean fairly easily, so...

I mean, I get why people get so defensive about it - I know I have been defensive when I've had people taking the piss out of me for having it done. Nobody wants to think that they are different or missing out on something that personal. But at the end of the day, I have had something removed as a baby and now I will never experience what it would have been like the other way. It's permanent. I can kind of live with that, because I know it was done for an actual reason. I know that I'd be more pissed off if I knew it was done because someone thought it'd "look better" and I wasn't given an option.

If you've been cut and love it and live in a place where you're the majority and it is normal at the moment, then happy days, that's all that matters - enjoy your penis. I'm just not sure I'd take the risk that in the distant future my kids are gonna feel the same or be in the same majority.

Right, I'm off to hide before the argument starts up again! :D

[JamesCam]

Ok, so here is my personal opinion, which other people are fine to disagree with.

I was cut as a baby, which is pretty bloody rare in the UK, but it was done because it was causing actual medical issues. From what I've read from people on here though, the main reason a lot of people seem to get cut in certain places - especially north America - seems to be "because the rest of my family is cut and it's fine". The "health benefits" usually aren't mentioned at first.

Those health benefits studies though usually show a tiny change in how likely you are to get some things - I mean, my appendix could go pop at any time, but they aren't cutting them out of everyone when they are born because the risk of an issue is just so small. Cutting off the foreskin as soon as a boy is born, just for a, like, 1% less chance they might get an STI in later life seems mad - especially since people who still have theirs tell me they feel quite nice... :)

As for the cleaner thing, and I'm obviously no expert here, but I live in a country where pretty much the entire male population still have their penis intact and have easy access to clean running water and soap. As far as I know, they manage to keep themselves clean fairly easily, so...

I mean, I get why people get so defensive about it - I know I have been defensive when I've had people taking the piss out of me for having it done. Nobody wants to think that they are different or missing out on something that personal. But at the end of the day, I have had something removed as a baby and now I will never experience what it would have been like the other way. It's permanent. I can kind of live with that, because I know it was done for an actual reason. I know that I'd be more pissed off if I knew it was done because someone thought it'd "look better" and I wasn't given an option.

If you've been cut and love it and live in a place where you're the majority and it is normal at the moment, then happy days, that's all that matters - enjoy your penis. I'm just not sure I'd take the risk that in the distant future my kids are gonna feel the same or be in the same majority.

Right, I'm off to hide before the argument starts up again! :D

Well said Dan , pretty much spot on :)

[Diable rouge]

Sorry, that's absolute b**ls**t (sorry for my words, but it truely is). How can you compare removing the clitoris with circumcision? That would be as if they cut off your glans.

So cutting body parts on young girls is not good, but it's not a problem if it's done on young boys? (except medical reasons)

If it were the contrary (ok to cut body parts on girls, but not on boys) the reaction of feminists would be terrible.

[Hermes]

I do believe that people should have autonomy over their own bodies and that cases where parents authorise an operation on one of their children should be restricted to cases where there is both clear medical need and also an urgency that means the decision cannot wait until the child is old enough to understand what is proposed and why. The sex of the child should not be a factor so it should be seen as no more acceptable to cut of a piece of a boys body than to do the same for a girl.

For most newborn boys there is no medical need and no urgency. Neonatal circumcision for effectively cosmetic reasons I believe is wrong.

I would rather people were persuaded by this argument so there was no need to legislate but if that doesn't happen then yes, it would be reasonable to legislate to prevent it.

I know there are plenty of people who are happy being circumcised and I am fine with that. There will also be some that see having it done before they could remember as an advantage but to me the issue is that at least those who specifically want to be circumcised could choose to have it done later in life whereas those done at birth who later conclude they would have liked to keep their foreskin cannot choose to have it undone.

