Sooooo....What’s the verdict on male circumcision?
“What’s the verdict on male circumcision?”
To answer my own question, I’m assuming that the courts wouldn’t touch that one with a ten-foot pole.
The equivalent procedure in men would be to cut off their man parts. Circumcision is not even remotely comparable.
Interesting question. As an MD I have DONE over 75 circs. It is a tradition that goes back millennia as opposed to FGM. About the only medical benefit I have ever seen in serious medical literature is penile squamous cell cancer (the male equivalent of cervical cancer) which is rare is non existent in circumcised males. So there may be a real medical benefit which is small. There may be also some resistance theoretically to some STDs. Beyond that I am unaware of any real argument that can be made for either side. Some argue that like FGM it degrades the “intimacy experience” but I don’t think that can ever be tested as there is no “control group” possible. Some would like to make circumcising and FGM equivalent but they really aren’t. Tl/dr: apples to oranges IMHO.
Female circumcision involves cutting the clitoris off. The true male equivalent would be cutting the entire penis off. Like what Kasich and Romney had done to themselves.
They are not the same thing. FGM has no health benefits instead it causes lifelong health issues.
I wonder if it was a liberal women’s group that came up with circumcision and made men put it on a string and make the wear it aeound their neck?.