Would you circumcise your son? Why or why not

[CraddaPoosta]

Don't lie: In most countries, if not all, children can't go through a sexual assignment surgery. As far as I know, like in my Country Spain, you only have the option when you're over 18, and there's usually more limitations (like getting diagnosed with gender disforia diagnosis first, or going through years of hormones first)

Another way your message is wrong: you can't have the breast removed to a child, because they wouldn't have any. Mamoplastias for trans aren't done until completing puberty, adulthood... when the breasts have stopped growing.

I'm not against a 18 years old choosing to circumcise himself (a closer example to the trans surgery you critize) or going through assignment surgery.
But I'm against a baby, or a very little infant, being circumcised. Too young to understand and give consent.

I live in America. I am referencing specifically how some Americans are pushing for actual children to receive hormone-blocking "therapy" (read: chemicals to prevent them from naturally maturing so they can be a better false version of what they can never be). This actually happens here. Just because it can't happen where you live doesn't mean that it isn't a serious, serious problem.

Genital mutilation is genital mutilation, no matter how you slice it. Pun absolutely intended. Why should circumcision bother people, but the same folks are perfectly fine with children deciding to "transition" into the opposite gender by means of mutilating their genitals? If you think a child should be 18 before choosing to be circumcised, isn't that based on the intellectual maturity level of that child?

Circumcision is far, far less destructive than "gender reassignment surgery". But, circumcision is going against a child's will, and they should be an adult and capable of making that educated decision by themselves, right? Hmmm...

One of these things is not like the other. One of these things just doesn't belong.

 

[mrdude]

I live in America. I am referencing specifically how some Americans are pushing for actual children to receive hormone-blocking "therapy" (read: chemicals to prevent them from naturally maturing so they can be a better false version of what they can never be). This actually happens here. Just because it can't happen where you live doesn't mean that it isn't a serious, serious problem.

Genital mutilation is genital mutilation, no matter how you slice it. Pun absolutely intended. Why should circumcision bother people, but the same folks are perfectly fine with children deciding to "transition" into the opposite gender by means of mutilating their genitals? If you think a child should be 18 before choosing to be circumcised, isn't that based on the intellectual maturity level of that child?

Circumcision is far, far less destructive than "gender reassignment surgery". But, circumcision is going against a child's will, and they should be an adult and capable of making that educated decision by themselves, right? Hmmm...

One of these things is not like the other. One of these things just doesn't belong.

Yep these hormone blockers just don't affect the sexual organs from maturing, they also stop the brain from maturing, so basically these kids that have been taking these hormone blockers will have a form of brain damage when they are adults. USA has a problem with their education system already and a vast amount of 20-30 years olds still act like a UK 16 year old from my youth. America is dumbing down their population. I am glad lots of the world outside of the USA are seeing USA for what it truly is now and abandoning it because it's lost it's shine now and is turning into a Banana Republic more and more each day.

 

[djnate27]

Absolutely NOT! I have no experience is such matters, so I let the doctors do it.
There are definite health benefits though...so I'm 'team snip' all the way!!!

 

[RHOPKINS13]

I'm going to refrain from saying everything I want to on this topic, because quite frankly it would turn into a very obscene rant that would offend a lot of people. But what I will say is that circumcision is no different from genital mutilation. The supposed "health benefits" are vastly overexaggerated, and in many cases downright lies. REGARDLESS of whether there are health benefits, strapping an infant down and slicing away part of their genitals is an egregious human rights violation, regardless of their gender. And at least here in the United States, we're supposed to have freedom of religion. If you carve your religion into someone else's body, you are denying them their own freedom to choose for themselves!

Instead of the rant I would love to go into, I would recommend that anybody who is seriously interested in learning more about this issue, go watch the following YouTube videos. I will warn you, while these videos are intended to be educational, some parts are GRAPHIC so don't watch unless you're prepared for that.
Adam Ruins Everything - The Real Reason You're Circumcised
Eric Clopper - Sex & Circumcision: An American Love Story
CHHRP.org - Circumcision: The Whole Story

Finally, a picture. This is from a protest I went to, in front of the White House. I'm in the bottom-left in a black jacket.


Feel free to AMA. Obviously this is a topic I feel very strongly about. And yes, unfortunately I was subjected to this mutilation when I was a newborn and couldn't possible consent or even try to defend myself.

 

[Desconocido90]

I live in America. I am referencing specifically how some Americans are pushing for actual children to receive hormone-blocking "therapy" (read: chemicals to prevent them from naturally maturing so they can be a better false version of what they can never be). This actually happens here. Just because it can't happen where you live doesn't mean that it isn't a serious, serious problem.

