Traditional initiation is a rite of passage into manhood for young males that is practiced by various ethnic groups in Africa, including parts of South Africa. Among them are the Xhosa, Ndebele, Sotho and Venda communities.
You should really try reading your own article. These boys died from negligence and unsafe conditions…all of which are avoidable. Keep your bigotry out of it.
I get that it’s hard for you to accept other people’s cultural identities, but that’s no excuse to call it child abuse. The issue here is performing a rather simple procedure without proper training or adherence to basic safety standards.
You see? You don’t even know what the procedure is for, and yet you claim some kind of altruism when advocating against it. You have been misled by right-wing propaganda, meant to discriminate against immigrants. Or, you’re just racist and think those people are barbarians for looking out for their children’s well-being in a way you don’t agree with.
Either way, you calling it “child abuse”, doesn’t mean it is.
It always amazes me how ignorant western men are about this subject. No wonder you view men that practice it as if they are barbaric or “lesser-than”. That’s how most bigotry works though…through ignorance.
The foreskin is highly susceptible to infection during early childhood. Especially in regions where cleaning the foreskin is not as easy. It’s a perfect example of how a common sense health measure becomes a cultural tradition.
I think it’s far more lazy to simply write it off as some kind of barbaric practice, instead of utilizing some critical thinking about why it’s so common.
Lol “western men.” Okay. You couldn’t sound more like an American man right now defending child genital mutilation. In any event, rambling incoherently about how evil western men are to defend child genital mutilation isn’t convincing anybody that your position has any merit, and most people in the developing world would find it weird.
If this were about “looking out for their children’s well-being,” then wouldn’t they follow the suggestions of doctors and specialists in the field of pediatrics?
They do. The push to have circumcision banned in many EU countries is the result of a concerted effort by anti-immigrant groups, hoping to deter Muslims from settling in their countries. A lot of money is being invested in the effort, and the propaganda is thick with misinformation about the benefits and risks.
They can even, if they’re very very creative/completionist or maybe in a different climate, abuse them in a way the culture I’m from didn’t. Reactionary fetishization of indigeneity is only very slightly better than instinctive condemnation of a thing because it’s unlike you.
Only you’re blowing it out of proportion to support the bullshit cultural agenda you started this stupid debate with. Now you’re switching tracks to make it about health and wellness?
That seems like it falls into the same category as ‘protecting your children from all the scary shit on the internet’.
Like, sure, but your action seems awfully severe and like it wouldn’t do that. Like the action and proclaimed goal have never been in the same room.
Plus modern western conceptions of pain are bullshit and I kind of think it exists purely as an excuse to abusive authority that can only be justified by the fact pain-fear is the dumbest easiest and therefore most-popular-among-authorities method of control, so physical cowardice has become a kind of synonym for loyalty/virtue. But that’s besides the point, I’m sure these infections you’re talking about are real and dangerous and not mostly made up hyperbolizing.
The cultural institution of pederasty practiced by the noble terf islander civilizations serves to impart a certain stoicism and strength of character to their future leaders. Its a valid cultural practice, and just because you don’t agree with it doesn’t mean it’s wrong.
Its a cultural institution to rape children in TERF islander private schools.
Tell me why this is different, admit you’re a disingenuous lying fuck defending sick shit for made up dogmatic reasons you have no understanding of, or admit you’re a pedophile.
The “procedure” you’re referring to is, by definition, genital mutilation. Which is intentionally inflicting trauma on a child. That is child abuse.
If they were truly able to consent (which is not possible due to power imbalance), then maybe you’d have an argument. Maybe. But the truth is this “procedure” is for the express purpose of forcing puritanical beliefs and lifestyle into another. So, again, its literally child abuse.
Believing that your religious views override any of this? That’s bigotry.
Your “cultural practices” ends when it harms another sentient being. Funny how you also want to harm the animals for selfish reasons by pushing misinformation on the plant-based diet to make excuses to eat the flesh and secretions of others.
The main purpose of male circumcision is to prevent harm. Funny how you are so passionate about a subject you don’t even understand. You have the whole idea backwards.
The motive might be to prevent harm, but motive does not justify actions. Parents literally used to beat children, to make them more obedient and thereby “protecting” them. Some parents today will prevent their child being vaccinated from life threatening diseases, because in their culture vaccines are seen as bad, and their warped view of medicine makes them think they are protecting their children.
It seems you’re very uneducated. Genital mutilation is performed in order to mark the child as a member of an insane cult, and hinder masturbation. This is very well documented by cult “scholars”. The “reduce infection” thing is a new excuse made up to fool normal people into tolerating insane child abusing cultists.
Oh. Are you saying that 2 year olds in your culture are capable of maintaining “modern hygiene standards”? Is that a measure of how advanced your culture is?
If you define your cultural identity by the need to unnecessarily mutilate the genitals of children, then your culture is shit and does not deserve respect or acceptance.
Take a step back and consider what it is you’re defending here.