[justa16yearoldaussie]

i feel like circumcision should be a voluntary procedure that only the recipient of said procedure can consent to, once their of the age of majority in their country

[jaydenmichael]

That is disrespectful and rude. Watch the things you say on here. Your opinion isn't always the right one.

hes not being disrespectful? hes just stating his opinion. its not a lie that he has seen some horrific pictures of uncut dicks in which the person did not take care to clean properly. i can say in my personal experience i can too. my ex was uncut and didnt clean properly and it was disgusting. its not disrespectful, its just a fact that SOME do not care to take proper hygienic care of themselves. i personally am very glad my parents got me circumsized bc 1) much easier to clean bc theres no extra skin/folds i have to clean 2) i personally just think it looks better on myself, and 3) to have to pay later on for that procedure would be a pain in the ass.

[Petyr]

hes not being disrespectful? hes just stating his opinion. its not a lie that he has seen some horrific pictures of uncut dicks in which the person did not take care to clean properly. i can say in my personal experience i can too. my ex was uncut and didnt clean properly and it was disgusting. its not disrespectful, its just a fact that SOME do not care to take proper hygienic care of themselves. i personally am very glad my parents got me circumsized bc 1) much easier to clean bc theres no extra skin/folds i have to clean 2) i personally just think it looks better on myself, and 3) to have to pay later on for that procedure would be a pain in the ass.

agreed

[arca]

It should be banned from being done at birth unless there is some medical reason. It's just another reason for hospitals to make more money off of us. There's no reason that in 2019 we should still be mutilating people's penises at birth. It's a ridiculous old practice and people are only convinced of keeping it because it's the norm. If someone grows up and wants to make that choice, so be it, but a baby or a child does NOT have the capacity to make that permanent decision.

[Jason2005]

It’s done not so much for cosmetic reasons but also to lower the chance of certain health issues worth it. It’s also cleaner and it really isn’t mutilation like some of you think it is.

I am offended by your statement. HAVE YOU GOT PROOF THAT THE FORESKIN IS DIRTY?

Stop making false statements.

Mine is only 13 years old and cleaner than YOURS, I BET.

all boys were born with a foreskin and it should be there decision to remove it at or before puberty.

[german_boy]

So cutting body parts on young girls is not good, but it's not a problem if it's done on young boys? (except medical reasons)

If it were the contrary (ok to cut body parts on girls, but not on boys) the reaction of feminists would be terrible.

I don't say it's good, there are reasons against circumcision, that's for sure. You can't compare as you are not cutting the same body part, technically, however. You could compare it if circumcision would mean removing the glans. If just the clitoral hood was cut, it wouldn't be that controversial (fyi: that's what's commonly practiced in Malaysia/Indonesia). FGM mainly refers to the horrific things happening to girls in Africa where they remove parts of the clitoris.

[medhalfie]

No, I don't think it should be outlawed. First of all, I would like to say I am glad to see so many young people have healthy discussion and debate on current issues. Sometimes, it is rare to find such debate. Some good points were made above - no, it should definitely NOT be compare to FGM, I feel the majority of cut guys would agree that they haven't been "mutilated". Also, it very MUCH reduces the risk of STI spread, and tbh I would rather be cut than have a lifelong disease. In fact, circumcision is a leading risk reducer for the spread of HIV, and, for the majority of people that will have unsafe sex at least once in their life, even if it is just to have children, I would say they would rather be cut than live with a illness that requires a daily cocktail of tablets like HIV. Finally, for the guy that said this should be treated as an education issue rather than legislational one: YES! THAT IS ABSOLUTELY THE ANSWER. I would also like to point out that a very powerful and predominant religion absolutely requires it (Jewish) and two others have largely positive views towards it (Christianity and Islam). Look, like it or not, our parents have and will always have a certain amount of autonomy over our lives - what we eat, where we grow up, where we go to school, how we spend our weekends (religious or not). They will decide whether we're vaccinated, whether we're breastfed or born via caesarian (links to possible developmental defects and allergies if not breastfed or live birthed) and even to some extent whether we get braces as a child. They can even decide whether to abort you. Like it or not, they have the final say over all medical decisions until a certain age. And they should - they're our parents after all. For the most of us, they love and care for us and only want what is best for us. So rather than cramming even more complicated and controversial legislation into the already overfilled lawbooks, we should instead work towards better educating parents about the positive and negative effects of circumcision and then let them make the decision. Proper education worked extremely well for increasing vaccination rates to a near acceptable level and decreasing smoking rates; all without the need for controversial legislation. I don't see why circumcision can't be the same

