How many american women are against male/female circumcision?

Question

Totally or with Religious exceptions?
Reasons,cultural doctrine or personal?

Answer 1

Canadian woman.
Against it on both counts.
It is mutilation. We circumsize our children so that they cannot play with themselves because it is a sin and against our religion. Society now has translated that into 'it is cleaner' which is a load of crap. The 'it'll get infected and have to be removed anyway' is a cop out. There is a reason that our bodies have a protective 'sheath' so to speak around these nerve endings. It is to protect them, keep them clean, and keep them sensitive. For all those who are for -please watch as they cut your son open for no reason other than vanity and ignorance.

(the Canadian government no longer pays for it because it is considered a cosmetic surgery- Ontario for sure anyway)

Answer 2

American female. I consider infant/child circumcision of either sex to be child abuse. We don't allow female circumcision for religious reasons, so why do we need to allow it for boys? If the boy wants to be circumcised as a sign of his religion when he reaches adulthood, fine. But nobody can be sure what religion he is going to choose when he is old enough to make that choice, so why should parents have the right to cut part of his body off to show that he believes in something that he may not actually end up believing in?

NOBODY has the right to mutilate another person's body when that person is too young to give consent unless there is a medical reason that can't wait until adulthood to be fixed. So, yes, if the foreskin has a cancerous growth on it (extremely rare), chop it off regardless of age. But if the foreskin is healthy, parents and religious/hospital personnel have no business messing with it.

Answer 3

I'm a secularist, and am against all circumcision.

Female circumcision, aside from being sadistic, has no medical justification and can only cause infections and infertility. There are competing theories about whether or not male circumcision has health benefits, but good hygiene and safe sex practices look to be almost as beneficial, if not equally beneficial, to circumcision. So why mutilate an infant's genitals if you don't have to? Have you noticed they always scream? Perhaps this is because it's very painful.

If people want to be circumcised for religious reasons, they should be free to sign up for that procedure AS ADULTS making their own choice. It's one thing to have parents take you to church or otherwise raise you in their religion, you can always change your mind when you're old enough to think for yourself. It's another thing for them to go after your genitalia and alter it permanently when you are young and defenseless.

Answer 4

Many people are unaware of exactly what female circumcision is.

There's genital mutilation - removal of the clit (this is terrible)

And then there are measures that greatly help some women. If the hood is too long or big it can block a lot of pleasure and even cause infection. This can be helped with a little cut. The hood can also get stuck with a substance that sorta glues things together and can be very harmful/painful

I highly recommend researching it if you're curious.

Answer 5

Male: Against it being performed on babies. It is so incredibly unfair to do it without their consent, many men regret it, and it has problems. Personally I don't think circumcision is necessary, but if an adult male wishes to get it done (based on informed reseach), unlikely as this is, then it is not my place to disagree.

Female: Do you mean female genital mutilation, or simply the removal of the prepuce? FGM is absolutely terrible and disgusting. No infants' genitals should be altered without really really compelling medical reasons like a birth defect. Beyond that though (apparently some people get merely the clitoral prepuce removed for whatever reasons), I don't want to tell an adult woman what to do with her own genitals - presumably if it's done surgically and with her informed consent.

Answer 6

Icy has a good point about ibraham, I would also point out that this 99 year old man had been out in the desert sun, I wouldn't ask such a man directions to a bus stop.

As a circumcised man, I know that male genital mutilation also removes a great deal of sensitiviy/pleasure. That is why they started doing it 5000 years ago, so men would not spend so much time with their women, rather they would work more, devote more time to religion and be more willing to go to war.

Answer 7

I'm definitely against female genital mutilation (female "circumcision") for all the reasons listed above.

Male circumcision is a bit more complex. It isn't necessary, and I wouldn't have any hypothetical sons circumcised, but I can understand why some people have it done for religious reasons.

Then my mind flashes to the first few episodes of Nip/Tuck, and how John Hensley's character was in so much pain after his cirucmcision at age 16 (granted, this was after he botched it himself). If my hypothetical son were a teenager, and he wanted to get a circumcision for cosmetic reasons, I hope he'd do the research himself, and then come to me, his dad (father-figure, if bio-dad isn't in the picture), or his doctor and discuss it.

Answer 8

It's barbaric mutilation anyway you look at it. The idea that uncircumcised men can get aids is stupid. You contract aids by having unsafe sex, not by reason of a foreskin.

As for cleaning, I wash my knob every day and being circumcised shouldn't change that .. yuck to those men who do not wash their knobs just because they are circumcised!

As for Ibrahim who invented the concept.. he was an 80+ year old man when he decided to circumcise himself with a hatchet. Now, I am no rocket scientist, but an 80 year old man with an irritated foreskin (obviously because he didn't wash it) who gets cranky enough to cut it off with a hatchet is, for me, not a man to be trusted as having all his faculties. Sorry for the offence, but logically, the dude must have had Alzheimer's or summat.

Answer 9

Completely against both male and female. And the female type is not "circumcision" that word is used to give a more positive connotation to torture and mutilation. You should properly call it Female Genital mutilation or FGM.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg12917544.000-female-circumcision-fighting-a-cruel-tradition-some-80million-women-around-the-world-are-subjected-to-an-ancient-practice-thatendangers-their-life-health-and-happiness-campaigns-to-end-the-mutilationare-g

Answer 10

In looking at both Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) and Male Genital Mutilation (MGM), it appears that there is no equal protection under the law for male infants and boys under the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Illegal to perform FGM, fine to perform MGM. Yes, willful destruction of the primary male sex organ is unethical. Or is it much more than unethical?" -Ken Derifield of The Intact Network


im against female circumcision ,, cuz it kills sexuality.. but for male its healthier to circumsize...