My elder stepson did it when he was around 20 for medical reasons, I can ask him it it was hell on earth.

Tom

I'm so glad giving birth is just a walk in the park as opposed to the excrutiating pain of a circumcision.

Giving birth is the most natural thing in the world, cutting off a piece of your body is not. One of these things is not like the other.

In theory, it should be a push or two and out the baby comes. In reality, it can often involve tearing, cutting, irreparable damage or even an operation. The difference is that women do this gladly for the joy of a child.

And the comparison with circumcision... why?


The most intense pain I can remember was when I'd smashed pretty much all my ribs on one side and some on t'other (also 9 crushed vertebrae and much internal bleeding) and tried to breathe. Wow. I've heard of people 'blacking out' from pain, but I don't think it's real, although at that moment I wished it was. Took half an hour, or an infinite lifetime, I can't remember which, until a medic who was able to give me morphine arrived on the scene.

Anyway, yes, lots of pain, lots worse than childbirth, and waay worse than circumcision, I'm sure, but it doesn't in any way suggest that the pain of childbirth (or circumcision) is somehow not an issue.

There can be complications, but as every other animal on the planet, birth happens or we don't exist. We can now assist the process with "tearing, cutting, irreparable damage or even an operation".

Theres no way that in theory the foreskin can fall off painlessly, if there are complications we can then do something.

In summary, childbirth=good (excluding overpopulation arguments)
Genital mutilation bad.

1. Circumcision is still done and many believe there are health benefits to it. I know a few boys who needed to be circumcised due to infections around their foreskin. It's more common than one might think.

2. From my point of view, the amount of "hell on earth" pain from circumcision needed to be balanced out by what women go through at childbirth.

Now that I've got that off my chest, please proceed.

I see a problem not in parental choice, but if it is so unethical, how come it is still legal? Be is circumcision in the west, FGM elsewhere..chopping a hand off as an official punishment, you name it. So obviously humans have different definition of ethics. Pushing on people to try to influence their parenting will change very little. Lobbying to change the system might be more constructive. But it still doesn't solve the problem of multiple views on immorality. What is right or wrong.

Because it is up to the whims of the mods to decide which threads are allowed a separate question and answer thread to the thread which also answers these questions but questions the morals, or legalities of such actions.

Apparently a thread on "joining far-right (but legal)" groups (info only) is not allowed and nor is a thread on "Prostitution thread (info only)".

Why do threads with, let's face it, a religious element get special treatment.

As for your comments on a Billag, Serafe (info only) thread -it's clear that would never have worked as if look back, 90% of the answers that people proffered were incorrect in some aspect, or gave false information.

How about a thread asking where to get homeopathic medicine after hours for a child with a high-fever (info only).

Would the mods be correct, or incorrect to move any posts that may suggest not to go down the homeopathic route but to seek real medical help from a doctor or pharmacy and only allow those posts which gave address details of after-hours homeopathic pharmacies?

Do you have evidence for that or is it your own prejudiced view?

1-As somebody else mentioned, there can be benefits to not having an appendix, still fine to have one until there are issues. Others here have had the operation done later for medical reasons later in life, this I can understand.

2-That's a very sexist view. Women experience pain so let's inflict pain on men.

I did not say that. Don't misconstrue my words.

I wonder if it is in fact your prejudice that doesn't allow you to see my post as constructive. Again: Leave it up to parents and nothing will change. Ban the practice as illegal and you will see results.

Is it an easily implementable route? Of course not, for the reasons I wrote above: people will argue with their own definition of ethics, just like they do in this thread.

That's what I'm trying to understand - why do you think that?

There's no more relevance to such a comparison than to any other sort of pain that people may suffer through voluntary or involuntary circumstances.

It does almost sound like that, to be fair, which is why I'm hoping you'll clarify.

I believe it is very different in the sense that it is - in most cases - a willing choice made by a consenting adult.

If anyone feels like figuring out how to improve the situation for newborn baby boys - instead of shaming parents..

What measure or step could bring a change? A petition? Of pediatric doctors and nurses, parents, everybody?

One of the main hurdles to this debate achieving any kind of change will be navigating the discussion without being tarred as antisemitic / Islamophobic. The argument is often circular - "they" have done it for centuries, we can't ban "them" from doing it, why should "they" do it and not us, if "they" are allowed, then so should we. Conversely, if you wanted to try and ban the practice, then you would have to ban it for everyone, thus criminalising the tradition of those whose religious beliefs lead them to see circumcision as necessary.

My view is that the right of every child to be unharmed and to make choices about their own bodies is more important than religious views and some misguided notion of "it just looks neater" (actual argument I heard from a mother talking about why she was looking forward to her baby son being circumcised).

The lower risk of STD argument is kind of unhelpful in my view - you know who has an even lower risk of STDs AND is less likely to get someone pregnant by accident? A dude who wears a condom. So unless you are planning on your son having the sort of lifestyle that leaves him too poor and/or too stupid to rubber up, that should really not factor into your thinking...

There are lots of people on this forum with Swiss nationality. Have any of them started an initiative to force a referendum?

I'm not sure that would work anyway as people whose religious denomination requires circumcision of males would cry that this was anti-semitic or anti-Islamic or removing freedom of choice (which obviously the child does not have).

Bigger battles have been won in this world before laws have been changed.

I am not for or against circumcision. I believe it's a personal decision made by the parents. I would not circumcise my own sons unless there was a need for it but I understand why some parents do.

As for the pain, I just thought the amount of groaning about pain in the male genital area needed a balance with what women go through in childbirth. We'd rather it be pain free, mutilation free, tear free, and free of any operation but that's never a given.

That's all I wanted to say.

What is that you understand?