[JamesCam]

No, I don't think it should be outlawed. First of all, I would like to say I am glad to see so many young people have healthy discussion and debate on current issues. Sometimes, it is rare to find such debate. Some good points were made above - no, it should definitely NOT be compare to FGM, I feel the majority of cut guys would agree that they haven't been "mutilated". Also, it very MUCH reduces the risk of STI spread, and tbh I would rather be cut than have a lifelong disease. In fact, circumcision is a leading risk reducer for the spread of HIV, and, for the majority of people that will have unsafe sex at least once in their life, even if it is just to have children, I would say they would rather be cut than live with a illness that requires a daily cocktail of tablets like HIV. Finally, for the guy that said this should be treated as an education issue rather than legislational one: YES! THAT IS ABSOLUTELY THE ANSWER. I would also like to point out that a very powerful and predominant religion absolutely requires it (Jewish) and two others have largely positive views towards it (Christianity and Islam). Look, like it or not, our parents have and will always have a certain amount of autonomy over our lives - what we eat, where we grow up, where we go to school, how we spend our weekends (religious or not). They will decide whether we're vaccinated, whether we're breastfed or born via caesarian (links to possible developmental defects and allergies if not breastfed or live birthed) and even to some extent whether we get braces as a child. They can even decide whether to abort you. Like it or not, they have the final say over all medical decisions until a certain age. And they should - they're our parents after all. For the most of us, they love and care for us and only want what is best for us. So rather than cramming even more complicated and controversial legislation into the already overfilled lawbooks, we should instead work towards better educating parents about the positive and negative effects of circumcision and then let them make the decision. Proper education worked extremely well for increasing vaccination rates to a near acceptable level and decreasing smoking rates; all without the need for controversial legislation. I don't see why circumcision can't be the same

Last time I checked there were laws regarding smoking , in the UK it is prohibited in cars with children present and the age to purchase them is 18. Done to protect children. Then as adults people can choose if they wish to smoke.
There is a huge problem at the moment surrounding vaccinations and the miseducation surrounding them. Too many children no longer getting vaccinated and outbreaks of measles etc.
The same could also be said for the miseducation surrounding circumcision.
Some studies have shown that in sub-sharan Africa it MAY help to prevent the spread of HIV , How ever it it is only limited in effect. It has led to circumcised men in those areas having more unprotected sex thinking they will not get HIV as they are circumcised. In developed countries would you not question why the country with the highest HIV rate was also the country with the highest level of circumcised males ? Kinda makes me question that theory some what. In ritual circumcisions in Africa , the fact the same knife is used on multiple “victims” HIV has actually been acquired in the name of becoming a man.
I don’t believe in God so I don’t care for any god that would ask me to chop of a part of my child.
Parents I am sure make decisions based on the best knowledge they have, I personally would never cause my child even a second of pain or discomfort for something which in my country (and yours) is seen as unnecessary by the medical profession. Nor would I risk , even if that risk is small, anything going wrong.

[Hermes]

Last time I checked there were laws regarding smoking , in the UK it is prohibited in cars with children present and the age to purchase them is 18. Done to protect children. Then as adults people can choose if they wish to smoke.

Smoking is an interesting example. Government efforts to reduce smoking in the UK had, for a long time, concentrated on education and the rate of smoking had come down over a number of years. I am not sure if the rate of reduction had plateaued but at some point the government obviously decided that progress was not fast enough and started to legislate in various way to restrict where people are allowed to smoke which seem to be aimed at making it such an inconvenient habit that people who be eager to quit. But some people can be quite entrenched and rather than seeing this as helping them to be healthier have dug their heels in and continued despite the inconvenience. As far as I know, workplaces now have to be non-smoking as otherwise any non-smoker exposed to smoke could take his employer to a tribunal for industrial injury so now you see shop workers hanging out in the street outside other shops (not the ones they work in) dragging away.

