671

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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] AuroraZzz@lemmy.world 227 points 3 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

[-] Silentiea@lemm.ee 73 points 3 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.

load more comments (48 replies)
[-] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 97 points 3 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.

load more comments (21 replies)
[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 71 points 3 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.

[-] then_three_more@lemmy.world 70 points 3 months ago

I've never understood the American obsession with MGM (male genital mutilation). But it seems that a large percentage of your population has had it done. So from an outsider perspective it seems like it must be a cultural thing to your country. So for laws to exist that ban it (or at least make it harder to authorise) you'd first need a cultural shift, then. Enough political will for laws to be passed.

[-] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 18 points 3 months ago

It really isn't cultural. In the early 1900s, William Kellogg (of Kellogg's) was a puritanical Christian. He hated the idea of masturbation more than anything, so he created Corn Flakes to be a cereal so bland it would kill your libido and prevent you from masturbating. He also was a proponent of circumcision as a means of preventing masturbation because it would make the penis too tight that stroking it would be painful. Americans bought into his propaganda that circumcised penises are "cleaner" and then it just became "well, I'm circumcised, and my son's penis should look like mine!"

No one said that the average American was intelligent.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] voltaric@lemmy.world 66 points 3 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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Pandoras_Can_Opener@mander.xyz 56 points 3 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.

[-] meekah@lemmy.world 21 points 3 months ago

What the fuck, I wasn't aware of that. Thanks for sharing

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] neomachino@lemmy.world 55 points 3 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.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] BlueHarvest@lemmy.world 52 points 3 months ago

circumcision is in the Bible, gender reassignment surgery is not. That's where they're going to hang their hats... on the invisible sky ghost.

[-] Silentiea@lemm.ee 18 points 3 months ago

Um, ackshually, eunuchs are in the Bible, including Jesus saying that some people "become eunuchs" to get closer to God. So...

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] snooggums@midwest.social 48 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 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.

[-] deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 23 points 3 months ago

In which case it is cosmetic surgery.

One does not Botox an infant.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] mightyfoolish@lemmy.world 40 points 3 months ago

Because transgender (anti)rights have nothing to do with religion; it's simply the transgender people's turn to be thrown under the bus so the conservatives can continue virtue signalling.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 40 points 3 months ago

On one hand I oppose circumcision, on the other hand I think we’re getting far too comfortable letting politicians ban medical procedures.

My alternative perspective is no surgery on someone too young to request it unless it cannot wait until they’re old enough to do so.

[-] derpgon@programming.dev 25 points 3 months ago

Kids can't get plastic surgery even if they wanted to, but can get circumcised even if nobody asked them? It's just dumb.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] richieadler@lemmy.myserv.one 35 points 3 months ago

Because one is ordered by their favorite imaginary character in their favorite fairy tale book.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Pat12@lemmy.world 35 points 3 months ago

we *should *ban circumcision, it's genital mutilation and children cannot consent

[-] Ultraviolet@lemmy.world 34 points 3 months ago

Because the laws are being pushed on a religious basis, not a rational one.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] FrankTheHealer@lemmy.world 30 points 3 months ago

Circumcision is so weird. Like why are non religious people opting for that so much in the US?

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Flax_vert@feddit.uk 29 points 3 months ago

I think we should ban circumcision

[-] Ziggurat@sh.itjust.works 22 points 3 months ago

This is one of the case where we can talk about the Jewish/Muslim lobby without being a far-right biggot. People want to defend their religious practice, even if they involve chopping off a piece of kids genitalia

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] _number8_@lemmy.world 22 points 3 months ago

because we are a stupid, prudish, and vain country. we don't want people to enjoy jerking off too much, nor do we want to reverse the trend of mutilation, which would make the old guard feel like they're the broken ones

[-] drmoose@lemmy.world 20 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Genital mutilation is incredibly sad and people are somehow tricking themselves into being ok with it because they can't get they dick tips back lol

Remember that cult where dudes were required to cut their balls off? It's the same cult.

load more comments (12 replies)
[-] Thorny_Insight@lemm.ee 19 points 3 months ago

If we ban circumcision does that then mean it's okay to keep trans medical procedures banned aswell or that we shouldn't ban neither? I'm not sure the reasoning is sound here. Circumcision without the subject's concent is an obviously barbaric tradition that we will look back with horror one day.

[-] nutsack@lemmy.world 22 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

no. trans medical procedures are consentual.

[-] Crack0n7uesday@lemmy.world 19 points 3 months ago

They'll make the Church of Scientology pay taxes before they ban circumcisions.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] ferralcat@monyet.cc 18 points 3 months ago

Circumcision is taking a kid and doing something irreversible to them without consent. Trans treatment is taking a kid and preventing irreversible things from happening until they consent.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] tiredofsametab@kbin.run 18 points 3 months ago

You probably want to carve out medically necessary circumcision (required treatment for some issues). The main answer in the US would be a combination of religion and tradition with some bonus vanity and outdated knowledge (see arguments about cleanliness).

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 27 Feb 2024
671 points (91.9% liked)

No Stupid Questions

33833 readers
1008 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 11 months ago
MODERATORS