Why is male circumcision celebrated while female circumcision is considered barbaric?

Question

Is western society so screwed up that they can rationalize this despite the medical evidence that offers no benefit to male circumcision?

Medical reports have proven that cleanliness is a non factor.

Statistically there can be negative side effects to male circumcision. Why take the risk from something that is cosmetic? Are we that shallow that we would risk a new borns health for this?

I agree that female circumcision is barbaric, so why do we do it to baby boys?

It's funny how some people don't fully read the question and launch in to a tirade about how much of an idiot I am for suggesting that we condone female circumcision.

Maybe Yahoo should have an entrance exam and only allow those qualified to post answers. Clearly some people are not properly equipped.

Answer 1

Be careful how you use the word "Western". In the UK male circumcision is considered highly undesirable unless medically indicated, and is generally rarely carried out. It is certainly NOT celebrated, any more than any other srugical intervention for an illness is.

Answer 2

Sexism. They think a teenage guy won't take time to touch his penis in the shower (LOL) and that it doesn't matter if a male loses a bit of sensation during sex. It's all very unfair.

While female circumcision it undoubtedly worse, the females can still feel pleasure and even come. Most of the problems rae due to infection and infibulation; without that it's still possible to get pleasure from inside the vagina even if it's not as much as the clit.

BTW the limited "benefits" to male circumcision also apply to female circumcision. Like some people claim it looks better (it doesn't) - probably the same if you removed the inner labia. People think it's cleaner both ways too and I think some studies in Africa also claim that circumcised females are less likely to get/cause all sorts of problems including some STDs. Hmmmm

Answer 3

MindBend, you ask a great question and youºre absolutely right in your analysis.

First off, when it comes to discussing female circumcision, it is important to know that there are SEVERAL different types. Type I, which can include anything from the removal of the female prepuce, to partial or full removal of the clitoris, is the "mildest". Type III, infibulation, where everything is scraped clean and the vagina is sewn up with just a small hole, is the most extreme. Guess what? Type III is also the most rare. Type I, the removal of the clitoral hood aka the female prepuce, is analogous to male circumcision. But guess what? It's illegal in the US.

So why is it, that the removal of the prepuce in the male is legal and sanctioned, but the removal of the prepuce in the female is barbaric and shunned?

Did you also know that some boys die from circumcision? And suffer mutilation like glans amputation?

Answer 4

It was given to the Jewish people for males only--it does have sanitary advantages yet its a free choice. there is two sides to 'medical evidence' most children are circumcised of all origins in the usa- the vast majority of Doctors wouldnt do something on the vast majority of babies that has no advantage

yet God says we are to have our heart circumcised Romans chapter 2 last 2 verses, and this is how i answered one who claims to be one of my Jewish people who is still incomplete=

You are a precious person truely loved by the Messiah of Israel
The point is the gentile that come to the Jewish Messiah is not required to study and practice Judaism laws-one of which if you carry money one the Sabbath you are as a Jewish person to be stoned to death along with wood or lighting a fire too.
I am a Jew, and I can tell you you didnt convert to Judaism nor were you ever a follower of the Messiah which is what Christian means be a person Jew or gentile born, you simply were and are part of religions-if you go in a garage that doesnt make you a car.

If you dont believe Moses and Isaiah you are following a religion that was made up when the Temple was destroyed because there was no blood atonement commanded by God through Moses.

Leviticus 17:11 The life of the flesh is in the blood and I have given it upon the altar to make atonement for your souls.
reading from the Hebrew or the orthodox Mazoretic text=
Isaiah gave the fulfillment of this in the Mighty God that was to be the son given the child born and the prince of peace Isaiah 9:6

Isaiah 52:13-53:12 Says he would be exaulted but first marred more than any man and lay down his life despised and rejected to make atonement for our sins.

Yet you are a person and just as important to the Messiah as anyone else, that is why he says he knocks on your heart door to come in, forgive sin and be your friend

as promised from the coming new coventant to know God personally Jeremiah 31:31 and following

strange how someone would ask a question say nothing bad and be accused of anti semitism, yet when others claim to follow Moses and Isaiah and reject their words-that is maybe even a bigger problem.

Shalom in the Sar Shalom the prince of peace, David the sweet pea who truely cares about you and is praying for you too.

may we each get the circumcision of the heart today!

Answer 5

wow, that is one insightful question! basically any circumcision is barbaric & unecessary; but western civ feels its 'cleaner' (it also does not negatively affect the male in the same way a clitorectomy does...the penis is left intact, albeit w/out some loose skin, but the female version EXCISES the complete organ, thus depriving the woman 100% of sexual pleasure. certain religions do it, and, yes, it's celebrated. however, i think it's done more in a more sanitarily than the forced female circumcisions that take place at a much older age & w/o the benefit of sanitary 'instruments' or pain killers. either way, i'm with you on this one...it's wrong & shouldn't be done. period.

Answer 6

Male infant circumcision should be outlawed as it's now proven purely cosmetic. I would propose that should a man wish to undergo this procedure then that's fine as he accepts and understands the ramifications, but to impose this almost barbaric procedure on an infant is ridiculous.

Answer 7

I think your question should be:
"Why is male circumcision celebrated while female circumcision is considered barbaric in America?"
Because most of the world does not approve of any genital cuting male or female.
For example only 4% of european men are circumcised and those are jews and muslims.

Answer 8

Male circumcision is not needed and it said to be unprofitable in the New Testament. It does not help anyone spiritually, and those who teach it as "required" are false teachers.

Female circumcision was never Biblical. It sounds like something from the islamic cult.

Answer 9

I am astonished that you would even ask this question. Both surgeries might have their roots in religious belief but both have very different consequences.

The male can continue to enjoy sex after having his foreskin removed. A female, on the other hand, will never be able to enjoy sex once the clitoris is removed. Further, this barbaric act of female circumcision often results in a lifetime of physical pain during the sexual act and during normal urination. Consequently...

How you are able to compare the two as being similar let alone the same act is idiotic. You might as well say that the now outlawed Chinese practice of binding women's feet was somehow of benefit to women. Like female circumcision, all it succeeded in doing was cause a lifetime of pain and suffering, and an inability to conduct one's life in a normal, healthy and natural fashion. And finally...

You state, "Is western society so screwed up that they can rationalize this despite the medical evidence that offers no benefit to male circumcision?"

Are you able to name me one medical benefit for female circumcision?

No. You cannot because there is no such thing. It is, like so many other acts against the female gender, a means by which males can exert authority over women. In this case, it goes beyond gender marginalization into torture and a lifetime of physical suffering.

This act should go the way of the Dodo and be included as an act of torture under the Geneva Conventions, if it isn't already the case.

You sir, are a sadistic moron.

Answer 10

You do know that circumcized men are far less likely to contract AIDS?

Aside from that, I can't think of any good reason to be circumcised--EXCEPT for religious reasons. Jews do circumcise, because we were told by G-d to do so.

I wasn't born Jewish, though--I'm a convert--and when my sons were born, I didn't have them circumcised.

BUT--you can't compare the two. Female genital mutilation is a grusome process that involves cutting into each labia, scraping all tissue away, cutting off the clitoris, and (in extreme examples) sewing the woman shut. All of this is done to prevent a woman from enjoying sex, and sometimes to make sure she only has sex with her husband. It has dreadful and profound affects on a woman's health for the rest of her life.

Men lead full and productive lives after circumcision. Women who have had female gential mutilation--or female circumcision--do not. The two just can't be compared.