No. The bigotry would be not applying that logic across the board; doing it ICC style.
You are engaging in a brand of ‘bebevolent’ fetishization of ‘barbaric’ peoples and othering them, applying different values to them than to yourself. This is bigotry, even if it’s not hateful. Its genuinely disgusting.
I can imagine someone like you defending some of the things that my culture of origin did to me as a child this same way, and I’m white, so you wouldn’t; you’d apply values to me like I’m an actual person, but imagining someone who did? I’d fucking kill them
Just because it’s traditional does not mean it isn’t fucked up shit. Could I be wrong because I don’t know the context? Totally! But melanin is just color, not inherent fucking virtue. Don’t fetishize other cultures. They could suck as much as yours.
Many cultural traditions have practical origins. In climates where water is scarce, cleaning is often more difficult. And given the high likelihood of early childhood infections relating to the foreskin, in many of those cultures you apparently look down on, it is considered common sense to remove it before it becomes a problem.
Yeah. I remember some of the ones practiced on me.
The practical origins were things like control, degradation, fear. Practical purposes are not always valid or good. Some cultures are fucked up and if everything about them burned it would be an acceptable sacrifice for the amount of bullshit we’re getting rid of.
early childhood infections
Okay. But Europe and Asia don’t do this, don’t have a long tradition of this. Do surrounding cultural groups?
What infections? Infections are well within the realm of academia, we study the shit out of infections, and with cis dudes doing most of the science finding, I think dick infections their causes and their remedies is something I would expect a flood of academic material on.
look down on
I don’t assume they’re less than half as depraved tyrannical and shitty as the dumpster fire I fell out of. Sometimes I’m surprised, sometimes I’m not.
common sense
Okay but is it? A few of the women in my family, extremely high genetic cancer risk, removed a breast at the drop of a hat, like first hint radical mastectomy being planned instead of any tests, no attempt to save anything. I, not being an insane reactionary defined by a childish trauma response and kind of liking my breasts¹ might take a more measured approach. I can’t help but think these kids, these literal children, are not sufficiently informed for these decisions to be made with the amount of cultural inertia behind them.
It is child abuse. You only do it because it’s always been done before. That’s what cultural means. You have No reason, other than, we’ve always done it, so we can never rethink it. That’s what you’re saying. Never question the reason. Don’t think about if it’s right or wrong, it’s “cultural” therefore we just do it blindly without questioning. And you, the person acting blindly, following cruel practices, just because they’ve always been done, thinks you’re in the right, and everyone who can think for themselves and question things, is just wrong. You know that’s delusional, right.
The term “cultural” has a lot of meanings that have nothing to do with your narrow definition.
And the “reason” for male circumcision is mostly to prevent early childhood infections. It’s like any other decision that parents make for the health and wellbeing of their children. Waiting until the child is “old enough to decide for themselves”, does nothing to protect your child from potential harm.
All unnessecary child genital mutilation is fucked up, even when done in the USA or any other country, whether for religious or parental choice reasons. The only appropriate circumcision is for direct medical intervention or by the informed consent of the gentals’ owner.
Archangel1313… are you okay? Is everything good? I don’t see how not wanting people to mutilate other people’s genitals is bigotry. Or is this a disingenuous “parents’ rights” argument?
I don’t think “healthy” describes the loss of sensitivity, slight deformity, scars, and unease I have about mine. And mine was done for medical reasons when there were other alternatives. Mutilation does feel more accurate.
There is zero biological reason to remove foreskin. It’s objectively mutilation.
I’m circumsized. I did not give anyone permission to remove a part of my penis that was perfectly healthy when I was an infant and could not consent. I want you to quantify to me how I was not done wrong, and how my bodily autonomy was not violated. I understand that isn’t the case in the article, but it’s the perfect example for you to argue.
Also, just because a culture or religion does something doesn’t mean I have to support it, and it definitely doesn’t make me a bigot to oppose it. Iran will stone women to death under Sharia Law. Am I a bigot for saying stoning women is bad?
It almost completely prevents balanitis in young boys, and has long term benefits in preventing other types of infections later in life. And that’s on top of the fact that it’s simply easier to keep clean, in general.
Equating that to stoning a woman under Sharia Law, is absurd and intellectually dishonest. Which is why making those types of comparisons is a form of bigotry. You are making ridiculous generalizations in order to denigrate other people.
They’re always going on about cleaning in and behind the ears. Let’s be honest here. Ears are pretty ugly and you don’t need them to hear. You can prevent so many infections because cutting off the ear makes it easier to clean the ear canal.
The WHO doean’t support this, and I’ve lived and worked in medicine all over Africa. You teach them and support them with better self-care, not encouraging genital mutilation. No matter how much shit you sling at the wind, you can literally accomplish this by educating people to wash their dicks.
Refute my challenge you ignored. I never consented to being circumsized and I was circumsized for the same reason. Justify to me how my bodily autonomly wasn’t violated as a baby when someone cut off a piece of my penis.
