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.

  • voltaric@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    There is a lot of misinformation in this post. Here’s a snippet of my research about the anatomy of the penis and the damage of circumcision causes.

    The foreskin has specialized nerve endings called Meissner’s Corpsucles located at the tip in an area called the ridged band. It is connected to the penis by the extension of the shaft skin in areas called the outer foreskin and the inner foreskin. The inner foreskin is rich with sensory receptors and is a inner mucosa similar to the inside of our cheeks. It keeps the glans moist and protected from the environment. The inner foreskin is attached to the head of the penis by a membrane called the frenulum. The frenulum is an erogenous zone that is mostly removed by a circumcision procedure.

    When a child or baby is circumcised, the foreskin is forcibly removed from the glans which scars and damages the glans. The foreskin is adhered to the glans like a fingernail. When a boy hits puberty the foreskin naturally retracts. In rare cases, phimosis happens which is when the foreskin is unable to retract. Non-surgical solutions to phimosis are stretching the foreskin over a span of time and/or applying steroid creme.

    Circumcision is extremely painful for babies and children. Cortisol spikes in babies when they are circumcised. Babies will pass out during the procedure as many circumcisions are done with inadequate anesthetic.

    The foreskin is self-cleaning like the vagina. Rinsing in the shower is enough usually for hygiene. Caregivers who retract the foreskin of their children will damage the child’s genitals. The only person who should retract the foreskin is the children as it will naturally retract with age. Some boys are unable to retract their foreskin until their late teens or early adulthood.

    This information is not foreign to the medical world. Most medical and political professionals have a bias for the circumcision ritual. Circumcision is the same for boys as it is for girls as the objective of circumcision is to harm the sexual function of the child.

    Modern circumcision for males is extremely harsh as it removes 60-80% of penile skin. Many men do not have frenulums from the procedure. It is possible to repair some of the damage by using mitosis to restore skin coverage. It is not currently possible to repair tissue that was completely removed. Foregen is a non-profit researching ways to completely repair the damage caused by circumcision.

    For men impacted by this and want to do something for themselves

    • Look into foreskin restoration
    • Donate to foregen

    Warning that this topic draws a lot of insane people with genital mutilation fetishes. Any of the comments advocating for circumcision are either men who were circumcised against their will, women who circumcised their children and haven’t accepted the truth, or weirdos who want others to suffer.

    • pinchcramp@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Thank you so much for writing this up. I really appreciate the detailed post.

      Most medical and political professionals have a bias for the circumcision ritual.

      I think it’s important to point out that this bias is mostly cultural. In many countries where ritual infant circumcision is the exception instead of the norm, medical personnel do not have a bias towards RIC.

      Foreskin restoration is legit (even if it may sound crazy like regrowing limbs). I know we collectively dislike Reddit on here, but the subreddit /r/foreskin_restoration has a really supportive and welcoming community and a lot of resources about how to get started (check their wiki).

  • Pandoras_Can_Opener@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    Personally I find it a lot more disturbing that intersex babies are still assgined a binary gender by a doctor and then get surgery to shape their genitals. The parents are often scaremongered and pressured into consenting and the affected people don’t know it was done to them until firmly into adulthood. It’s often a sterilising surgery too.

    If you are against doctors doing gender changing surgery, please start with the babies? But oh no! Then the argument that there are only two genders falls apart.

    • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Is it still practice? Even when I studied, long time ago, I thought it was rather consensus that it’s gets worse results in the the long run.

      • Jojo@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        It still happens, but I don’t believe it’s as common as it once was (per capita intersex person, which is also a very small number)

  • deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    9 months ago

    It would require that a significant portion of the population admit their parents mutilated them as infants.

    For some reason, they refuse to admit they were mutilated without their consent.

    Some of them have subsequently mutilated their own sons, and admitting that was mutilation is beyond their capacity.

    • Briguy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I have a neutral stance on circumcision. Do what you please. I just wish people like you could try to prove a point without using “mutilation” over and over to make it sound worse than it actually is. It puts an agenda on your point and biases it. There’s nothing mutilated about it. It’s just altered.

      If you consider this to be mutilation then that would also mean you think any gender affirming surgery is also mutilation. And one could much easier argue that converting a penis to a vagina is far more mutilating than just removing some extra skin from a penis.

      So if you’re trying to convince people to stop circumcision, stop using overly dramatic words and just explain why it’s not necessary. Otherwise I’ll just roll my eyes at people like you.

      • deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        If you consider this to be mutilation then that would also mean you think any gender affirming surgery is also mutilation.