Genital mutilation is genital mutilation, no matter how you slice it. Pun absolutely intended. Why should circumcision bother people, but the same folks are perfectly fine with children deciding to "transition" into the opposite gender by means of mutilating their genitals? If you think a child should be 18 before choosing to be circumcised, isn't that based on the intellectual maturity level of that child?

Circumcision is far, far less destructive than "gender reassignment surgery". But, circumcision is going against a child's will, and they should be an adult and capable of making that educated decision by themselves, right? Hmmm...

One of these things is not like the other. One of these things just doesn't belong.

In your previous message you condemned "removing a child's penis or breasts", but now you're talking of [reversible] "hormone-blocking to children" (more like early teens)
Do you really not see the difference?

The conservative slogan against "cutting child's penises" is a lie, and your group keep spreading it because have more emotional effect than the complex reality of teens starting a slow process that won't be irreversible until they make the big decissions as adults, a process they can stop if they decide so.

 

[Luke94]

I guess it's because it's ancient,mythical jewish tradition ritual.

 

[mrdude]

but now you're talking of [reversible] "hormone-blocking to children" (more like early teens)
Do you really not see the difference?

Where's your evidence to prove they are reversible, they are not and they cause damage to the body's cells, bones and the brain.

Maybe you should stop reading propoganda because you want something to be true, and just accept that when you mess with evolution and nature that there are unintended consequences.

For example, maybe you should read this:
https://fullyinformed.nz/docs/impacts/statements/

 

[p1ngpong]

Only if I ran out of bacon.

 

[CraddaPoosta]

In your previous message you condemned "removing a child's penis or breasts", but now you're talking of [reversible] "hormone-blocking to children" (more like early teens)
Do you really not see the difference?

The conservative slogan against "cutting child's penises" is a lie, and your group keep spreading it because have more emotional effect than the complex reality of teens starting a slow process that won't be irreversible until they make the big decissions as adults, a process they can stop if they decide so.

You have COMPLETELY missed my point if you think I support chemically altering CHILDREN to prevent them from sexual maturation, in case their FEELINGS don't align with physical facts.

I am okay with circumcision based on its aesthetics later in life, and the reduced risk of transmission of STDs, and the fact that most males in America ARE circumcised, which would make it a bit easier for them later in life when their genitals will actually matter.

In no way do I support the fantasy of "gender reassignment" or "gender-affirming therapy". If gential mutilation is done for the purpose of mangling a penis or vagina into a fake version of its opposite, I could not be more firmly opposed, especially when it relates to CHILDREN whom are not mature enough to make this decision.

There is absolutely zero health benefits associated with genital mutilation for the purpose of pretending to be the opposite gender. Remember that there are only two genders, and they can never, ever, ever, ever, EVER be changed, not by surgery, not by self-identification, not by chemicals. XX can never be XY. Period. End of story.

Circumcision is not in the same category, although it still relates to a form of genital mutilation. The difference is, there ARE health benefits associated with circumcision, along with societal norms, and for a lot of people, adherence to genuine beliefs and religious practices, which most people believe should be respected.

Circumcision does not harm anyone. Mutilating your genitals for any other reason ABSOLUTELY does.

I was pointing out that a lot of people who believe the T in LGBT is actually legitimate are the ones who are adamantly against circumcision. Merely pointing out the rampant hypocrisy of the gender-fluid, when it comes to what is right or wrong for a child to be subjected to.

I just wonder why so many people are mad about male circumcision, but they have no problem with a male child literally chopping off his entire penis, not just trimming the foreskin, so he can be a better fake version of what his chromosomes prevent him from ever being.

One of these things is not like the other. One of these things just doesn't belong. If circumcision causes you outrage, why not "gender reassignment"? Where do you draw the line?

If you are against circumcision, but you support "gender reassignment" by means of surgery... I think you are a very, very confused individual, and I hope you never become a surgeon.

 

[The Catboy]

I'm pretty sure that comparing these two things was meant to show the pure hypocracy of a certain group of people.

It’s not a hypocracy because gender-affirming surgeries are not being performed on minors. This is made up issue to spread misinformation about trans people.

I just find it inconsistent how certain folks are completely okay with genital mutilation (which is permanent and irreversible) if it involves "gender identity" or "gender-affirming surgery", but they clutch their pearls when confronted with the idea of having a baby boy's foreskin clipped.

