Male circumcision vs fgm

I do agree with this. Although FGM is much worse than male circumcision (and so some will say that it's therefore stupid to compare the two), the principle is exactly the same (so it is a fair comparison). They're both painful and performed against someone's will for absolutely no medical benefits, just for cultural/religious reasons.

Plus the main reason male circumcision doesn't seem that bad is because it's done on someone who doesn't have the ability to beg it to stop, or to describe afterwards the agony it caused them. And people view this as a good thing, as if it means that the pain isn't that bad just because the baby is incapable of letting them know how bad it is. That's just burying your head in the sand to prevent you from realising the truth about circumcision, that it's barbaric torture.

Im circumcised I didnt circumcise my son. I looked up how they did it before making a decision and they strap them down and slice their foreskin off with no pain killers or anything while being fully conscious. Ill never allow that to happen to my kids. I dont care how old they are.

I agree that circumcision regardless of gender is fucked, especially non-consentual circumcision 🙃

Circumcision is a disgusting and awful practice. Modify an adults or a woman's body without their permission and everyone goes crazy. Do it to a baby male and no one bats an eye. It's completely fucked up.

People like to talk about health benefits for it but hate to tell you I've been with several guys who weren't circumcised and 1. It feels better for both partners
2. Sanitation isn't actually that hard it's called take a shower.

People say oh something might go wrong though yea you might get ingrown toenails but you don't remove the bad bits till AFTER it happens you don't remove the entire plate at birth to prevent something that probably won't happen to you. It irritates the heck out of me

Both are terrible and should be banned, at least unless its done on a consenting adult, rather than a child with no choice. But I think women tend to have more actual health issues and long term pain from it, which is why we consider it worse

I am fully for a law that bans parents from circumcising the kids (unless its medically needed), and the parents should go to prison if they do after that law is implemented. Parents have no right to cause lasting damage to their children. And there also is a lot of pain involved, no proof a baby feels less pain than an adult. And I have seen footage of someone who were circumcised in adult age, they seemed to be in extreme pain

From my understanding, male circumcision is more of a cultural thing that varies from country to country. The countries that do practice it are seeing a slow decline in the rate of parents who chose to have the surgery done on their child. The issue in countries with a high circumcision rate is that MOST men that get the surgery don't mind that they were circumcised. To them, that's just what their penis looks like.

In areas where circumcision is common (such as the rural United States) people will often find uncircumcised penises unattractive and unusual. If most men and women are used to seeing circumcised ones, and in fact prefer them, then obviously a parent will want their child to "fit in" when he eventually starts dating.

In countries that DON'T usually circumcise male children, the surgery is usually reserved for very religious families. There's also the rare case where it needs to be done for medical reasons. In places like the United Kingdom, hardly anyone is circumcised.

The only medically relavent downsides of circumcision are:
1. Circumcision removes nerve ending in the penis, making sex less pleasurable for the man.
2. Foreskin decreases friction during intercourse. Making sex more pleasant for both parties involved.
3. There are studies that shown that being uncircumcised leads to a slightly larger penis when at full erection. (Although not by much.) Scar tissue/skin tightening is the culprit for this.

As said previously, circumcision is seeing a steady decline. Eventually it will even be seen as weird for men to be circumcised in the United States. By the time it happens, we'll all either be dead or too old to care about sex.

Well males circumcision provides a minor benefit of keeping the penis cleaner. Plus it just makes the penis less sensitive which isnt the worst thing to have.

FGM provides exactly zero use towards the women. In fact it mostly removes their ability to have an orgasim which is monstrous to do. As well it's often performed without anesthetic.

So no it's not the same thing nor should be treated like the same thing.

My only experience is with mens' circumcision and i definitely prefer a cut vs a non cut. It looks way better and definitely smells better. I gag when a european man or peasent American brings out a nasty overflow. :cringe: No thanks!

There is no lack of feeling with cut dicks, I know that for sure lol.

Most people in the States that are having children are kindly fixing their son's dicks and it isn't for religious reasons at all.

I think female clit removal is very different and only done by extremeist muslims purely so women can't have sexual pleasure. Male circumcision is nothing like that.

Male circumcision is just removing extra skin it's not at all the same as removing the clitoris. The female kind you're referring to is comparative to cutting off the penis.

Also it's proven to reduce infection, disease and even reduces the chance of penile cancer. It should be necessary. This is tmi but two of my exes got their foreskin removed as adults because of issues they were having down there. It was a lot harder to go through. Way better to snip the excess skin off at birth than wait as an adult.