I want to hear your armchair quarterback mental gymnastic bullshit since we’re actively trying to teach people all over Weat Africa to just wash your dick.
You know how I know you don’t actually work in medicine? Because you’re using the term “mutilation” to describe a relatively benign medical procedure. Regardless of whether or not you view it as necessary…at the very least, you should know what that word actually implies…and you would know that it doesn’t apply.
According to your first paragraph, we should just remove the pinky finger from all children because it just gets in the way, traps bacteria under the fingernail, and might get caught in a car door someday.
So, would you then describe all forms of surgery as “mutilation”? Or tattoos? Pierced ears? Hair cuts? They all fit the definition, as long as you see them as “harmful” or “destructive”.
What makes the term derogatory is its inherently negative context. Applying it to hundreds of millions of people, is equally harmful and negative. That’s what makes it a form of bigotry. You are making a broadly generalized, inherently negative assertion about an entire demographic.
You don’t have a moral leg to stand on; just surface reactionary parodies of anticolonial thought. You’re on the Canadian server so I’m gonna assume this isn’t personal. You aren’t displaying a concrete knowledge of this culture, so I’m going to assume this isn’t personal. And of course: that culture’s not gonna fuck you.
What makes a difference is this is the non-consensual removal of a piece of the penis that has something like 30% of the total nerve endings in your entire dick, from an infant. It’s not okay to pierce baby’s ears either, or give them tattoos moron.
Adults can mutilate their dicks all they want. I’m completely in favor of 100% body autonomy for adults.
You support mutilating babies. Not too long ago, it was generally acceptable to rape kids as well, and that is horrific to think about for most of us now. None consensual baby circumcision will be just as disgusting and barbaric in the future, I’m sure of it.
The comment you’re replying to has got to be a bot. Like, wtf? What kind of sick individual calls it derogatory to say, “Hey, let’s not mutilate childrens’ genitals.”
Tell me youre a fucked up psychopath with telling me.
What the actual fuck does being a white supremacist have to do with male genitals mutilation?
Let’s put it this way. If your cultural, religious, or ideological leanings require you to cut off foreskins or clitoral hoods off unconsenting children, youre a sick fuck.
If you dont have those cultural, religious, or ideological leanings, and you just enjoy watching children get mutilated, youre a sick fuck.
White supremacists and child circumcision enthusiasts such as yourself are all sick fucks.
This entire debate has gained traction over the last 10-15 years, largely because European white nationalists have been promoting anti-immigration legislation in several EU countries, in response to the influx of Syrian refugees after the Arab Spring.
They thought that by passing anti-circumcision laws in their countries, those immigrants would choose to settle elsewhere. All they had to do, was amplify and promote pseudo-scientific studies proclaiming the “evils” of “male genital mutilation” in order to turn public support in their favor.
It worked like a charm. Now all you guys are repeating the same racist bullshit, without even realizing where you got it from.
Exactly. You are basically saying that circumcised men are disfigured. Are you aware of how inherently negative that description is for circumcised men? Does it not bother you to refer to other men with such disdain and disrespect?
You’ve got the wrong person. The only thing I did was deliver to you the dictionary definition of the word mutilate. I made no other claims, expressions, or comments on the topic at hand.
You have shifted to a common logical fallacy called the Straw Man argument. This attempt has failed.
Is not doing things to children’s (or anyone’s) bodies without their consent (which they may not be capable of, depending on what for) is a cost? Like, if you were designing a society, would the ‘stuff done to the bodies of children (or fucking anyone) without their consent’ number be one you’re proud of making smaller?
Did the kid want their ear pierced, with decent understanding of the cultural weight that’s pushing them?
Or is it only allowed because it’s the thing that their parents did? Could the kid as easily get a genital piercing? Full back tattoo of Richard Nixon’s face? Cool face scar?
One could argue that alfeeling that ear mutilations is ok is a cultural thing. Many very young children have their ears pieced, and probably more than half of girls get their ears pierced before they are at the age of consent.
Personally I don’t agree with very young children having their ears pierced, nor do I necessarily agree they need to reach the full age of consent to do so. Definitely it should be done at the child’s request and not the parent’s desire, after careful consideration and not on a whim.
There’s also a world of difference between a small hole that will usually close over if left unused and irreversibly cutting a chunk of a child’s genitals off, while these two things both raise questions of informed consent they should not be seen as equivalent.
Talk about “intentional misunderstanding”, when you’re the one repeating white nationalist talking points used to promote anti-immigration policies in the EU.
Not from what I’ve seen in n America - most girls under 16 already have their ears pierced. And such ear mutilation of girls without their ability to consent seems to be culturally fine.
Of course the two situations aren’t identical, that’s how analogies work and it’s still a useful part of critical thinking.
The point is that it’s not quite as black and white as many people think. If these boys at 16 want their diicks cut and it’s part of their culture and done properly, I’m not going to say it’s bad. Obviously in the case of this article, it was not done right.
