4 ms·

Let's add some nuance: Circumcision, for (orthodox) Jews, is one of the most fundamental conditions for identification and belonging to that group. Leaving a J

by pugio 9y ago

Let's add some nuance: Circumcision, for (orthodox) Jews, is one of the most fundamental conditions for identification and belonging to that group. Leaving a Jewish male baby uncircumcised would most likely lead to feelings of alienation and isolation later on in life – feelings which could have significant psychological impact and could largely negate the benefits one gains from strong communal structures. Regardless of the process's inherent morality, a blanket ban may cause more harm than good. Cultures have dependency trees, like a Jenga tower: remove one block, even one that, in isolation, is a negative, and you risk destabilizing the entire structure and causing significantly more net harm than that single negative you erased. More generally, I'd propose a corollary to Chesterson's fence [1]: Before you (in righteous external-observer outrage) destroy an element of a culture, make sure you understand what role that element plays, and what harm you may cause with such heavy handed destruction. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._K._Chesterton#Chesterton.27s_fence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G._K._Chesterton#Chesterton.27...

wyager 9y ago
The same is true for female genital mutilation in certain Islamic cultures. I still don't think "it's culturally important" is a reasonable defense, and I doubt you do either. And just to cut off this objection, the vast majority of female circumcision involves removal of the clitoral hood, which is (mutatis mutandis) anatomically equivalent to removal of the foreskin and has similar effects and risks.
- gotchange 9y ago
  By the way, FGM is not an exclusively Islamic tradition in some Muslim-majority countries. There are certain non-Muslim African communities that engage in these awful practices.
- EGreg 9y ago
  You are factually wrong about the majority of FGM removing just the foreskin. Most FGM is type II https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_mutilation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_mutilation Saying it has similar effects and risks is just handwaving. And it is largely practiced in Africa, where tribal ritualistic bodily modification has remained a much bigger thing (compared to the rest of the world). Consider women who stretch their lips with disks to attract men etc.
bluejekyll 9y ago
No. Full stop. Just as with female genital mutilation, male genital mutilation should be banned. For religious purposes this proposal should fit: https://www.google.com/amp/www.newsweek.com/fgm-compromise-nick-western-countries-429250%3Famp%3D1 https://www.google.com/amp/www.newsweek.com/fgm-compromise-n... That is a nick, not full mutilation.
- EGreg 9y ago
  That nick is the equivalent of male circumcision and is practiced by the Bohras, an Islamic sect. It makes a tiny incision for girls in the foreskin covering the clitoris and it is not clear that this reduces sexual pleasure in the future. It is very far from FGM which removes the clitoris etc. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawoodi_Bohra https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawoodi_Bohra We have hundreds of years of data on Jewish males and how they fare after this operation at 8 days old, and it is not at all clear that they are medically or psychologically worse off than without it. The fact that it is considered a requirement in the Jewish religion for membership in the Jewish people plays a major role in the phychological well being of the child and adult, and as the parent comment has said this needs to be considered!
  - bluejekyll 9y ago
    Thank you for pointing out that the FGM nick actually has lasting effects. I was not aware of that, and it's not something that I support. > The fact that it is considered a requirement in the Jewish religion for membership in the Jewish people plays a major role in the phychological well being of the child and adult, and as the parent comment has said this needs to be considered! And it should be. It should be considered just like stoning is considered, and thrown out as against modern principles (in most places, sadly not all). It should be considered, just like homosexuality should not have you burned at the stake. This is no different. I recognize that this is not a light decision, but it is a brutal act (with non 0% chances of horrible things going wrong) that has no physiological need.
    - jquery 9y ago
gotchange 9y ago
I have a circumcised penis and I am not Jewish. Reducing the Jewish identity to having your penis circumcised is just flawed as it naturally excludes Jewish women. Jewish males can still have their private parts circumcised when they become adult as it was supposed to be the case, a rite of passage for getting into the adult world. Most of your rebuttal is centered around a "slippery-slope" argument and it is not convincing enough.
- relics443 9y ago
  Entirely incorrect. As an orthodox Jew, I can tell you that failure to circumcize your son at 8 days old (outside of extenuating circumstances, e.g. medical issues) is one of the worst sins you could commit. Furthermore, you would be ostracized from the community, and your child will suffer socially, and emotionally. Once the child turns 13 he is responsible to ensure that he it's circumcised, and considering that he most likely will not have abandoned his religion by 13 he will go through with it. So now there's physical pain as well.
  - gotchange 9y ago
    That's a theological critique, mine was sociological one from an outside observer. Still, the theological arguments don't work under a secular government which takes pride in separating the state from religion.
    - relics443 9y ago
      They do. It's called religious persecution. And if a government would ban circumcision, I'd be willing to bet that all Orthodox Jews would leave. And if the government prevented that (which has certainly happened before), then it is well documented that many Jews are ready to give up their lives in order to circumcise their sons. Update: only my first comment was theological; the rest were socio-physical
  - spraak 9y ago
    Babies feel pain, which you seem to be saying they don't with: > by 13 he will go through with it. So now there's physical pain as well.
IshKebab 9y ago
> Leaving a Jewish male baby uncircumcised would most likely lead to feelings of alienation and isolation later on in life Do Jews really go around checking each other's penises all the time?
- pugio 9y ago
  1. Internal identity: Being told that a Jewish male must be circumcised, realizing you're not, and experiencing alienation. This can hit adolescents quite hard. 2. Marriage: Barring a specific medical reason to not be circumcised, many Jewish women would take issue with an uncircumcised husband. 3. Locker rooms. But really #1 is the most immediately pressing.

