[Tom4784]

I always found the idea of comparing circumcision to FGM to be grotesque. FGM can cause a woman problems for the rest of her life but circumcision does not, hell, circumcision makes things easier in terms of cleanliness and such. There's no real long term downsides to circumcision.

While the philosophical question is valid, I dislike calling it 'Male Genital mutilation' since it promotes false equivalency to FGM. Circumcision can not ruin a man's life like FGM can for a woman.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I always found the idea of comparing circumcision to FGM to be grotesque. FGM can cause a woman problems for the rest of her life but circumcision does not, hell, circumcision makes things easier in terms of cleanliness and such. There's no real long term downsides to circumcision.

While the philosophical question is valid, I dislike calling it 'Male Genital mutilation' since it promotes false equivalency to FGM. Circumcision can not ruin a man's life like FGM can for a woman.

I agree with this, and livias post upthread too. But did not want to 'what about' in a thread about male circumscision, given I complain about whatabouts everywhere else

Yeah, 'MGM' is nothing like FGM. FGM is utterly utterly barbaric and cannot really be compared to circumscision. Mind, I do not think that parm was doing that. But I guess even terming it MGM is..comparing it in a way. As you said.

I do disagree to no downsides of circumscision though tbh. There might not be physical downsides, but I have read hundreds of accounts of blokes really pissed off and upset about their parents removing part of them without consent. So there are mental downsides it seems.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I agree with this, and livias post upthread too. But did not want to 'what about' in a thread about male circumscision, given I complain about whatabouts everywhere else

Yeah, 'MGM' is nothing like FGM. FGM is utterly utterly barbaric and cannot really be compared to circumscision. Mind, I do not think that parm was doing that. But I guess even terming it MGM is..comparing it in a way. As you said.

I do disagree to no downsides of circumscision though tbh. There might not be physical downsides, but I have read hundreds of accounts of blokes really pissed off and upset about their parents removing part of them without consent. So there are mental downsides it seems.

Apparently it reduces sensitivity aswell so in theory sex may be affected a bit afterwards, although a man who has always been circumcised since becoming sexually active wouldn't be able to compare it to sex without circumcision

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Apparently is reduces sensitivity aswell so in theory sex may be affected a bit afterwards, although a man who has always been circumcised since becoming sexually active wouldn't be able to compare it to sex without circumcision

Yup, have read that a fair bit and it makes sense.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I agree with this, and livias post upthread too. But did not want to 'what about' in a thread about male circumscision, given I complain about whatabouts everywhere else

Yeah, 'MGM' is nothing like FGM. FGM is utterly utterly barbaric and cannot really be compared to circumscision. Mind, I do not think that parm was doing that. But I guess even terming it MGM is..comparing it in a way. As you said.

I do disagree to no downsides of circumscision though tbh. There might not be physical downsides, but I have read hundreds of accounts of blokes really pissed off and upset about their parents removing part of them without consent. So there are mental downsides it seems.

I don't think it's really whataboutism, it's just commenting on false equivalency.

As for your last paragraph, I think that comes under the philosophy side of it, is it right for a parent to make that decision for their child? For me personally my personal take is 'meh'. It's a flap of skin that you have to pull back to wash yourself properly or it'll get infected. It's a bother more than anything. I think a lot of men who are circumcised would prefer to remain that way if they could experience the other side of it.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

I don't think it's really whataboutism, it's just commenting on false equivalency.

As for your last paragraph, I think that comes under the philosophy side of it, is it right for a parent to make that decision for their child? For me personally my personal take is 'meh'. It's a flap of skin that you have to pull back to wash yourself properly or it'll get infected. It's a bother more than anything. I think a lot of men who are circumcised would prefer to remain that way if they could experience the other side of it.

Maybe, but I do think it should be a choice the bloke makes, not something the parents decide when they are babies. Its quite telling I think, that there seems to be a lack of adult men wanting to be circumscised..unless for actual medical problems. None just 'because'

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Maybe, but I do think it should be a choice the bloke makes, not something the parents decide when they are babies. Its quite telling I think, that there seems to be a lack of adult men wanting to be circumscised..unless for actual medical problems. None just 'because'

Probably because we'd remember the recovery as an adult I imagine it would be a worse procedure as an adult too, babies could probably recover from it quite quickly while a man might be out of commission for a few days or would be slower to move around.

I'm ultimately fine with it being the parents' choice given that circumcision doesn't really have any big health drawbacks, only positives.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Probably because we'd remember the recovery as an adult I imagine it would be a worse procedure as an adult too, babies could probably recover from it quite quickly while a man might be out of commission for a few days or would be slower to move around.

I'm ultimately fine with it being the parents' choice given that circumcision doesn't really have any big health drawbacks, only positives.

I think babies would be in as much pain and such as adults, maybe even moreso. But because they are babies, they simply won't remember it, but it will have been there. And it makes me feel a bit iffy to say that because babies don't remember painful procedures, its fine. I know thats not what you said, but thats what comes to mind when trying to think that its all ok..

[Beso]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I agree with this, and livias post upthread too. But did not want to 'what about' in a thread about male circumscision, given I complain about whatabouts everywhere else

Yeah, 'MGM' is nothing like FGM. FGM is utterly utterly barbaric and cannot really be compared to circumscision. Mind, I do not think that parm was doing that. But I guess even terming it MGM is..comparing it in a way. As you said.

I do disagree to no downsides of circumscision though tbh. There might not be physical downsides, but I have read hundreds of accounts of blokes really pissed off and upset about their parents removing part of them without consent. So there are mental downsides it seems.

All I can say to this is "I hope uou and dezzy watched the programme."