Why do so many people insist on having the right to mutilate a defenseless boy’s penis?
Most people refer to the removal of the foreskin from the penis as “circumcision”. When done to a non-consenting and defenceless child, there are so many disturbing issues involved that it’s difficult to know where to begin.
First of all, let’s get this straight. It is nothing short of mutilation – it is the destruction and removal of normal and healthy tissue. In fact, it’s more than just ’tissue’. It’s an extremely nerve-rich and erogenous part of the penis.
Therefore, mutilating or surgically altering someone else with no genuine medical reason is a violation of their most basic human right.
Genital mutilation has been recognized and made illegal by numerous countries and under international law – but only for girls.
Many people will say that genital mutilation of girls is much more damaging and will even be offended that male circumcision should be called “mutilation”.
It’s true that the majority of physical consequences of genital mutilation to girls is more severe (but not always!). Does that mean that boys don’t deserve any protection? If you do an internet search for “foreskin restoration” you will see thousands of sites offering men anything from counselling and support for their sense of loss or trauma through to actual ways to ‘restore’ their foreskins (such as through stretching or surgery). ‘Restoration’ is only cosmetic – true restoration is not possible.
Circumcision is permanent, irreversible, reduces sensitivity and will definately alter the way that person will experience sex for the rest of his life.
It’s clear that circumcision is male genital mutilation, an assault on a male’s body and dignity, and nothing has been done about it by the legal system. In fact, it seems as though the legal system has gone to great lengths to enusre that the practice can continue (on boys only).
Some people will try to excuse it as a part of family tradition or religious custom. That’s an odd argument because international law against female genital mutilation specifically excludes any justification for the practise (including religious reasons).
The arguments that male circumcision are for health reasons are ridiculous and pro-circumcision campaigners will typically use fear tactics, “what if’s” and point to theories, flawed research and so-called statistics to justify their position.
The reality is that boys who grow up in countries that do not circumcise grow up happy and healthy without the aledged health problems that pro-circumcision advocates would have you believe. For example, Sweden does not circumcise yet has less problems with AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases than the USA which does circumcise.
In fact, a common justification used for circucisicion is that it claims to reduce urinary tract infections in boys. Did you know that girls have more problems with urinary tract infections than circumcised boys? Yet, urinary tract infection in girls is never mentioned or considered a problem. Why is that?
It’s great that girls at least have legal protection against circumcision – but why are boys specifically excluded? It’s argued that this is even illegal under U.S. law by violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
For more details on a current legal campaign in the US against Male genital Mutilation please visit www.mgmbill.org .
More good sites are listed at http://www.circinfo.org/links.html
Young boys being prepared for ritual circumcision.
‘Hospital style’ – strapped down spread-eagle in a ‘Circumstraint’.