• Difficult for Discussion.

    The issue here is that there are so many religious people in this world who find it pleasing to their deity, but then you even have the non-religious people who still carry on this circumsising. Some people will argue that it makes it easier to have children, others will say that it can make the top of the unit rougher and easier to "do it" with. Honestly, this is a very opinionated topic. I'm saying yes, only because I respect and agree with religion and heritage. Would I ever do it? Possibly. It also helps when you're trying to clean it. Having no skin on top makes it slightly more difficult to catch any STD's, not that that should be a problem for most people with common sense. But as I said, a bit too opinionated of a topic.

  • No legitimate reason, no ability for child to consent.

    So first of all, there are no legitimate or medical reasons to want your child to become circumcised. There are absolutely zero health benefits to being circumcised; assuming you actually take a minute to wash yourself (or your child, as the case may be) properly now and again, being circumcised simply does not have verified health benefits over being uncircumcised; the minor noted 'potential benefits' (as in, the most common is only even an issue for 1/1000 babies) are completely equaled out if you actually practice proper hygiene. If you can't do that, that's a problem in itself.
    There are in fact notable *detrimental* effects to becoming circumcised, notwithstanding the fact that it's a painful (potentially traumatically so) and unnecessary surgery. Generally, deadened nerves, and complete removal of large numbers of nerves of comparable if not higher importance to sexual function, and all the effects this can have on both male sexual ability and female sexual pleasure (for example, the foreskin is meant to somewhat help avoid issues involving vaginal dryness, which obviously doesn't happen when the foreskin isn't there).
    To build on the above, the only 'real' reason you would want your child to be circumcised, assuming you aren't ignorant about the total lack of health benefits, which just shouldn't happen if your doctor knows what they're doing and are doing their job properly, is for religious reasons. Which is totally illegitimate as a 'reason' for permanently mutilating your child's genitals. You can do whatever you want to your own body, but unless you have consent (which children are not capable of giving) or an actual, serious medical reason (combined with inability to obtain consent; if someone capable of giving it simply chooses not to, you still can't do anything), you can't do *anything* to anyone else's body, let alone irreparable damage like we're discussing here.
    Let's summarize, shall we? Irreparable damage to children's genitals, with no legitimate medical reason or actual health benefits, generally done due to either total ignorance or the parents forcing their religious beliefs on their children by removing important tissue from their genitals. That sh*t would not fly if we were discussing female children. Why is there even an argument about this? Of course it isn't 'OK'.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.