5 ms·

They're not equivalent in most cases (not all female genital mutilation is performed the same way and I cannot fathom a medical reason for any sort). But that

They're not equivalent in most cases (not all female genital mutilation is performed the same way and I cannot fathom a medical reason for any sort). But that doesn't mean they aren't in the same general category when defined as surgical alterations of people's genitalia performed for religious or cultural reasons without any medical necessity. A medically required circumcision when reasoned and self-chosen is an altogether different story.

hn_throwaway_99 4y ago
Except, ironically enough, male circumcision is the perfect example of something that was done for "traditional" religious reasons, but for which now there is ample medical support for it. For example, circumcision is extremely common in the US, despite the fact that it is relatively very rare for it to be done for religious reasons (only about 2-3% of the US population is Muslim or Jewish). It is done because the medical community broadly recommends it due to its health benefits: https://www.healthline.com/health-news/cdc-encourages-circumcision-120314 https://www.healthline.com/health-news/cdc-encourages-circum...
- drekipus 4y ago
  The biggest misconception about traditions is that people just randomly decided to do it and punish those who don't follow. The most probable case is that traditions, such as male circumcision were done for a particular purpose and ritualised into a traditional to share and continue that process. It's only in more modern ages where we said that rituals aren't enough and we need to think of medical reasons for it as well. Considering how much of the mind is an enigma it's arms race to find out positive reasons of why we do certain traditions before we get rid of them completely from not understanding them.
  - P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
    Think of it like ML at the human level. ML's entire thing is statistical correlations that aren't obvious. Tradition is probably operating like that as well. Is all tradition like this and useful? Of course not. But I bet a lot of it is very subtle and nuanced. It's also worth considering that there are other pressures. For example, women typically find circumstanced penises more appealing. It's very possible that pressure, coupled with the benefits, helped society land on it more than not.
    - drekipus 4y ago
      That's a good way of putting it. A sort of black box process that has gone through something to end up the way it is.
- ahelwer 4y ago
  There's ample medical support because it's a quick way to make a hundred bucks when you're a urologist.
- vimy 4y ago
  > It is done because the medical community broadly recommends it due to its health benefits: https://www.healthline.com/health-news/cdc-encourages-circum https://www.healthline.com/health-news/cdc-encourages-circum... Only recommended in the US. Which indicates that it’s still cultural.
- lelanthran 4y ago
  > Except, ironically enough, male circumcision is the perfect example of something that was done for "traditional" religious reasons, but for which now there is ample medical support for it. There is no medical support for it; all the "medical" support that was published in the past was never replicable and was only a thin veneer over superstition. IOW, you've already made you mind up that male circumcision is a positive. You'll look for evidence to support your conclusions after establishing your conclusions, just like all the other "traditions" do.
criley2 4y ago
It's horrifying that these are even compared. The foreskin is just some skin and absolutely not required to experience sexual pleasure or climax. But for women, they cut their clitoris out, fundamentally altering their ability to have sex forever. You cannot compare this. There is no equivalence here. IMO, female genital mutilation is comparable to male gelding --- removal of the entire penis. Both are designed to ruin sexual pleasure Always weirds me out when a dude compares a circumcision to FGM, like someone is intentionally conflating a much lesser evil with a far greater one.
- nehal3m 4y ago
  One, how do you know I am a dude? I am, but you're assuming. Two, I did not compare them, I explicitly said they are NOT equivalent, even accounting for the type of female genital mutilation where the clitoris is merely nicked.
- drekipus 4y ago
  FGM also can be just cutting some skin (the inner labia) and it is comparable to circumcision. The function of the inner labia is to help keep in moisture and lubricant, very much the exact same function and role of the foreskin.
- P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
  circumcised males experience less intense orgasm and sexual sensitivity.
- FooBarBizBazz 4y ago
  > just some skin You could use chemical or thermal burns to remove all the skin, preserving a numb nub of mechanical structure.
- betwixthewires 4y ago
  FGM refers broadly to a multitude of traditions related to modification of female genitalia, not only to that one specific kind. And generally speaking, they're all illegal in the west, even ones where the damage is comparable to male circumcision. You can compare this, fundamentally and in principle. Both involve the irreversible mutilation of an infant's sexual organs. One might not be quite impactful as another later in life, but on principle they're equally abhorrent in a society that believes in bodily autonomy and values its children.