[Cycler21]

I was circumcised as a baby and when I figured out what foreskin was I glad to have been. I also would dislike having smegma and I prefer it to be out of the skin, looks more natural to me in my opinion, foreskin is kind of like having a trophy but having your trophy blocked so nobody can see it. Not to disrespect anyone with foreskin but I have seen some pictures in my life of foreskin that made me sick. I think you should have the free option to get it removed when you're older and it could be donated to help burn victims if you want.

You only get smegma i you don't wash your body. A cut penis looks more natural to you because that's what your used to.

[Billy1212]

I believe it ahould be outlawed wxcept for medical reasons until the patient is 14 to 15 years old. There should also be a tanner stage requirement in my opinion. Because a 14 year old who started at 10 years old is a lot more informed than a 16 year old who only just started puberty and isnt familiar with there dick yet. Thats just my opinion. Thanks for coming to my ted talk

[Billy1212]

No, I don't think it should be outlawed. First of all, I would like to say I am glad to see so many young people have healthy discussion and debate on current issues. Sometimes, it is rare to find such debate. Some good points were made above - no, it should definitely NOT be compare to FGM, I feel the majority of cut guys would agree that they haven't been "mutilated". Also, it very MUCH reduces the risk of STI spread, and tbh I would rather be cut than have a lifelong disease. In fact, circumcision is a leading risk reducer for the spread of HIV, and, for the majority of people that will have unsafe sex at least once in their life, even if it is just to have children, I would say they would rather be cut than live with a illness that requires a daily cocktail of tablets like HIV. Finally, for the guy that said this should be treated as an education issue rather than legislational one: YES! THAT IS ABSOLUTELY THE ANSWER. I would also like to point out that a very powerful and predominant religion absolutely requires it (Jewish) and two others have largely positive views towards it (Christianity and Islam). Look, like it or not, our parents have and will always have a certain amount of autonomy over our lives - what we eat, where we grow up, where we go to school, how we spend our weekends (religious or not). They will decide whether we're vaccinated, whether we're breastfed or born via caesarian (links to possible developmental defects and allergies if not breastfed or live birthed) and even to some extent whether we get braces as a child. They can even decide whether to abort you. Like it or not, they have the final say over all medical decisions until a certain age. And they should - they're our parents after all. For the most of us, they love and care for us and only want what is best for us. So rather than cramming even more complicated and controversial legislation into the already overfilled lawbooks, we should instead work towards better educating parents about the positive and negative effects of circumcision and then let them make the decision. Proper education worked extremely well for increasing vaccination rates to a near acceptable level and decreasing smoking rates; all without the need for controversial legislation. I don't see why circumcision can't be the same

U mention parents control. "They decide whether or not to vaccinate you" there a retards who, if we base law off those principles, will cause innkcent children lives of pure pain for there own beliefs. Parents let kids die for there beliefs. Parents are indeed in charge. But whats better. A (likely) uneducated parent, or someone who has spent years and years learning about it. Fuck the parents senss of control. Think about the kid here. The parents should not be able to hurt kids like that. The same principle can in some waysbe applied to circumsision, albeit with a bit more freedom as it wont kill a kid.

[brightlight]

You only get smegma i you don't wash your body. A cut penis looks more natural to you because that's what your used to.

yeah I already knew that

[vandilization]

I am offended by your statement. HAVE YOU GOT PROOF THAT THE FORESKIN IS DIRTY?

Stop making false statements.

Mine is only 13 years old and cleaner than YOURS, I BET.

all boys were born with a foreskin and it should be there decision to remove it at or before puberty.


Lol, yeah ok buddy. The foreskin itself is not dirty, but there are many medical reasons to have it removed. How about you look stuff up instead of being rude and immature?

