If we can ban trans medical procedures, why haven't we banned circumcision?
If we can ban trans medical procedures, why haven't we banned circumcision?
Was just talking at dinner with family, and it seems a logical action to ban circumcision, as in most cases, doesn't have consent, and is a major (genitals are important) body modification. Can we ban it at the state level? Just a thought.
You're viewing a single thread.
Assuming you’re talking about male circumscission, the short answer is you’re about to be inundated with accusations of antisemitism.
As for female circumcision; it is illegal in the US. The Stop FGM act was signed into federal law in 2020.
To add to that, some Muslims will claim that FGM is religious. That is not correct. It is something that existed culturally prior to the introduction of Islam to those regions of Africa, and was incorporated into their religious practice. It is not, in any way, a necessary part of Islam. Unlike male circumcision, which is required in orthodox Judaism.
No religion should be mutilating babies. EVER.
I'm on the fence. Male circumcision reduces rates of certain STIs, decreases rates of UTIs, and it pretty well eliminates the possibility of phimosis. On the flip side, some men claim that circumcision reduces sensation, although I don't know how anyone other than a person that had a circumcision after being sexually active would know. On the list of things to be upset about that parents frequently do to children, it's pretty far down on my list, well below "spanking" and "gross invasions of privacy".
Interesting that surgically removing a body part without consent isn't as alarming to you as spanking
There are no benefits to spanking for the child, only negatives. There are benefits from male circumcision, and the negatives appear to be alleged rather than proven. (Most men that claim reduced sensation would likely do well to use lube, and stop using a kung-fu death grip.)
Given that circumcision has some limited benefits to the child, and spanking has none at all, yes, it makes sense that it's a lower priority.
It should probably be noted a more important distinction is that the entire purpose of FGM is to remove their ability to feel pleasure - by clipping off the clit - and thereby ensuring she doesn’t go around having sex.
While (male) circumcision isn’t necessarily to do that. (Though when they take too much, it absolutely does. Jewish mohels take far less than surgeons.)
Worth noting "clipping off the clit" is one of the milder less invasive forms of FGM.
Some types of FGM involve cutting off the clit and the labia.
Some involve going full scorched earth and cutting everything off then sewing up the wound leaving a tiny straw hole for pee and menstrual blood.
Then the husband is supposed to cut the scar open with a dagger on the wedding night.
Even before marriage, this creates all kinds of long term health problems and recurrent infections for some women. Of course, not all girls survive the procedure, traditionally the stitching is done using accacia thorns.
Also, in regions where FGM is practiced, it is practiced by Christians and Animists as well as Muslims.