hn_throwaway_99 4y ago

Except, ironically enough, male circumcision is the perfect example of something that was done for "traditional" religious reasons, but for which now there is ample medical support for it. For example, circumcision is extremely common in the US, despite the fact that it is relatively very rare for it to be done for religious reasons (only about 2-3% of the US population is Muslim or Jewish). It is done because the medical community broadly recommends it due to its health benefits: https://www.healthline.com/health-news/cdc-encourages-circumcision-120314 https://www.healthline.com/health-news/cdc-encourages-circum...

drekipus 4y ago
The biggest misconception about traditions is that people just randomly decided to do it and punish those who don't follow. The most probable case is that traditions, such as male circumcision were done for a particular purpose and ritualised into a traditional to share and continue that process. It's only in more modern ages where we said that rituals aren't enough and we need to think of medical reasons for it as well. Considering how much of the mind is an enigma it's arms race to find out positive reasons of why we do certain traditions before we get rid of them completely from not understanding them.
- P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
  Think of it like ML at the human level. ML's entire thing is statistical correlations that aren't obvious. Tradition is probably operating like that as well. Is all tradition like this and useful? Of course not. But I bet a lot of it is very subtle and nuanced. It's also worth considering that there are other pressures. For example, women typically find circumstanced penises more appealing. It's very possible that pressure, coupled with the benefits, helped society land on it more than not.
  - drekipus 4y ago
    That's a good way of putting it. A sort of black box process that has gone through something to end up the way it is.
ahelwer 4y ago
There's ample medical support because it's a quick way to make a hundred bucks when you're a urologist.
vimy 4y ago
> It is done because the medical community broadly recommends it due to its health benefits: https://www.healthline.com/health-news/cdc-encourages-circum https://www.healthline.com/health-news/cdc-encourages-circum... Only recommended in the US. Which indicates that it’s still cultural.
lelanthran 4y ago
> Except, ironically enough, male circumcision is the perfect example of something that was done for "traditional" religious reasons, but for which now there is ample medical support for it. There is no medical support for it; all the "medical" support that was published in the past was never replicable and was only a thin veneer over superstition. IOW, you've already made you mind up that male circumcision is a positive. You'll look for evidence to support your conclusions after establishing your conclusions, just like all the other "traditions" do.

criley2 4y ago

It's horrifying that these are even compared. The foreskin is just some skin and absolutely not required to experience sexual pleasure or climax. But for women, they cut their clitoris out, fundamentally altering their ability to have sex forever. You cannot compare this. There is no equivalence here. IMO, female genital mutilation is comparable to male gelding --- removal of the entire penis. Both are designed to ruin sexual pleasure Always weirds me out when a dude compares a circumcision to FGM, like someone is intentionally conflating a much lesser evil with a far greater one.

nehal3m 4y ago
One, how do you know I am a dude? I am, but you're assuming. Two, I did not compare them, I explicitly said they are NOT equivalent, even accounting for the type of female genital mutilation where the clitoris is merely nicked.
drekipus 4y ago
FGM also can be just cutting some skin (the inner labia) and it is comparable to circumcision. The function of the inner labia is to help keep in moisture and lubricant, very much the exact same function and role of the foreskin.
P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
circumcised males experience less intense orgasm and sexual sensitivity.
FooBarBizBazz 4y ago
> just some skin You could use chemical or thermal burns to remove all the skin, preserving a numb nub of mechanical structure.
betwixthewires 4y ago
FGM refers broadly to a multitude of traditions related to modification of female genitalia, not only to that one specific kind. And generally speaking, they're all illegal in the west, even ones where the damage is comparable to male circumcision. You can compare this, fundamentally and in principle. Both involve the irreversible mutilation of an infant's sexual organs. One might not be quite impactful as another later in life, but on principle they're equally abhorrent in a society that believes in bodily autonomy and values its children.