Circumcision just after birth is a separate issue; but I’m not particularly against it having had it done to me and not feeling that I am lacking anything as a result.
Are you even aware of how common foreskin infections are among young boys? What you call an “unnecessary procedure” is considered a preventative measure for millions of fathers around the world. Why would you choose to risk your son’s health and well-being, when a simple procedure at birth can effectively remove that risk entirely?
Imagine taking a pro-circumcision stance in the comments of an article where 41 boys died as a result of the procedure- all while fully KNOWING that in this day and age, it is a brutal and absolutely unnecessary thing to do begin with.
Those boys would still be alive if assholes stoped butchering children’s genitalia.
They died because the procedure was performed far too late in life, by people who were not trained medical professionals, in unsafe conditions.
Using this as an example of why circumcision is “bad”, is a perfect example of how western white nationalists weaponize tragedy to push their narratives into the mainstream. Don’t be so naive.
It would still happen, and be more dangerous. Cultural inertia would keep it happening and the requirement to keep it secret would drive it underground. Education is the way.
There are valid reasons for parents to choose circumcision. I’m not sure religion is a part of that, and I’m not sure that it isn’t. For example, if this were female circumcision based strictly on religion or culture, I’d feel very strongly against it, since it’s to curb pleasure and often leads to infection, from bodily fluids not being able to exit. However, malformed genetalia can also cause complications.
I’m glad I never had to choose gender assignment or not because children in middle school can be cruel, so can misassignment, and as we see, adults can be cruel too.
I posit perhaps such complicated decisions not be based entirely on religion or cultural identity of the parents alone, since what the child chooses as an adult may be very different than what the parent prefers.
Cut off a body part because sometimes it’s a problem later which usually can be treated in a less-destructive manner? No, that’s not a rational response.
Dear World: Stop mutilating children’s genitals.
You should really try reading your own article. These boys died from negligence and unsafe conditions…all of which are avoidable. Keep your bigotry out of it.
These boys died from an unnecessary procedure that should never have been performed on a child who cannot consent. Keep your child abuse out of it.
I get that it’s hard for you to accept other people’s cultural identities, but that’s no excuse to call it child abuse. The issue here is performing a rather simple procedure without proper training or adherence to basic safety standards.
Culture does not excuse child abuse. If they truly want to go through with this, let them do so as adults with minds that are fully developed.
You see? You don’t even know what the procedure is for, and yet you claim some kind of altruism when advocating against it. You have been misled by right-wing propaganda, meant to discriminate against immigrants. Or, you’re just racist and think those people are barbarians for looking out for their children’s well-being in a way you don’t agree with.
Either way, you calling it “child abuse”, doesn’t mean it is.
And you lazily hiding behind pure cultural relativism with absolutely no other explanation doesn’t make it not child abuse.
It always amazes me how ignorant western men are about this subject. No wonder you view men that practice it as if they are barbaric or “lesser-than”. That’s how most bigotry works though…through ignorance.
The foreskin is highly susceptible to infection during early childhood. Especially in regions where cleaning the foreskin is not as easy. It’s a perfect example of how a common sense health measure becomes a cultural tradition.
I think it’s far more lazy to simply write it off as some kind of barbaric practice, instead of utilizing some critical thinking about why it’s so common.
Lol “western men.” Okay. You couldn’t sound more like an American man right now defending child genital mutilation. In any event, rambling incoherently about how evil western men are to defend child genital mutilation isn’t convincing anybody that your position has any merit, and most people in the developing world would find it weird.
You’re the only ignorant one here, you disgusting child abuser.
Yeah. I know in the southern hemisphere brushing your teeth can get really difficult too.
Fucking exoticizing fetishizing bullshit.
If this were about “looking out for their children’s well-being,” then wouldn’t they follow the suggestions of doctors and specialists in the field of pediatrics?
They do. The push to have circumcision banned in many EU countries is the result of a concerted effort by anti-immigrant groups, hoping to deter Muslims from settling in their countries. A lot of money is being invested in the effort, and the propaganda is thick with misinformation about the benefits and risks.
Everything I don’t like is racism.
You though, you’re totally clear and unpropagandized
No, no, because you see doctors are secretly lizard people.
People not from my culture can abuse children.
They can even, if they’re very very creative/completionist or maybe in a different climate, abuse them in a way the culture I’m from didn’t. Reactionary fetishization of indigeneity is only very slightly better than instinctive condemnation of a thing because it’s unlike you.
Protecting your child from potentially painful infections during their early childhood, is not child abuse.
Only you’re blowing it out of proportion to support the bullshit cultural agenda you started this stupid debate with. Now you’re switching tracks to make it about health and wellness?
That seems like it falls into the same category as ‘protecting your children from all the scary shit on the internet’.
Like, sure, but your action seems awfully severe and like it wouldn’t do that. Like the action and proclaimed goal have never been in the same room.
