Circumcision: A Feminist issue?

[B_liono]

I chose the fourth option, but only because my real answer "it should be decided by both parents together" wasn't offered as a choice. Ideally, all decisions about the child should be made by both parents discussing it together and coming to a consensus. That way the child benefits from the combined wisdom of both parents.

I find your answer very enlightening and insightful, Petite. And reading your reasons, as a man who wasn't happy about the choice that was made to me, you are wise. Now I only quoted this part of your post just to make a small comment, which is I don't think circumcision should even be a choice left to both parents, it should still only be a choice left to the child when he is of age to make an informed decision. I say this because unfortunately in a lot of those cases (both parents deciding), at least here in the US, neither parents are wise when it comes to it and seems most don't research or really think of the consequences (he could hate it, it could be botched, if he does hate it he can never get it back). All in all though, I respect your answer.

 

[petite]

I find your answer very enlightening and insightful, Petite. And reading your reasons, as a man who wasn't happy about the choice that was made to me, you are wise. Now I only quoted this part of your post just to make a small comment, which is I don't think circumcision should even be a choice left to both parents, it should still only be a choice left to the child when he is of age to make an informed decision. I say this because unfortunately in a lot of those cases (both parents deciding), at least here in the US, neither parents are wise when it comes to it and seems most don't research or really think of the consequences (he could hate it, it could be botched, if he does hate it he can never get it back). All in all though, I respect your answer.

The problem is with the poll. The options answer completely different questions. The first three options are the answer to the question of who gets to choose what happens after birth. The baby cannot choose at that time. Someone, the mother or father, has to choose to circumcise or not at that moment. The fourth option can only occur long after the mother or father already made a choice not to circumcise him, but the OP has made the poll so that he specifically is asking whether it gets to be the father or mother who gets to choose NOT to circumcise. In order for me to properly answer the poll to indicate what I believe, I would have to choose an option that wasn't offered, "Both parents should choose" because I believe that both parents should be involved in all decisions, but I personally don't believe in circumcision, so that's also the fourth option.

In other words, the poll is written so that the first three options are about who has the power of choice over what happens to the baby, the mother or father. The fourth option asks if you're against circumcising babies, not whether the mother or father should have the power not to circumcise him. There should be two different polls, because the poll essentially allows the poll-taker to choose which question to answer.

Putting all four options together indicates that the OP is anti-circumcision. I am also, but the poll didn't directly ask that question. I don't think that the way that the poll was created could accurately reveal what I think the OP intended to reveal, whatever that is. Also, I hope that the poll-maker isn't assuming that everyone who answers this poll is female. The majority of people who answer polls in the Women's Issues section are male. In order to discover what women believe, he needs to put that into the options, like "I am a woman and I don't believe in circumcising babies" or "I am a woman and since I don't have a penis, I think it should be the father's decision" or "I am a man and since women don't have penises, I don't think they should have a say in whether or not their sons are circumcised." I'm really unsure what attitudes the OP is hoping to reveal, but being more specific and giving people the option to choose more than one answer would provide more insight.

The poll also implies that the OP holds unflattering opinions about women. I hope that was unintentional and for the moment I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt.

You see, the OP makes it impossible for someone to answer yes to the title of the thread, which implies that he doesn't understand what feminism is at all. To be a feminist issue, that issue would have to be, "Do women have the same amount of choice over what happens to their children as the father?" I believe that the answer should be "yes" to that question, but the OP only offered answers that suggest that feminists believe that women should have more power of choice than men do, and no option to select the same power of choice. Whether men have the power to choose later on in life to get circumcised can only occur after a parent or the parents together have chosen to not circumcise him when he was a baby, so that's a completely separate question entirely, "Are feminists anti-circumcision?" Unfortunately, he didn't actually ask that question either, so I couldn't answer it. If he wants to know, I personally am anti-circumcision.

 

[HiddenLacey]

After talking to the OP last night, I feel the need to defend him. I will not share things he told me personally, but I have asked him to come back to the thread and share more of why he's asking this question. Read his previous posts as well, this is something that's important to him. He's not implying anything about women, I promise he was incrediably polite to me. If anything I will say he was one of the nicer guys that have pm'd me on this site, he also stuck to the subject that he wanted to talk about and didn't go all pervy on me and do the "I want to pretend to have a conversation with you about something and then try to make wank fodder move." Maybe his poll isn't asked the way everyone else would have asked it, no big deal.

