If you think this is okay, you’re NOT for equality.
Seriously though, don’t call yourself an activist for justice and equality and human rights if you do this shit
Is this supposed to scare me away, KNA? Because it is not working.
It’s supposed to burn our retinas or something. Because we’re, like… all supposed to be homophobic or something and the very sight of a man’s bare chest sends us fleeing in terror. I dunno.
I’m envious of that body, honestly.
There’s supposed to be a comma in that title…
Since I was a boy in 1995 my parents decided it would be okay if a doctor sliced off a part if my heathy genitals. They didn’t even bother to question it, even after hearing my older brother’s screams when his was done. Now as a man in 2014 I am told to “deal with it” or I should “thank my parents” by people just as ignorant as they were. #sinceiwasaboy #rethink #circumcision #i2
Omg crying like a little bitch haha
Circumcision is not an issue. Men are not deprived of their genitals, neither are they deprived of any sexual pleasures. It is done in a clean hospital environment. Stop making a big deal about.
SO does this mean I can get my daughter’s labia removed? Because if it isn’t a big deal then I don’t see why I can’t.
Of course!! You have every right as a parent to mutilate your kids body. Why even stop at foreskin?? Ears! Those get infected sometimes. Toes! They always get stubbed and broken. Or arms and legs. Kids break those, just prevent it all together. You know ribs can PUNCTURE lungs!? Get rid of their ribs.
Basically what I’m trying to say is, don’t teach your kid to be hygienic and safe, just remove their body parts.
OKAY HYGINE PEOPLE. Parents do this for two reasons, HYGINE or it’s apart of the RELIGIOUS beliefs. Get the fuck over it. I think social justice side of tumblr should stick to feministic issues. Men’s issues are handled. Please. Don’t argue about this petty debate.
Actually surveys show the primary reason parents circumcise in the United States stands from social pressures and to have the son’s genitals match the fathers. The presence or lack of presence of the foreskin minimally affects hygiene - rather that varies from person to person. A foreskin-less penis is no cleaner than one that retains it foreskin as the foreskin has been studied to produce certain oils and enzymes that offer ant-bacterial and ant-viral properties, and there’s this thing called ‘bathing’. The argument of hygiene is one heard primarily from the United States where the practices origins laid in morality rather than hygiene. The practice was executed to deter masturbation - with masturbation being assumed to cause a variety of ailments including paralysis. Hygiene and class did not become a factor until the early 20th century when an overflow of European immigrants crossed over the Atlantic into the United States. The overwhelming majority of European men, even today, retained their foreskins. They were also poor and many of these immigrants were not held in high regard because of how their culture clashed with a primarily Anglo population. This is where we associated the presence of a foreskin with poverty and a lack of hygiene or class.
Studies globally conclude that circumcision has NO net gain and studies promoting the procedure usually originate from the United States and have been debunked (in particular claims concerning HIV and STD contraction). So medical claims of circumcision benefiting the male population are , for lack of a better word , absolute bullshit. Teach your kid to wash up and wrap up.
When it comes to religion, I have a simple question for you. Do you defend religious practices that negatively affect women ? I’m going to guess no. FGM is commonly executed for socio-religious reasons and has been executed on the believe that it’ll improve hygiene. You’re going to claim FGM is worse than neonatal male circumcision but the fact is the most common forms of FGM are actually comparable to male circumcision , usually being done in infancy or adolescence with similar tissue being excised. This brilliant explanation by Brian D. Earp from the University of Oxford explains it further and further exposes the obvious double standard that exists in regards to genital cutting http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2014/02/female-genital-mutilation-and-male-circumcision-time-to-confront-the-double-standard/
Religion does not excuse circumcision. Religious practices have been outlawed that have been deemed harmful. Why is male circumcision suddenly given the okay when related to religion ?
Circumcision has become a huge topic globally as the globe understands the harm the procedure causes ranging from a desensitized organ, a flurry of cases of castration and surgical errors, to death. The Council of Europe has deemed it a human rights violation, along with child protection organizations, and several regions across the world are debating as to whether or not to ban the practice on minors.
How is this a petty issue ? How is circumcision petty when we’re neglecting male bodily rights and have deemed it acceptable to alter the male body without consent or necessity ? How is it a petty issue when there are men adversely affected by the procedure ? How can people be so cruel ? When infants are being put through record levels of pain and stress because of petty beliefs and a corrupt medical establishment, what does that say about us when we stand by it in approval and ridicule those who were harmed by it or those who stand against the practice. You have to be wicked to be in approval of such a habit. My other question is..What male-centered issues are handled ? I mean when we haven’t even granted males ownership of their own body, explain to me how men’s issues are handled ?
As a FGM survivor, I agree that circumcision is MGM.