2 ms·
Perhaps. But like with most medical procedures there is risk vs reward. In this case the risk is a 100% chance of altering how your child's sex organs look and
by IgorPartola 10y ago
Perhaps. But like with most medical procedures there is risk vs reward. In this case the risk is a 100% chance of altering how your child's sex organs look and function without their knowledge or consent vs a small and dubious reward.
In other words don't fucking do it because it is barbaric and evil. If you think it's not, ask an uncircumcised adult to have the procedure done for all the benefits it provides and see how many agree.
- colbyh 10y agoYou're not even making rational arguments, you're vilifying a procedure you happen to dislike. The fact is that the entire medical community agrees there are benefits to either approach, so letting parents decide is the more reasonable stance here.
- IgorPartola 10y agoNo. The entire medical community does not agree. The argument that risk vs reward should be considered and the reward does not actually outweigh the risk is, to me, a pretty reasonable argument. No I don't like the procedure, any more than I like female circumcision or any other form of genital mutilation. Especially in the US, circumcision is popular not because of any supposed health benefits, and not because of any religious reasons, but simply because it was initially popularized as a part of an anti-masturbation campaign hard fought by John Kellogg and his comrades (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Harvey_Kellogg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Harvey_Kellogg). In the modern world it has nothing to do with cleanliness or health. It is a savage and barbaric tradition passed down from generation to generation. Thankfully, the numbers are now starting to come down as people realize that taking a knife to their newborn sons' genitals is probably not a nice thing to do.