Plus modern western conceptions of pain are bullshit and I kind of think it exists purely as an excuse to abusive authority that can only be justified by the fact pain-fear is the dumbest easiest and therefore most-popular-among-authorities method of control, so physical cowardice has become a kind of synonym for loyalty/virtue. But that’s besides the point, I’m sure these infections you’re talking about are real and dangerous and not mostly made up hyperbolizing.
That’s what you sound like.
What’s your take on catholic priests abusing children?
Its a cultural institution to rape children in TERF islander private schools.
Tell me why this is different, admit you’re a disingenuous lying fuck defending sick shit for made up dogmatic reasons you have no understanding of, or admit you’re a pedophile.
The “procedure” you’re referring to is, by definition, genital mutilation. Which is intentionally inflicting trauma on a child. That is child abuse.
If they were truly able to consent (which is not possible due to power imbalance), then maybe you’d have an argument. Maybe. But the truth is this “procedure” is for the express purpose of forcing puritanical beliefs and lifestyle into another. So, again, its literally child abuse.
Believing that your religious views override any of this? That’s bigotry.
No, buddy…bigotry is applying the most derogatory terms you can think of, to denigrate other people’s cultural practices.
Your “cultural practices” ends when it harms another sentient being. Funny how you also want to harm the animals for selfish reasons by pushing misinformation on the plant-based diet to make excuses to eat the flesh and secretions of others.
The main purpose of male circumcision is to prevent harm. Funny how you are so passionate about a subject you don’t even understand. You have the whole idea backwards.
The motive might be to prevent harm, but motive does not justify actions. Parents literally used to beat children, to make them more obedient and thereby “protecting” them. Some parents today will prevent their child being vaccinated from life threatening diseases, because in their culture vaccines are seen as bad, and their warped view of medicine makes them think they are protecting their children.
Motive is not justification.
It seems you’re very uneducated. Genital mutilation is performed in order to mark the child as a member of an insane cult, and hinder masturbation. This is very well documented by cult “scholars”. The “reduce infection” thing is a new excuse made up to fool normal people into tolerating insane child abusing cultists.
Shoooosh!
Is that why King David ordered all of those foreskins? He was looking out for their genital hygiene?
Lol ok bud.
I think fetishizing and othering foreign cultures, suggesting they’re incapable of modern hygeine standards, etc,is also pretty fucking bigoted.
Oh. Are you saying that 2 year olds in your culture are capable of maintaining “modern hygiene standards”? Is that a measure of how advanced your culture is?
Do you think the African two year old bathes themselves? The depths of racism on you. Holy shit.
If your cultural identity is child abuse, go fuck yourself.
If you define your cultural identity by the need to unnecessarily mutilate the genitals of children, then your culture is shit and does not deserve respect or acceptance.
Take a step back and consider what it is you’re defending here.
And there’s that bigotry I mentioned.
No. The bigotry would be not applying that logic across the board; doing it ICC style.
You are engaging in a brand of ‘bebevolent’ fetishization of ‘barbaric’ peoples and othering them, applying different values to them than to yourself. This is bigotry, even if it’s not hateful. Its genuinely disgusting.
I can imagine someone like you defending some of the things that my culture of origin did to me as a child this same way, and I’m white, so you wouldn’t; you’d apply values to me like I’m an actual person, but imagining someone who did? I’d fucking kill them
I get that it’s hard for you to call if for what it is, but it is genital mutilation. There’s zero need for it. They can’t consent to it.
The culture I’m from is mostly fucked up shit.
Just because it’s traditional does not mean it isn’t fucked up shit. Could I be wrong because I don’t know the context? Totally! But melanin is just color, not inherent fucking virtue. Don’t fetishize other cultures. They could suck as much as yours.
Many cultural traditions have practical origins. In climates where water is scarce, cleaning is often more difficult. And given the high likelihood of early childhood infections relating to the foreskin, in many of those cultures you apparently look down on, it is considered common sense to remove it before it becomes a problem.
The foreskin/glans is self cleaning, if it was this big hazard to our health and safety it would not have evolved.
Tell that to the appendix.
The appendix is rarely a health hazard, it’s just useless. Hence why it didn’t filter itself out.
deleted by creator
Then why is infection so common?
Yeah. I remember some of the ones practiced on me.
The practical origins were things like control, degradation, fear. Practical purposes are not always valid or good. Some cultures are fucked up and if everything about them burned it would be an acceptable sacrifice for the amount of bullshit we’re getting rid of.
Okay. But Europe and Asia don’t do this, don’t have a long tradition of this. Do surrounding cultural groups?
What infections? Infections are well within the realm of academia, we study the shit out of infections, and with cis dudes doing most of the science finding, I think dick infections their causes and their remedies is something I would expect a flood of academic material on.
I don’t assume they’re less than half as depraved tyrannical and shitty as the dumpster fire I fell out of. Sometimes I’m surprised, sometimes I’m not.