        No one gets gender reassignment surgery until they can concentyi it as an adult.

        False equivalence.

    • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 months ago

      I was circumcised, I don’t have a problem with that fact. I understand why people do have a problem with circumcision and I don’t have an issue with it being banned.

      Don’t try to induce mental trauma in me for my past that I’m not bothered by.

      • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Good for you not being bothered by it. But I think it’s rather easy to imagine that it can be a traumatizing experience and lead to psychological or physiological injuries. So it’s a medical procedure that should only be prescribed by doctors or if you are an adult.

        • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Sure, I’m not arguing against that. I’m arguing against this mentality that everyone who has been circumcised should be carrying trauma over it, or must be carrying trauma but are lying to themselves. Don’t say you’re fighting on my behalf for something that doesn’t bother me in the slightest.

          • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Fair point, not sure somebody is doing it and if so why, but that would be indeed contra productive. If someone does not feel traumatized why would anyone would want to convince them otherwise?

            • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              Fair point, not sure somebody is doing it and if so why, but that would be indeed contra productive

              The post I was replying to:

              For some reason, they refuse to admit they were mutilated without their consent.

              • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                For some reason, they refuse to admit they were mutilated without their consent.

                I’m not sure that is exactly how they meant it, but I can see you interpret it that way. An unnecessary, irreversible medical operation was performed on you without your consent, but since you are not bothered by it - good for you.

      • Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        I have been physically punished when I did something bad as a kid. I’m not traumatized by that either but I still think it’s good that it’s illegal nowdays.

        • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          I agree. And if people went around claiming you must be traumatized over it and lying to yourself you’d say they’re full of shit. If someone was trying to convince you to be traumatized about it you’d tell them to fuck off.

          • Cethin@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            I don’t think they’re saying people are traumatized. That word has a meaning. They’re saying people have issue reconciling the fact that their parents would do something like that to them and also that their parents are generally good people. Many people would rather not even consider that it wasn’t the right call, because it makes it easier to hold those two beliefs at the same time. However, people make mistakes. Those aren’t contradictory ideas if you can understand that people can be mislead.

      • deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you a persons who is refusing to admit.

        Thanks for demonstrating my point so effectively.

        • LifeOfChance@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          What? They’re not bothered by it how the fuck is that refusing to admit anything? Does that mean if two people get jumped scared in a dark room and one for the rest of their life needs a light on in their room and the other doesn’t that they are secretly traumatized? No it doesn’t.

          Also circumcision happens at birth most of the time so many people (myself included) don’t remember it. It should absolutely be illegal but as the other person said don’t tell someone what traumas they faced and how they should be effected.

          You’re a clown

          • deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            so many people (myself included) don’t remember it.

            "She doesn’t remember being raped, so it’s ok’.

  • AuroraZzz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Circumcisions should be banned because they are mutilating children’s genitals without consent. At least trans medical procedures have consent.

    I think it’s just religious people being hypocrites again. Hard to convince delusional people of facts when they make up what they believe based on the circumstances. The decisions of religious cults shouldn’t have more power than the decisions of individual people. Completely crazy what this country is devolving into

    • Shirasho@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      There is scientific evidence that circumcision results in the area being cleaner and easier to maintain. I’m not denying it is child mutilation, but you also shouldn’t just sweep it under the rug as religious bullshittery.

    • Jojo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Trans surgical procedures have some of the best outcomes of any major procedures. they are performed on consenting individuals who are always well informed and at or very near adulthood, and only after many other interventions have been ongoing. People who receive these interventions show incredibly low rates of regret (compare for example the percent of people who regret knee replacements or probably circumcisions), and enjoy increased happiness and satisfaction by almost any metric.

      Basically every major medical organization in the world (and certainly in America) agrees these interventions are medically useful and should be performed. While there are doctors who dissent, they are in the vast minority and almost never actually work with any trans people, but rather insist all the doctors who do work with trans people must be wrong. It’s not a controversy in the medical world, just the political one.

    • adONis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      Then we shall ban dentists too. They never had my consent to touch my teeth.

      • humorlessrepost@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Did they remove your perfectly healthy canines because a bronze-age book said dogs are unclean? If not, get the fuck out of here with your infant penis mutilation apologetics.

  • Alien Nathan Edward@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Here’s another question along the same lines - my friend when I was a kid developed gynecomastia, commonly known as “breast knots” when he was 14. They’re completely harmless, but they made it look like he had boobs. Cute little A cups on this otherwise very boy-presenting person. For some reason, no one thought it was “against God’s plan” or “mutilating his body” or “part of the gender agenda” when this 14 year old boy had a purely cosmetic double mastectomy. I wonder why no one batted an eye at a child receiving gender-affirming cosmetic surgery just because he wanted to in this particular case.

