Do you think male circumcision is ethically wrong?

Forceably cut penis parts off babies? How can anyone think it is not ethically wrong to cut off the MOST innervated parts of the HUMAN MALE and shut down a huge part of the kid’s/man’s sensory system without their consent. That can never be returned (a part of the sensory system is shut down for good). If an adult (male or female) wants to cut off parts of their genitals, that is their right. However EVERY HUMAN (male and female) has the RIGHT (a human right) to reach adulthood with all of their tissue (particularly all of their erogenous tissue) that THEIR genetic code dictates.

I am so happy I have all of my penis. I would never do this to a child (and my sons have thanked me for not removing parts of their penis). It is wrong to cut off penis parts of a baby with or without pain relief (a baby can not have a true anesthetic due to age/weight).

BTW, 10% is probably way low. The glans of the natural male is more sensitive than for a cut male but it also is more elastic (it can swell (grow) more as it is not been keratinized). However, the real sensory loss is the inner foreskin (mucosa) that has thousands of special touch and stretch nerves. These parts (that also MOVE) help men have sex as long as they are alive, whereas cut men are reporting sexual dysfunction at very young ages. Cut men use almost all of the VIAGRA that is consumed.

The parts of the penis that are cut off are some of the most highly innervated parts of the human. A whole range of sensation and sexual and protective function are lost. The lips, fingertips and nipples have similar touch sense. To take this away from another person without their consent is heinous. To do this to a newborn baby is creepy, child abuse and a human rights VIOLATION.

NO DISEASE

NO CONSENT

NO PENIS PARTS REMOVAL

----------------

As to the PE myth: Young cut men and natural men last about the same time (yes there was a study). Cut men can have orgasm difficulty as they age (that is not a good thing). A recent study discovered that premature ejaculation is five times more likely for otherwise healthy CIRCUMCISED men- the scar the most sensitive part, sends wrong signals to the brain. Natural men have better control and timing (better feedback). The sensation is not overwhelming or too much, it is natural and better.

yes, I belive it's ethically wrong.

I never really thought about it much until I met someone who was circumcised. It doesn't really come up in conversation much, and I had seen a few questions on this site about whether or not they should get their child cut, and when I was 5 a nurse told me about babies getting cut who nearly died because of it, so I kind of just figured it was a dead practise and no-one did it anymore. It was pretty recently I found out that in the US it's still being done, and that some people really do believe there are advantages.

no.

no. no way.

extremely. It's the most pain a human being can experience, and to do that on babies who's brains and nervous systems are still developing is heinous. Also, it's a much simpler operation when done to adults. Considering a baby has a higher risk of dying during a circumcision than a male ever does throughout his lifetime of even needing one for medical reasons it can't be justified.

Yes, I think male genital mutilation (MGM) is ethically wrong. Everybody has the right to bodily integrity, but NOBODY has the right to forcibly amputate another person's body parts!! This forced amputation of healthy body parts is disrespectful, inconsiderate, and is a violation of bodily integrity & religious freedom!! To force MGM onto someone as a religious ritual is a form of religious extremism!!!!!!!

Have you ever thought about it before? I think about MGM a lot.

Was it done to you? Unfortunately, it was done to me at birth, when I was unable to consent. I'm very upset that this happened to me.

Would you circumcise your son? NO! MGM is just causing absurd pain and pointless stress to an infant.

Do you think its wrong to do it to babies without anesthetic? It doesn't matter if the procedure had anesthetic or not, it's wrong to force MGM on anyone period!!

Reducing someone's sexual sensation is definitely unfair, but the 10% reduction isn't the most accurate. A more accurate reduction would be 33-80% reduction of sexual sensation.

Circumcision should be a personal choice when the person is old enough to decide for themselves. I was circumcised as a infant and wish I wasn't. Just let it be your son's decision.

I think boys should be old enough to decide for themselves.

I myself was circumcised as a child, and I really wish somebody would of asked me first.

I mean, it's MY penis. Why did I not get a say in the matter?

Yes, when it is a child and there is no medical need.

It is equally morally wrong as female genital mutilation but the consequences are much less severe.

Sometimes there is a medical need - one of my 5 brothers needed to be circumcised because the skin was tight and painful. An erection would have been very painful and so it was done when he was 5.

I think it's a criminal act and ought to be treated as such.

And no, I did not circumcise my son.

there are many medical benefits of circumcision.

It was most likely invented by man to help with premature ejaculation.