Okay but is it? A few of the women in my family, extremely high genetic cancer risk, removed a breast at the drop of a hat, like first hint radical mastectomy being planned instead of any tests, no attempt to save anything. I, not being an insane reactionary defined by a childish trauma response and kind of liking my breasts¹ might take a more measured approach. I can’t help but think these kids, these literal children, are not sufficiently informed for these decisions to be made with the amount of cultural inertia behind them.
¹and having anything to lose
It is child abuse. You only do it because it’s always been done before. That’s what cultural means. You have No reason, other than, we’ve always done it, so we can never rethink it. That’s what you’re saying. Never question the reason. Don’t think about if it’s right or wrong, it’s “cultural” therefore we just do it blindly without questioning. And you, the person acting blindly, following cruel practices, just because they’ve always been done, thinks you’re in the right, and everyone who can think for themselves and question things, is just wrong. You know that’s delusional, right.
The term “cultural” has a lot of meanings that have nothing to do with your narrow definition.
And the “reason” for male circumcision is mostly to prevent early childhood infections. It’s like any other decision that parents make for the health and wellbeing of their children. Waiting until the child is “old enough to decide for themselves”, does nothing to protect your child from potential harm.
Fuck off with your pedophile procedures.
This guy HAS to be a troll.
All unnessecary child genital mutilation is fucked up, even when done in the USA or any other country, whether for religious or parental choice reasons. The only appropriate circumcision is for direct medical intervention or by the informed consent of the gentals’ owner.
Please ceremonies are usually performed on older adolescent or young adult males. It marks the change from child to adulthood.
Not that I’m in favor of it in any case, but it’s not being done on infants, like in North America.
Archangel1313… are you okay? Is everything good? I don’t see how not wanting people to mutilate other people’s genitals is bigotry. Or is this a disingenuous “parents’ rights” argument?
It’s not bigotry to be opposed to genital mutilation.
Using the term “mutilation” to describe someone’s perfectly healthy penis, is a form of bigotry.
As someone who is perfectly comfortable with his circumcized penis: it’s absolutely mutilation.
Agreed. My parents had me snipped. When I asked why it was basically “well everyone was doing it.”
My son is intact and can make his own decision about it when he’s older.
I don’t think “healthy” describes the loss of sensitivity, slight deformity, scars, and unease I have about mine. And mine was done for medical reasons when there were other alternatives. Mutilation does feel more accurate.
There is zero biological reason to remove foreskin. It’s objectively mutilation.
I’m circumsized. I did not give anyone permission to remove a part of my penis that was perfectly healthy when I was an infant and could not consent. I want you to quantify to me how I was not done wrong, and how my bodily autonomy was not violated. I understand that isn’t the case in the article, but it’s the perfect example for you to argue.
Also, just because a culture or religion does something doesn’t mean I have to support it, and it definitely doesn’t make me a bigot to oppose it. Iran will stone women to death under Sharia Law. Am I a bigot for saying stoning women is bad?
Infant genital mutilation is disgusting and I think it’s about time it’s made illegal around the world. I’m sorry about your penis.
It almost completely prevents balanitis in young boys, and has long term benefits in preventing other types of infections later in life. And that’s on top of the fact that it’s simply easier to keep clean, in general.
Equating that to stoning a woman under Sharia Law, is absurd and intellectually dishonest. Which is why making those types of comparisons is a form of bigotry. You are making ridiculous generalizations in order to denigrate other people.
You know what’s hard to keep clean? An open wound on your dick. It’s why these 41 people are dead.
‘Easier to keep clean’.
So what other body modification should we do to infants to make them cleaner?
They’re always going on about cleaning in and behind the ears. Let’s be honest here. Ears are pretty ugly and you don’t need them to hear. You can prevent so many infections because cutting off the ear makes it easier to clean the ear canal.
infant Earectomy infection study
It’s a joke
Well then, ears it is!
The WHO doean’t support this, and I’ve lived and worked in medicine all over Africa. You teach them and support them with better self-care, not encouraging genital mutilation. No matter how much shit you sling at the wind, you can literally accomplish this by educating people to wash their dicks.
Refute my challenge you ignored. I never consented to being circumsized and I was circumsized for the same reason. Justify to me how my bodily autonomly wasn’t violated as a baby when someone cut off a piece of my penis.
I want to hear your armchair quarterback mental gymnastic bullshit since we’re actively trying to teach people all over Weat Africa to just wash your dick.
You know how I know you don’t actually work in medicine? Because you’re using the term “mutilation” to describe a relatively benign medical procedure. Regardless of whether or not you view it as necessary…at the very least, you should know what that word actually implies…and you would know that it doesn’t apply.
Apparently you either don’t understand English or you’re just angry that you have a mutilated dick.
Hey, I’d be angry too, if someone had mutilated my penis.
According to your first paragraph, we should just remove the pinky finger from all children because it just gets in the way, traps bacteria under the fingernail, and might get caught in a car door someday.