  • neomachino@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 months ago

    Cutting a piece of your baby’s junk off for no other reason then everyone does it is a really weird thing that I’ve never been able to wrap my head around.

    I’m not religious but I at least can understand if it’s for religious reason, there’s a point to it, even if I don’t agree with/understand the point. But people seem to just do it for no reason aside from it’s what people do. It’s forced genital mutilation anyway you look at it.

    • FlaminGoku@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      There are medical reasons to remove. If the foreskin isn’t cleaned well (challenging for toddlers) it can get infected which prevents it from separating, which is very dangerous.

      • Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        If your foot isn’t cleaned well, it can get infected and potentially cause sepsis, which is very dangerous. Should we be removing children’s feet?

        No, obviously not. The time for invasive, nonconsentual medical intervention is when it is medically necessary, and circumcision does not fit the bill.

        “The CPS does not recommend the routine circumcision of every newborn male.”

        “It is shown that the foreskin is more sensitive than the uncircumcised glans mucosa, which means that after circumcision genital sensitivity is lost.” - Meaning circumcision is quite a damaging procedure, which means the justification for it must be high. And as a preventive measure for which the things being prevented won’t happen for a decade and a half or longer, isn’t justified.

        If the foreskin isn’t cleaned well (challenging for toddlers)

        Newborns should not have their foreskin pulled back for cleaning, as the separation can cause damage. IIRC it’s only a bit before puberty that it is safe to gently (not forcibly) pull back the foreskin.

        • FlyForABeeGuy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Nah mate. They had to remove mine because is overgrew my gland and was so tight that I would have pee between the foreskin and the gland layong around, and it was impossible to unhook. The alternative would have been to cut it open and have dumbo’s ear flapping everytime I’d take my dick out. No partner ever complained, and I don’t give à shit about it.

          I wouldn’t circumsize a kid if it wasn’t necessary, but when an operation takes place specifically for medical reasons, it’s because there is no other solution. Like when a foot id so gangrenous that you have to remove it or it will propagate the necrosis to the leg.

          • okamiueru@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 months ago

            Are you trolling? Or just finding it very difficult to understand what you are replying to? I’m genuinely asking here.

            “Nah mate”, to someone saying it has to be a medical necessity… Following it up with “it was a medical necessity in my case”, and then arguing the same point of it needing to be a medical necessity… It’s just a bit too on-the-nose, that it seems more likely to be intentional, than just… Well, what it looks like

  • snooggums@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    As someone whose circumcision worked out perfectly fine and can’t imagine myself without one, I still think it should be banned for babies and children under 18 for any reason other than medical necessity. Even a slight risk of problems outweighs the ‘my dad did it and he turned out fine’ or religious tradition arguments.

    It should not be banned for adults who voluntarily choose it for themselves though.

  • FederatedSaint@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    Hot take: I have never regretted being circumcized and never met anyone who regretted being circumcized so banning it doesn’t make sense for that reason alone. Some parents pierce their children’s ears without their consent, some give them frenectomies, pull teeth, reshape heads, bind feet, or do a variety of other “elective” procedures so I’m not sure why circumcision has so much hate.

    • nocturne@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      I know we have never met (and after having read your previous post i am quite okay with that), but I hate the fact i am circumcised. I have severe loss of feeling from it. My father said he regretted it the instant it was done and would have never agreed to it if he knew the way i was going to scream.

      I personally cannot regret being circumcised, as i had nothing to do with it other than being born with a foreskin.

    • Dr. Moose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Google is right there buddy. Just google “people regretting being circumsized” before spearding this cult shit lol

      • deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        That dude just listed a bunch of horrendous mutilations and went “if that’s ok then…”.

        Critical thinking fail there.

  • Gabu@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    because (and I recognize the irony) some people actually need it for health reasons.

    • theonyltruemupf@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Those are rare exceptions and it should only be done after puberty AND if it can’t be resolved conservatively AND the person consents to the surgery. That’s something else entirely than doing it to children.

  • Crum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    Cutting foreskin versus turning a dick inside out are two very different things.

    • idiomaddict@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      Yeah, one’s done without anesthetic to babies to make sure their dicks look like their dads’, and one’s done to adults with their fully informed consent

      • Crum@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Huh? One completely changes a person’s anatomy, while the other slightly changes the look. These things are not comparable, and to do so is idiotic.