aka non consented circumcision is a human rights violations rule

  • Norah - She/They@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Let’s compare this to tail-docking for dogs. There are plenty of legitimate medical reasons that a vet might dock a tail for, including the fact it can be basically impossible to heal a severe injury on one. But if you get your dogs tail docked just for the looks, that’s a shitty thing to do. That’s why where I live, it’s illegal to do it just for aesthetics.

    Now, if you’re suggesting that the vast majority of circumcisions aren’t aesthetic, and are in fact a necessary preventative medical procedure. Well, firstly, we survived as a species for hundreds of thousands of years before we started doing it just fine. And secondly, you could just as easily make the argument that removing the testes is needed to prevent future cases of testicular cancer.

    Oh wait, doctors do literally say and do this to Intersex babies, with literally no medical evidence to back up their claims. Then try to force a child that was born with external genitalia to grow up as a “girl” after cutting it off.

    • tygerprints@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I don’t think any doctor performs circumcision “just for looks.” Hopefully not. I don’t personally see anything wrong with an uncircumcised penis at all, in fact, it really should be up to the parents.

      All I’m saying is that the reasons for doing it aren’t designed to hurt kids or make them feel sexually unhappy. Same with a child that has male and female sexual characteristics - at some point there you as a parent will make a decision, to remove the male genitalia or allow the kid to be hermaphroditic - the choice you make isn’t based on a desire to hurt the child, but on what you think will be a healthy benefit for them.