Plural mutilations
Synonyms of mutilation
1
: an act or instance of destroying, removing, or severely damaging a limb or other body part of a person or animal
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mutilation
Circumcision is literally a textbook example of the word multilation
So, would you then describe all forms of surgery as “mutilation”? Or tattoos? Pierced ears? Hair cuts? They all fit the definition, as long as you see them as “harmful” or “destructive”.
What makes the term derogatory is its inherently negative context. Applying it to hundreds of millions of people, is equally harmful and negative. That’s what makes it a form of bigotry. You are making a broadly generalized, inherently negative assertion about an entire demographic.
You don’t have a moral leg to stand on; just surface reactionary parodies of anticolonial thought. You’re on the Canadian server so I’m gonna assume this isn’t personal. You aren’t displaying a concrete knowledge of this culture, so I’m going to assume this isn’t personal. And of course: that culture’s not gonna fuck you.
You can stop.
What makes a difference is this is the non-consensual removal of a piece of the penis that has something like 30% of the total nerve endings in your entire dick, from an infant. It’s not okay to pierce baby’s ears either, or give them tattoos moron.
Adults can mutilate their dicks all they want. I’m completely in favor of 100% body autonomy for adults.
You support mutilating babies. Not too long ago, it was generally acceptable to rape kids as well, and that is horrific to think about for most of us now. None consensual baby circumcision will be just as disgusting and barbaric in the future, I’m sure of it.
Here we go with the rampant misinformation. Always relying on bullshit to make a point that doesn’t exist.
Was and in cities like Atlanta and London its still considered acceptable to rape children. How dare you criticize the practice.
It’s a tradition!
Tattoos? Yes
Pierced ears? Yes
Hair cuts? No
HTH
Genital mutilation is also avoidable.
Using derogatory terms like that is what makes it bigotry.
Please point to the derogatory word in the sentence
The comment you’re replying to has got to be a bot. Like, wtf? What kind of sick individual calls it derogatory to say, “Hey, let’s not mutilate childrens’ genitals.”
Tell me youre a fucked up psychopath with telling me.
Not a bot, dude. Just also not a white supremacist.
What the actual fuck does being a white supremacist have to do with male genitals mutilation?
Let’s put it this way. If your cultural, religious, or ideological leanings require you to cut off foreskins or clitoral hoods off unconsenting children, youre a sick fuck.
If you dont have those cultural, religious, or ideological leanings, and you just enjoy watching children get mutilated, youre a sick fuck.
White supremacists and child circumcision enthusiasts such as yourself are all sick fucks.
This entire debate has gained traction over the last 10-15 years, largely because European white nationalists have been promoting anti-immigration legislation in several EU countries, in response to the influx of Syrian refugees after the Arab Spring.
They thought that by passing anti-circumcision laws in their countries, those immigrants would choose to settle elsewhere. All they had to do, was amplify and promote pseudo-scientific studies proclaiming the “evils” of “male genital mutilation” in order to turn public support in their favor.
It worked like a charm. Now all you guys are repeating the same racist bullshit, without even realizing where you got it from.
The term “mutilation” is inherently derogatory.
It is not derogatory. The word means:
“… or disfigure, especially by cutting off tissue or body parts.”
from Latin mutilātus (past participle of mutilāre “to cut off, maim”)
Exactly. You are basically saying that circumcised men are disfigured. Are you aware of how inherently negative that description is for circumcised men? Does it not bother you to refer to other men with such disdain and disrespect?
Maybe stop actively supporting the permanent disfiguring of newborns and we might show even your mutilated dick some respect?
And yes, all circumcised men are disfigured.
The disdain isn’t for the victims of the mutilation, it’s for people like you who should know better.
You’ve got the wrong person. The only thing I did was deliver to you the dictionary definition of the word mutilate. I made no other claims, expressions, or comments on the topic at hand.
You have shifted to a common logical fallacy called the Straw Man argument. This attempt has failed.
This conversation is over.
The same term is used for women.
Shoooosh!
“Stop cutting off the foreskin of literal children and barely-not-children.”
“BIGOT!”
-some idiot
So, not mutilating kids’ genitals is…bigotry???
Fuck no. Like, seriously, your position is factually incorrect. And, frankly, the tone of superiority makes you sound, well, like a fucking bigot.
Using the term “mutilation” to describe a minor surgical procedure, due to your own cultural biases, is what makes it bigotry.
Is not doing things to children’s (or anyone’s) bodies without their consent (which they may not be capable of, depending on what for) is a cost? Like, if you were designing a society, would the ‘stuff done to the bodies of children (or fucking anyone) without their consent’ number be one you’re proud of making smaller?
How does this apply to kids getting ears pierced?
Did the kid want their ear pierced, with decent understanding of the cultural weight that’s pushing them?
Or is it only allowed because it’s the thing that their parents did? Could the kid as easily get a genital piercing? Full back tattoo of Richard Nixon’s face? Cool face scar?
One could argue that alfeeling that ear mutilations is ok is a cultural thing. Many very young children have their ears pieced, and probably more than half of girls get their ears pierced before they are at the age of consent.