by pugio 9y ago

wyager 9y ago

The same is true for female genital mutilation in certain Islamic cultures. I still don't think "it's culturally important" is a reasonable defense, and I doubt you do either. And just to cut off this objection, the vast majority of female circumcision involves removal of the clitoral hood, which is (mutatis mutandis) anatomically equivalent to removal of the foreskin and has similar effects and risks.

gotchange 9y ago
By the way, FGM is not an exclusively Islamic tradition in some Muslim-majority countries. There are certain non-Muslim African communities that engage in these awful practices.
EGreg 9y ago
You are factually wrong about the majority of FGM removing just the foreskin. Most FGM is type II https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_mutilation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_mutilation Saying it has similar effects and risks is just handwaving. And it is largely practiced in Africa, where tribal ritualistic bodily modification has remained a much bigger thing (compared to the rest of the world). Consider women who stretch their lips with disks to attract men etc.

bluejekyll 9y ago

No. Full stop. Just as with female genital mutilation, male genital mutilation should be banned. For religious purposes this proposal should fit: https://www.google.com/amp/www.newsweek.com/fgm-compromise-nick-western-countries-429250%3Famp%3D1 https://www.google.com/amp/www.newsweek.com/fgm-compromise-n... That is a nick, not full mutilation.

EGreg 9y ago
That nick is the equivalent of male circumcision and is practiced by the Bohras, an Islamic sect. It makes a tiny incision for girls in the foreskin covering the clitoris and it is not clear that this reduces sexual pleasure in the future. It is very far from FGM which removes the clitoris etc. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawoodi_Bohra https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawoodi_Bohra We have hundreds of years of data on Jewish males and how they fare after this operation at 8 days old, and it is not at all clear that they are medically or psychologically worse off than without it. The fact that it is considered a requirement in the Jewish religion for membership in the Jewish people plays a major role in the phychological well being of the child and adult, and as the parent comment has said this needs to be considered!
- bluejekyll 9y ago
  Thank you for pointing out that the FGM nick actually has lasting effects. I was not aware of that, and it's not something that I support. > The fact that it is considered a requirement in the Jewish religion for membership in the Jewish people plays a major role in the phychological well being of the child and adult, and as the parent comment has said this needs to be considered! And it should be. It should be considered just like stoning is considered, and thrown out as against modern principles (in most places, sadly not all). It should be considered, just like homosexuality should not have you burned at the stake. This is no different. I recognize that this is not a light decision, but it is a brutal act (with non 0% chances of horrible things going wrong) that has no physiological need.
  - jquery 9y ago

gotchange 9y ago

I have a circumcised penis and I am not Jewish. Reducing the Jewish identity to having your penis circumcised is just flawed as it naturally excludes Jewish women. Jewish males can still have their private parts circumcised when they become adult as it was supposed to be the case, a rite of passage for getting into the adult world. Most of your rebuttal is centered around a "slippery-slope" argument and it is not convincing enough.

relics443 9y ago
Entirely incorrect. As an orthodox Jew, I can tell you that failure to circumcize your son at 8 days old (outside of extenuating circumstances, e.g. medical issues) is one of the worst sins you could commit. Furthermore, you would be ostracized from the community, and your child will suffer socially, and emotionally. Once the child turns 13 he is responsible to ensure that he it's circumcised, and considering that he most likely will not have abandoned his religion by 13 he will go through with it. So now there's physical pain as well.
- gotchange 9y ago
  That's a theological critique, mine was sociological one from an outside observer. Still, the theological arguments don't work under a secular government which takes pride in separating the state from religion.
  - relics443 9y ago
    They do. It's called religious persecution. And if a government would ban circumcision, I'd be willing to bet that all Orthodox Jews would leave. And if the government prevented that (which has certainly happened before), then it is well documented that many Jews are ready to give up their lives in order to circumcise their sons. Update: only my first comment was theological; the rest were socio-physical
- spraak 9y ago
  Babies feel pain, which you seem to be saying they don't with: > by 13 he will go through with it. So now there's physical pain as well.

IshKebab 9y ago

> Leaving a Jewish male baby uncircumcised would most likely lead to feelings of alienation and isolation later on in life Do Jews really go around checking each other's penises all the time?

pugio 9y ago
1. Internal identity: Being told that a Jewish male must be circumcised, realizing you're not, and experiencing alienation. This can hit adolescents quite hard. 2. Marriage: Barring a specific medical reason to not be circumcised, many Jewish women would take issue with an uncircumcised husband. 3. Locker rooms. But really #1 is the most immediately pressing.