Petite, this is not directed at you, I just want to speak up before this thread spirals into another nasty thread.:smile:

 

[petite]

After talking to the OP last night, I feel the need to defend him. I will not share things he told me personally, but I have asked him to come back to the thread and share more of why he's asking this question. Read his previous posts as well, this is something that's important to him. He's not implying anything about women, I promise he was incrediably polite to me. If anything I will say he was one of the nicer guys that have pm'd me on this site, he also stuck to the subject that he wanted to talk about and didn't go all pervy on me and do the "I want to pretend to have a conversation with you about something and then try to make wank fodder move." Maybe his poll isn't asked the way everyone else would have asked it, no big deal.

Petite, this is not directed at you, I just want to speak up before this thread spirals into another nasty thread.:smile:

I think that perhaps the OP should give it a second try with a different poll. Like I said, it's so confusing, that I'm not even sure what it is that he's actually asking or what it is that he's trying to discover. I've given him the benefit of the doubt by answering the questions I think he meant to ask in the last paragraph of my last post, but I'm just guessing there and I can't read his mind, so I'm still just not sure what it is that he wants to know.

 

[HiddenLacey]

I think that perhaps the OP should give it a second try with a different poll. Like I said, it's so confusing, that I'm not even sure what it is that he's actually asking or what it is that he's trying to discover.

I know and I told him that last night, I asked him to come back and share more information. I understand why he asked the questions that he did, the way that he did. I'm not saying I agreed with anything he told me or disagreed in pm. It's really for him to share. Hopefully he will come back and hasn't been run off.

 

[petite]

I know and I told him that last night, I asked him to come back and share more information. I understand why he asked the questions that he did, the way that he did. I'm not saying I agreed with anything he told me or disagreed in pm. It's really for him to share. Hopefully he will come back and hasn't been run off.

Oh, I also thought of another problem with answering the poll... The poll appears to assume that all feminists are female. Either that or that only feminists would answer the poll and that non-feminists would abstain from answering it. My husband is a feminist and I know many women who are not. He doesn't indicate whether or not the person answering the poll is female or not or even if that person considers him/herself to be a feminist or not.

The question "Should circumcision be a feminist issue?" is a yes or no question, but the answers don't match up to the question. If a person says that it should be the father's choice, was that a feminist who thought that? Was it a man? Was it both? Do you see the problem?

 

[HiddenLacey]

Oh, I also thought of another problem with answering the poll... The poll appears to assume that all feminists are female. Either that or that only feminists would answer the poll and that non-feminists would abstain from answering it. My husband is a feminist and I know many women who are not. He doesn't indicate whether or not the person answering the poll is female or not or even if that person considers him/herself to be a feminist or not.

The question "Should circumcision be a feminist issue?" is a yes or no question, but the answers don't match up to the question. If a person says that it should be the father's choice, was that a feminist who thought that? Was it a man? Was it both? Do you see the problem?

I'm not a feminist and I still answered the question to the best of my ability giving him the answer that I thought was appropriate for how I personally felt about the issue as a woman, not a feminist. I told him last night that I wasn't a feminist and he still wanted to listen to me. It's not a feminist issue, I agree with that, once again I can't say why he asked the way he did, that's for him to say. I don't really have an issue with the way he asked it. I don't care to be honest. If I don't like the way someone asks something I simply give them the best possible answer I can with the information they've provided me. You did that as well. I wouldn't overanalyze it, maybe he will come back and explain, otherwise everything being discussed is just speculation.

 

[deleted15807]

Kudos for taking a thoroughly exhausted subject, re-working it for the 'women's forum', and gaining traction. Amazing.

 

[maxcok]

I think that perhaps the OP should give it a second try with a different poll.

Since posting in this thread I did a little reading in the OP's post history. He's started a number of "polls", which are confusing to say the least, and don't seem reflective of very deep thinking. Some appear to be designed, either intentionally or unintentionally, to reinforce a particular point of view. Of course, that's all par for the course on LPSG. I generally shy away from these "polls", especially if they're badly designed and don't present choices that offer a full range of response options, as Petite has pointed out. The OP still has not explained his reasoning behind asking if circumcision is a "feminist issue", but after reviewing his post history, not explaining his reasoning and not elaborating on his initial point seem par for the course too.

Note to self: Steer clear of suspect "polls"; at the very least check the OP's post history before weighing in.

 

[B_crackoff]

No child should be mutilated at all, without a profoundly necessary medical reason.

If they want to do it at an age when they're legally responsible - that's their bag.

Edit: I'm so glad Petite didn't do it to her son - but sod's law will probably mean he'll go to a school where everyone is cut, then get upset that he's not!:wink: Being a parent means never winning I guess! (until he's 30!!!)

(BTW Petite, I hope he's sleeping through the night!)

I was shocked when TMM mentioned(elsewhere) that she knew women who were grossed out by uncut cocks (though she's not at all).

It's an outdated religious/cultural practice - why would anyone cut their child anywhere?