Personally I don’t agree with very young children having their ears pierced, nor do I necessarily agree they need to reach the full age of consent to do so. Definitely it should be done at the child’s request and not the parent’s desire, after careful consideration and not on a whim.
There’s also a world of difference between a small hole that will usually close over if left unused and irreversibly cutting a chunk of a child’s genitals off, while these two things both raise questions of informed consent they should not be seen as equivalent.
What does the term “mutilation” actually mean in your mind?
Don’t touch their junk and there’s no article.
Check your bigotry, and there is no outrage.
👍
Intersex infants having surgeries forced upon them is morally wrong.
I am curious now, what is usually done in this case?
They essentially flip a coin and then go with one.
The doctor forces down vuvloplasty and calls the baby a girl because people are afraid of unique plumbing.
I guess you also disagree with doing any surgery on infants, for the same reason?
Here we go with the intentional misunderstanding. Stop mutilating the private parts of infants.
Talk about “intentional misunderstanding”, when you’re the one repeating white nationalist talking points used to promote anti-immigration policies in the EU.
Let me guess if someone critiques states persecuting women for having lifesaving abortions “that’s bigotry too”
Those are some mighty self-righteous words for somebody who advocates chopping off clitorises.
Nice false equivalence. I’m not talking about female circumcision.
You may not want to, but you are.
Unnecessary procedures to mutilate the body are morally and ethically wrong regardless of the age of the patient.
For fucks sake. How on earth can you be in defense of this abuse? Please, explain why you support this.
Like getting ears pierced?
Ears are predominantly pierced when age of consent is reached and no place will do it without that consent.
Parents doing this to their children without consent- are abusing their children.
So in a way, yeah- like ears being pierced.
Additionally, pieced ears heal back if left alone. Circumcision is permanent mutilation.
Man I love blowing up false equivalency fallacies! Thanks for this!
Not from what I’ve seen in n America - most girls under 16 already have their ears pierced. And such ear mutilation of girls without their ability to consent seems to be culturally fine.
Of course the two situations aren’t identical, that’s how analogies work and it’s still a useful part of critical thinking.
The point is that it’s not quite as black and white as many people think. If these boys at 16 want their diicks cut and it’s part of their culture and done properly, I’m not going to say it’s bad. Obviously in the case of this article, it was not done right. Circumcision just after birth is a separate issue; but I’m not particularly against it having had it done to me and not feeling that I am lacking anything as a result.
We’re going to agree to disagree on this.
Are you even aware of how common foreskin infections are among young boys? What you call an “unnecessary procedure” is considered a preventative measure for millions of fathers around the world. Why would you choose to risk your son’s health and well-being, when a simple procedure at birth can effectively remove that risk entirely?
Read up
So now imagine if that “ritual” never took place-
if in said imagination, you can see that those boys would still be alive, then I’d say you’re half way there.
You’ll be all the way there when you are able to come to this conclusion all on your own.
These boys would still be alive if they had had the procedure done by an actual medical professional, in an actual medical clinic.
Imagine taking a pro-circumcision stance in the comments of an article where 41 boys died as a result of the procedure- all while fully KNOWING that in this day and age, it is a brutal and absolutely unnecessary thing to do begin with.
Those boys would still be alive if assholes stoped butchering children’s genitalia.
END OF DEBATE.
They died because the procedure was performed far too late in life, by people who were not trained medical professionals, in unsafe conditions.
Using this as an example of why circumcision is “bad”, is a perfect example of how western white nationalists weaponize tragedy to push their narratives into the mainstream. Don’t be so naive.
Now imagine if those procedures were outlawed for being barbaric and unnecessary.
It would still happen, and be more dangerous. Cultural inertia would keep it happening and the requirement to keep it secret would drive it underground. Education is the way.
True, they should have just had a rabbi use their mouth to do it while they were still an infant. Good point.
Removed by mod
There are valid reasons for parents to choose circumcision. I’m not sure religion is a part of that, and I’m not sure that it isn’t. For example, if this were female circumcision based strictly on religion or culture, I’d feel very strongly against it, since it’s to curb pleasure and often leads to infection, from bodily fluids not being able to exit. However, malformed genetalia can also cause complications.
I’m glad I never had to choose gender assignment or not because children in middle school can be cruel, so can misassignment, and as we see, adults can be cruel too.
I posit perhaps such complicated decisions not be based entirely on religion or cultural identity of the parents alone, since what the child chooses as an adult may be very different than what the parent prefers.
I don’t believe this is true.
Kidney issues, prone to UTI, etc.
Dick cheese
Avoidable with the most basic hygiene.
Have you met teenage boys?
I was one? I just washed my dick in the shower.
Which as everybody knows has been available and abundant in every and all parts of the world for all of history.
Correct, which is why we have foreskin. Evolution doesn’t typically select for fatal reproductive mistakes.
Happens to girls, too.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phimosis
Cut off a body part because sometimes it’s a problem later which usually can be treated in a less-destructive manner? No, that’s not a rational response.