[Jason2005]

At 13 I am immature, and I have looked stuff up. But I also talk to my doctor and I am super healthy.

Sorry to disappoint you.

[mikkeldk]

Yes, it should definitely be prohibited for parents to choose on behalf of their young children.
The child should have to make his own choice over what happens to their body once they grow up.
I see it as child abuse otherwise - you don’t cut in children ..

There are discussions here in Denmark about making it illegal, so it will hopefully become the reality soon.

Just to clarify - it is perfectly fine if you want to do it when you grow up, but you need to be able to choose yourself.

[Gay Paul]

No, I don't think it should be outlawed. First of all, I would like to say I am glad to see so many young people have healthy discussion and debate on current issues. Sometimes, it is rare to find such debate. Some good points were made above - no, it should definitely NOT be compare to FGM, I feel the majority of cut guys would agree that they haven't been "mutilated". Also, it very MUCH reduces the risk of STI spread, and tbh I would rather be cut than have a lifelong disease. In fact, circumcision is a leading risk reducer for the spread of HIV, and, for the majority of people that will have unsafe sex at least once in their life, even if it is just to have children, I would say they would rather be cut than live with a illness that requires a daily cocktail of tablets like HIV. Finally, for the guy that said this should be treated as an education issue rather than legislational one: YES! THAT IS ABSOLUTELY THE ANSWER. I would also like to point out that a very powerful and predominant religion absolutely requires it (Jewish) and two others have largely positive views towards it (Christianity and Islam). Look, like it or not, our parents have and will always have a certain amount of autonomy over our lives - what we eat, where we grow up, where we go to school, how we spend our weekends (religious or not). They will decide whether we're vaccinated, whether we're breastfed or born via caesarian (links to possible developmental defects and allergies if not breastfed or live birthed) and even to some extent whether we get braces as a child. They can even decide whether to abort you. Like it or not, they have the final say over all medical decisions until a certain age. And they should - they're our parents after all. For the most of us, they love and care for us and only want what is best for us. So rather than cramming even more complicated and controversial legislation into the already overfilled lawbooks, we should instead work towards better educating parents about the positive and negative effects of circumcision and then let them make the decision. Proper education worked extremely well for increasing vaccination rates to a near acceptable level and decreasing smoking rates; all without the need for controversial legislation. I don't see why circumcision can't be the same

What nonsense, circumcision should only be allowed for health or religious reasons, and Christianity has never sanctioned circumcision (Colossians 2:11-12; Galatians 5:2)

And the health benefit are very minimal, why not remove the healthy appendix or tonsils.

And kids shouldn't be treated like parents property!

[Gazebo]

Mutilate? Lol it’s a bunch of extra skin that serves no medical benefit. Likewise, there is no detriment to the removal of foreskin either, besides the infinitely small chance that the procedure goes wrong. There is no reason that it should be banned, as it does not pose any risk to the sexual or physical well-being of the individual receiving the circumcision for the duration of their lives. Outright BANNING the procedure except in medical or religious occasions is also ridiculous, because now you’ve removed the possibility of adults who may want to get circumcised because maybe they think it looks better, but would not be able to do so under such legislation. It’s as simple as this: if a kid’s parents thinks it’s wrong, then that is for the parents to decide. There’s no reason the state has to get involved. And if they do decide to get their child circumcised, then the child suffers in no conceivable way as a result. The procedure causes little-to-no pain as the child is lightly anesthetized.

[kro814]

It should not be banned.

[Gay Paul]

Mutilate? Lol it’s a bunch of extra skin that serves no medical benefit. Likewise, there is no detriment to the removal of foreskin either, besides the infinitely small chance that the procedure goes wrong. There is no reason that it should be banned, as it does not pose any risk to the sexual or physical well-being of the individual receiving the circumcision for the duration of their lives. Outright BANNING the procedure except in medical or religious occasions is also ridiculous, because now you’ve removed the possibility of adults who may want to get circumcised because maybe they think it looks better, but would not be able to do so under such legislation. It’s as simple as this: if a kid’s parents thinks it’s wrong, then that is for the parents to decide. There’s no reason the state has to get involved. And if they do decide to get their child circumcised, then the child suffers in no conceivable way as a result. The procedure causes little-to-no pain as the child is lightly anesthetized.