 

[danerain]

out of curiosity, why are you asking? what link does male circumcision have with feminists?

aaaaahhhh, aren't a lot of the posts by men in the women's section usually about some guy's fetish or sexual fantasy?

 

[helgaleena]

I don't believe Female Genital Cutting to be an Issue in the United States or Canada. Male Circumcision is different and I believe that people that are both for and against it have something to say, if you don't agree well sorry!

It is an issue because there is a law against it. Great new book out, Desert Flower, about the practice which some emigres are now campaigning against elsewhere. But now and then a female child of immigrants is pressured to be cut like this for cultural reasons. It's also an issue in the UK, I know.

Any issue like this ought to be up to the child itself, even pierced ears imo.

Some immigrants are willing to kidnap their own children and bring them overseas to have these practices done. Very sad.

 

[B_crackoff]

IBut now and then a female child of immigrants is pressured to be cut like this for cultural reasons. It's also an issue in the UK, I know. .

That's the joy of multiculturalism - probably as bad as the large spate of slavery issues that we've had with some rich migrants - doctors even!

 

[Guy-jin]

Observation: Circumcision and vaccination are big topics in the "stay-at-home mothers online with too much time on their hands" crowd. I know because one of my best friends is such a person. The general consensus among them seems to be not to circumcise and not to vaccinate. These women do seem to generally feel it is a "woman's choice" issue (or, more specifically, a "mother's choice" issue). They have a my-way-or-the-highway approach to the topics. I find it strange, to be honest, that some people think circumcising their kid is some sort of pride or Feminist issue.

Personally, I see no need to circumcise and neither does my SO. She being ethnic Japanese, they do not circumcise generally so there's no cultural push for it. Therefore, we would choose the last option. However, it won't even be an issue in our family, to be frank. Neither of us could care less about circumcision as a topic.

That said, I do take offense to my penis's condition being called "mutilated". The term "mutilated" includes a negative connotation and implicitly means something was made imperfect through alteration. I'm circumcised and my penis is not imperfect as a result. And your opinion on my penis is not appreciated. So please, stop using the mindless term "mutilated"--it's offensive and biased.

 

[petite]

Observation: Circumcision and vaccination are big topics in the "stay-at-home mothers online with too much time on their hands" crowd. I know because one of my best friends is such a person. The general consensus among them seems to be not to circumcise and not to vaccinate. These women do seem to generally feel it is a "woman's choice" issue (or, more specifically, a "mother's choice" issue). They have a my-way-or-the-highway approach to the topics. I find it strange, to be honest, that some people think circumcising their kid is some sort of pride or Feminist issue.

Oh god, is she one of the women who hangs out the mommy boards? I read those boards when I have a question sometimes, but I've only posted a couple of times. I don't have any desire to become a part of that community online.

Here's an excerpt from a blog I'd love to link to, but I can't because it would violate LPSG site rules, but it pretty much describes the reason why I'm a lurker on the momma boards, so much funnier than I could do it.

The most egregious examples of mothers who do not have a grip on their Mama Skilz can be found on an evil website called mothering.com. Now, you might think - what could be wrong with an virtual community of MOTHERS, for Christ's sake, chit chatting about their babies on something as innocuous-sounding as mothering.com? What could be more generic? Truth be told, mothering.com is a festering cesspool of what can only be described as insane MAMAZ who put their children and the children of others at risk every single day because they essentially enjoy engaging in a pissing match over who can be crunchier. They get off on espousing bizarre and unfounded beliefs about pregnancy, childbirth, breastfeeding, discipline, nutrition, health care and education. The more outlandish, the more the other mothers revere you. It's amusing to troll the site for a while, and here and there you might pick of an tiny kernel of decent information, but by and large what you will find is something to the tune of:

Do you believe in alternative causes of AIDS? Tell me about them! The more links, the better!

I don't know if those women would consider themselves to be feminists. A lot of those opinionated women are stay-at-home Christian moms. In fact, there's a massive thread on one where one momma complains about all the anti-feminist posts and wonders where the feminist mothers are. The only reason I've seen women give is that they're Christian, and apparently some Christian women don't believe in feminism. Other women just say that they don't consider themselves to be one. Just because moms are women, or just because they're extremely opinionated, it doesn't mean that you can assume that they're feminists.

I didn't realize that circumcision was a popular topic, but I knew about the debate over vaccinating on those boards. I vaccinated my child, since I do not believe it to be the cause of autism.

 

[helgaleena]

I didn't realize that circumcision was a popular topic, but I knew about the debate over vaccinating on those boards. I vaccinated my child, since I do not believe it to be the cause of autism.

It isn't. I have an autistic son, and his vaccinations are identical to the other children's. It was supposedly a mercury based preservative causing the problem, but there are so many other environmental sources of mercury that even if a child was vaccinated twice every time, it would not cause toxic mercury levels. I do believe though that sensitivity to environmental stresses is something one is born with, and autism is in that family of reactivities.

