• pyre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    13 days ago

    who says pro choice people demand circumcision. most pro-choice people would probably leave the choice to the kid when they grow up enough to have an opinion on it. and if they don’t actively think that, I’m sure most can be very easily convinced to do so.

    • CaptainEffort@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      13 days ago

      That’s not what a strawman is. They’re not saying pro choice people are for circumcision, and then arguing against that falsely constructed opinion.

      They’re making a joke that pro “choice” people should be against circumcision, as the babies who get them aren’t given the choice.

      A strawman specifically means that they’re claiming that this is those people’s opinion, and then arguing against it.

  • voltaric@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 days ago

    For those who don’t know, the US systematically mutilates the genitals of baby boys and young boys.Sciences points to the foreskin being a protective and erogenous dual layered membrane.

    It is not ‘one side’ pushing this. This is how the American people take their aggression out on males.

    • iheartneopets@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      13 days ago

      You had me until the last sentence. There are a lot of deeply misguided—and plain fucking stupid—reasons that circumcision has become seen as the ‘norm’ in the US, but I don’t think it’s how the American people takes its aggression out on men?? That’s a pretty unhinged thing to think. I understand the anger and frustration at genital mutilation of babies (bc that’s what it is, in my opinion), but let’s come back to earth a bit.

      EDIT: since this comment is getting attention, I just wanted to add that it really does seem like people are waking up to how fucked circumcision is. We just had a baby, and as part of our stack of information brochures given to us by the hospital (in Oklahoma, a deeply red state), there was a whole page dedicated to circumcision pros and cons. You could tell it heavily favored not circumcising, and preserving bodily autonomy was it’s own full bullet point on the cons side, as well as busting myths that people perpetuate trying to justify it still.

      Also, in our infant care courses, they showed some really awful pictures of freshly-circumcised baby penises. We had already decided not to circumcise for obvious moral reasons, but that made us feel even more secure in our decision. I feel like more parents need to see that stuff to make them realize what’s actually going to be done to their baby with the procedure.

      All that to say, I think there’s hope for decreasing the occurrences of this deeply awful cultural practice!

    • MeaanBeaan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      13 days ago

      While I whole heartedly disagree with the practice of circumsizing babies. (babies can’t consent therfore an unnecessary procedure is just flat out unethical) It’s not really true to say science shows that the foreskin is erogenous or even that circumcision affects sexual pleasure.

      There is a bit of conflicting data out there so there is still some debate over the fact but right now the data leans heavily toward there being little to no adverse affects on sexual pleasure. And in fact some anecdotal evidence actually seems to show that the opposite may be true; that circumsized penises may actually be more sensitive to sexual stimuli.

      Again though, I can’t stress enough how much I believe circumsicion is wrong.

      Source

      Edit: hey guys. Coming back to this and uh, have learned some things. I’d like to retract this statement pretty please. Please forgive me.

      • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 days ago

        there isn’t conflicting data, there’s people without foreskins not knowing what they’ve lost and people with foreskins who don’t know how to jerk it properly.

        as someone with a foreskin i can tell you with the utmost certainty that it is an erogenous zone and makes the experience infinitely better, it is unfathomable to me how circumcized people are even capable of masturbation and intercourse, it’s like trying to swim without feet.

        • BlueMagma@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          14 days ago

          Wasn’t it the point of religious nutter ? To prevent kids and people in general from masturbating because they think it is sin ? IMO it ls very obvious that it reduces sexual pleasure.