You misunderstood me, I meant only prohibiting medically unjustified circumcision in people under 18 years of age, besides, I would allow circumcision if the child himself wants it, and the parents agree, I would only require a clinical psychologist to examine such a boy, is it really his decision, or sometimes it's not forced by parents.

[scentlessapprentice]

Yes I do. There's literally almost no reason to have one done unless the doctor thinks it's best option, and even the religious reasons for having them are pretty shaky and questionable at best.

We know from science that being circumcised takes away something (the literal foreskin and thousands of nerve endings), and adds almost nothing. So what is the point?

[sidric8]

There's literally almost no reason to have one done unless the doctor thinks it's best option… We know from science that being circumcised…adds almost nothing.
Except that isn't true. You can argue about the relative merits, and what the best age is, without having to deny that there even are any benefits. There are. You seem to prefer the benefits of a foreskin over the benefits of a circumcision—and that's fine!—but there really are benefits both ways.

[ERB-lade]

I'm personally very much against circumcision, mutiliation..

[Stevan LT]

Unless if it is medically justified, it should be banned

[thatrandomguy01]

I don't think it should be banned. As I've posted in other circumcision topics, as far as I know I was circumcised at birth and is the only way I've ever known. As far as I know all the penises I've seen in person so far have also been circumcised, so it is still pretty common. I am glad I was circumcised when I was as I didn't have to deal with getting it done later in life, I don't have to constantly pull it back to pee or clean and it's one thing less to have checked during physicals or get infected. As far as being less sensitive, I think some people just overstate that being circumcised reduces sensitivity. Circumcised or not, you are still sensitive in the penis head and the whole area, so for me that's not an issue.

[Brent2003]

I don't think its needs to be banned.... but I also understand that idea of those that are wishing that they weren't. Guess I could go either way here.

[Jason2005]

Unless if it is medically justified, it should be banned

This is why it should be banned unless it's a medical problem.

AMSTERDAM*(Reuters) - Dutch doctors want politicians and human rights groups to speak out and discourage the practice of male circumcision in the Netherlands because they say it is a "painful and harmful ritual," and a violation of children's rights.

[Diable rouge]

This is why it should be banned unless it's a medical problem.

AMSTERDAM*(Reuters) - Dutch doctors want politicians and human rights groups to speak out and discourage the practice of male circumcision in the Netherlands because they say it is a "painful and harmful ritual," and a violation of children's rights.

Finally people are trying to push for the right decisions.

[ska8er]

I don't think it should be banned. As I've posted in other circumcision topics, as far as I know I was circumcised at birth and is the only way I've ever known. As far as I know all the penises I've seen in person so far have also been circumcised, so it is still pretty common. I am glad I was circumcised when I was as I didn't have to deal with getting it done later in life, I don't have to constantly pull it back to pee or clean and it's one thing less to have checked during physicals or get infected. As far as being less sensitive, I think some people just overstate that being circumcised reduces sensitivity. Circumcised or not, you are still sensitive in the penis head and the whole area, so for me that's not an issue.


Well Said-My thoughts exactly.

In a lot of posts here over the years it seems
like quite a few guys have had problems with
foreskins. I am not against those who r intact
if that is their pleasure but my tool gives me
no problems with keeping clean-looking good
and not having to worry getting skin caught in
my zipper. :rolleyes:

[aarondayy]

I believe that it should be outlawed as well, I have never understood why we just cut up a baby's penis as soon as it is bored rather than for looks??

[Lukie]

I've getting circumcised in Sept cause of Corona they aren't doing minor operations only cause of phimosis that I haven't been able to cure with cream, stretching and primiostrech rings

[Boredgoose]

I think you should have to be old enough to give consent to have it done