Completely removing a child's penis or breasts when they are still CHILDREN is completely fine, but removing a foreskin (with absolutely no relevance to sexual preference or gender identity) is "HELL TO THE NAW!"

One of these things is not like the other. One of these things just doesn't make sense.

This isn’t a real thing, it’s illegal in most countries and extremely doubtful that it’s happening in any nations without laws covering this issue.

 

[aoikurayami]

Only if it is guranteed safe.

Circ Boys have actual health benefits that noncirc (with improper hygiene) do *not* have

Tip will also get less sensitive (might please the ladies maybe)


But as for RISK:
David Reimer ...

 

[ZeroT21]

So-called medical practice has always been about trial and error, who knows if the practice today will be illegal in the future

 

[MikaDubbz]

Having lived 35 years circumcised and no complaints in the bed from either party, and being weirded out by just the idea of smegma, yeah I probably would do the same for my son. But if my wife felt strongly against it, then I'd be willing to decline for her.

Post automatically merged: Dec 20, 2022

I guess it's because it's ancient,mythical jewish tradition ritual.

In America many non-Jewish families do it as well (though without having the whole bris event of course)

 

[RHOPKINS13]

Circumcision does not harm anyone. Mutilating your genitals for any other reason ABSOLUTELY does.

You're mistaken about this. Over 100 baby boys die every year in the United States alone due to circumcision complications. Thousands more end up with botched circumcisions, with cases ranging anywhere from leaving too much foreskin on, to accidentally amputating the head of the penis.

Finally, circumcision removes thousands of the most sensual nerve endings a man will ever have. A circumcised man will never be able to experience sex the way that nature intended it, and can only experience a fraction of the pleasure.

I have absolutely no problem with a consenting adult that wants to be circumcised, but it should never be done to a child that can't consent.

 

[Nakamichi]

only if i had nothing else to do

 

[TraderPatTX]

You're mistaken about this. Over 100 baby boys die every year in the United States alone due to circumcision complications. Thousands more end up with botched circumcisions, with cases ranging anywhere from leaving too much foreskin on, to accidentally amputating the head of the penis.

Finally, circumcision removes thousands of the most sensual nerve endings a man will ever have. A circumcised man will never be able to experience sex the way that nature intended it, and can only experience a fraction of the pleasure.

I have absolutely no problem with a consenting adult that wants to be circumcised, but it should never be done to a child that can't consent.

Children cannot consent to anything. That's what parents and legal guardians are for. Ever heard of parental consent?

It's weird that the left believes that children can consent to anything, especially anything sexual. I guess that's the reason the left has to keep certain things secret from parents concerning their own kids.

 

[The Catboy]

Children cannot consent to anything. That's what parents and legal guardians are for. Ever heard of parental consent?

It's weird that the left believes that children can consent to anything, especially anything sexual. I guess that's the reason the left has to keep certain things secret from parents concerning their own kids.

Where in their post did they mention any of this or even imply anything along these lines?

 

[subcon959]

I was genuinely interested in coming back to follow this discussion but you all infested it with politics as usual.

 

[RHOPKINS13]

Children cannot consent to anything. That's what parents and legal guardians are for. Ever heard of parental consent?

It's weird that the left believes that children can consent to anything, especially anything sexual. I guess that's the reason the left has to keep certain things secret from parents concerning their own kids.

Parental consent is a type of "proxy consent." Medical ethics dictate that proxy consent is only valid if the surgery in question is medically necessary. But circumcision is very rarely medically necessary, and is usually done for either aesthetics or cultural reasons. It is an elective surgery that in the absence of medical necessity should be postponed until adulthood, when proper consent can be given.

I'll also note that nowhere in my posts have I said or implied that a child could ever consent to a circumcision. Also, circumcision is not a left-or-right issue, there are plenty of intactivists on both sides of the political fence. If you can fight to keep your rights to guns and freedom of speech, you can fight for your right to keep your entire genitalia.

This is a bodily autonomy issue. I believe that everyone should have the right to their ENTIRE body, the only exception being in the case of medical necessity (i.e., if a kid has cancer and their only option to survive involves cutting a limb off, of course I'd be in favor of cutting it off.)

There is nothing inherently wrong, broken, or even unhygienic, about being male and having a foreskin. For that matter, every other mammal on this earth has a foreskin, but you don't see us circumcising them.

 

[Urbanshadow]

Unless the poor creature suffers from any condition where circumcission could be a good remedy for, it stays uncut and I'll be sure to teach that kid good hygiene habits.