Off topic, but you did right, petite.

 

[crossy]

Crackoff is so right on!
Mutilating a baby should fall under the category of child abuse.
For religious reasons - the Jews have 613 commandments to obey, my recommendation is to skip the cutting of the babies tiny weiner and work on the other comandments like avoiding cheeseburgers and shellfish,, spilling your seed,bearing false witness, usury, cheating customers, etc these are far more important, I think.
The topic is actually silly. Why did God or whoever come up with this mutilation idea?

 

[tiberian777]

Circumcision helps stop wart virus, study finds | Reuters

The health benefits of circumcision are well documented. There was controversy before whether or not this was the case but it has been studied long enough and there is enough evidence now to show it is a great choice on basis of health alone. I am circumcised and think it is great.

 

[petite]

Circumcision helps stop wart virus, study finds | Reuters

The health benefits of circumcision are well documented. There was controversy before whether or not this was the case but it has been studied long enough and there is enough evidence now to show it is a great choice on basis of health alone. I am circumcised and think it is great.

There's a vaccine for that, which makes more sense than circumcising, since HPV is also responsible for half the cancers above the neck.

It isn't. I have an autistic son, and his vaccinations are identical to the other children's. It was supposedly a mercury based preservative causing the problem, but there are so many other environmental sources of mercury that even if a child was vaccinated twice every time, it would not cause toxic mercury levels. I do believe though that sensitivity to environmental stresses is something one is born with, and autism is in that family of reactivities.

Off topic, but you did right, petite.

I hope so! There are so many toxins we accumulate in our bodies that might affect a child, it really could be a number of things, if the cause is environmental.

 

[Opalite]

Any issue like this ought to be up to the child itself, even pierced ears imo.*

I solemly agree. I'm not sure how the law and regulation is at the moment in Canada/US/UK, but overhere it is actually legal to "pierce" a childs ears from the shocking age of 6 months. Though, regulation is poor and it's still common practice to do so around 5/6 weeks. As a professional, I have always - and will always - refuse any client younger then 16 (with a parent present and valid IDs). Even if it's "just" for pierced ears. I will never use a piercing gun.

This because the practice disgusts me on many levels. Not only because I believe it should be the childs own decision, but more so because of the great risks these parents dare to put their babies through because they thing it looks "cute".*

Why? Because the most common way the childs ears are "pierced" is by the use of some sort of piercing gun by someone not properly trained in bloodborne pathogens and working at the very least aseptic. The training these - often mere jewelers - will undertake rarely takes longer then 2 hours (but usually 15-30 minutes!) and will commonly just explain them how to pull the trigger - whereas a any somewhat decent piercer would train fulltime for about 2 years before ever touching another person. Piercing earlobes is far, far more complicated than one might think, especially on small children, if done in the right manner.*

The jewelry used in these guns are not only made of the wrong grade or steel, *titanium, gold or silver - or a combination of these. This can prove a serious health risk for your child. The stainless steel used will always contain very high levels of nickle; not only is this an alloy many are in fact allergic to, beeing in contact with it - especially at a young age - can cause allergies when your kid is older. Reactions can be as "minimal" as rashes and infections - but more dramatic reactions arent uncommon. The titanium used (Ti) will nearly always be described as beeing G23. G23 is not implant grade, and it's a very vague way to decribe the material for body jewelry: never, NEVER accept Ti that isn't ASTM F136 and wasn't finished according to F86. Anything other is playing russian roulette. Silver and gold are a bit more complex - It would take me ages to explain - but the general problems are again within the alloys (nickle!) and permanent staining (blueish dots) is among the less dramatic risks. The jewelry itself is not made to accomodate swelling, and will nearly always pose problems. The design is possibly even worse, as the sharp end can ingure your child and the butterfly-end will be an optimal place for bacteria to grow. The design also makes it very difficult to properly clean - and I'm yet to meet the jeweler that actually provided proper afterare advice (up to APP standards).

This is just scratching the surface, but one thing anyone that ever even thought about using these guns on anyone should consider, is the fact that ANY piercing gun can not be sterilized or cleaned the way they should. This means they can easily (and do so often) spread Hep. B. Yes, hepatitis. Among various other bloodborne diseases.*

This isn't something we just found out about recently, but has been readily available for years. Anyone able to use google could and should know. People read tons of maturnity and parenting books, yet are oblivious to the health risks a simple ear piercing can pose. Thats ridiculous and the mere thought of a child - not even old enough to realise - is unwillingly exposed to these risks makes me nauseated to extremes.*That isn't a case of "personal preferences" or even "choice", its child abuse.

/offtopic.