Anti-circ?

*Fluffy Bunnies - posted on 08/07/2011

I think the argument about *routine* circumcision is that there isn't a medical reason to do it. I see your point about not wanting the government to interfere, but then we hear stories about parents denying their child treatment for a diseaese because of their beliefs. The government steps in and gets the child treatment. Is it fair to let the child suffer because their parents don't believe in certain treatments? Sometimes it is necessary for the govenrment to be involved.

Christina - posted on 08/07/2011

I'm pro-choice in almost every aspect. Unless a child is being abused and neglected, then it is the parent's choice on everything from circumcision, ear piercing, religion, ect. I don't believe the government has a right to dictate how I raise my children or the medical choices I make for them.

Minnie - posted on 08/07/2011

I'm sure you'll find plenty of people who are staunch anti-abortion/anti circumcision. I used to be extremely anti abortion. I still can't think about it with much more than hateful feelings. But my change to pro-choice was a result of me embracing reproductive rights after my transition out of hosptial birthing to homebirthing.



The difference I see here, like I mentioned above is that one involves not just a baby's body but the woman's as well, while circumcision involves violating only the person's rights it is performed upon.



Just to be clear, I DO believe that abortion violates a baby's right to life. But I also understand that it is a very fine line there we dance around- what if the baby has a horrific birth defect that would mean a painful short life, or if the mother's own life is in danger, etc.



I think another analogy might explain how I see it- I believe wholeheartedly that it is a baby's birthright to be breastfed. But in accordance with supporting a woman's reproductive rights, I support her right to choose not to breastfeed her baby. I don't like it- but it's not just the baby's body here, but hers as well.

Christina - posted on 08/07/2011

I'm just trying to find out if it is a mutual thing. Anti-circ, anti-abortion. Like a lot of pro-choicers believe those who are pro-life but support the death penalty are hypocrites.

Minnie - posted on 08/07/2011

What about religion?

This is making a permanent choice for the child. What if the child does not want to be a part of that religion as an adult? BTW, Christians who claim they need to circumcise due to the Bible don't know their Bibles.

And female circumcision is a lot different than male cirsumcision.

There are four defined categories of female circumcision

1. Clitoridectomy, or removal of clitoris or part of it.
2. Excision, removal of part or all of clitoris and labia minora
3. Infibulation- repositioning the labia and narrowing the vaginal opening
4. Other fgm practices such as knicking, pricking and cauterizing.

Most people think of female circumcision as only infibulation- which is what they hear from the media because it is so sensationalistic. It is rare. The most common form of female circumcision is clitoridectomy, removal of the clitoris or just the female prepuce. This procedure is far less invasive than routine male infant circumcision, which destroys 20,000 nerve endings as opposed to the 9,000 removed during a clitoridectomy.

Also, since most men go to the Dr for every ailment, I can only imagine how many times a Dr visit will be made by an uncirc boy/man based on his ailment (s) with his private part.

Perhaps you should consider that 85% of the men in this world are intact and generally don't have health issues with their penises?

I used to work in a hospital and I will tell you there were so many more severe infections in those men that weren't

My mother has worked with the elderly for 21 years now and has only come across ONE man who was intact who had a problem- and it wasn't infection related but a narrowing of the opening. That was quickly rectified with a small cut.

It makes me wonder if the care providers in your hospital are not trained in proper hygiene care of intact men- which is usually the cause of infections. YOU people learn to clean the men. It's your job. :)

Christy - posted on 08/07/2011

What about religion? Some parents choose to circ b/c of that. Let's try to change a person's religion, then.



And female circumcision is a lot different than male cirsumcision.



Since every site on the internet is correct about this topic, let's all make sure that's the only place we do our research, then. Also, since most men go to the Dr for every ailment, I can only imagine how many times a Dr visit will be made by an uncirc boy/man based on his ailment (s) with his private part. I used to work in a hospital and I will tell you there were so many more severe infections in those men that weren't. Not saying that I would circum as a result, but it was a reality and nothing about it was from the internet.



I can't wait until the debate changes to "we should all circ boys" in about 20 yrs. This arguement seems to go back and forth.

Minnie - posted on 08/07/2011

Yup, ditto the other ladies. In the case of circumcision, it is ONLY the baby's body at stake. Abortion is a grey area, because the mother's body is involved as well.



I'm a supporter of reproductive rights. That means that you support a woman's right to make choices regarding her reproductive health- her body. And I believe along with that a boy (or girl) has the right to keep their reproductive organs whole.

Emma - posted on 08/07/2011

Krista said it very well so i wont repeat the same thing.
I will just ask thought if you are pro circumcision of boys are you also pro female circumcision ?

*Fluffy Bunnies - posted on 08/07/2011

I don't think that's true, Christy. I used to think circumcision was something that had to done. Had my first been a boy we would've done it without putting much thought into it. I would be so upset with myself now. Thanks to the ladies on CoM I began to question routine circumcion and did tons of research on it when we decided to try for #2. I changed my mind about it and my husband and I decided that we wouldn't do it.



Being anti-circ doesn't mean you're against parents being allowed to make decisions for their children. Someone who is anti-circ is against cutting off an infant's foreskin for reasons that are not medically necessary. I'm also pro-life, but like Krista said, abortion is not a black and white issue. I'm very much against abortion just because you don't want a baby, but there are cases where mom's life is in danger or she was raped, or the baby won't survive due to a disease or defect, etc.

Christy - posted on 08/07/2011

I know, let's get off this topic. I have found that no matter want an opposing opinion states, it will not change the other sides' mind, period.

Kate CP - posted on 08/07/2011

I'm gonna echo what Krista just said. And add to it, as well...that this question just doesn't make any sense. You're talking about terminating a fetus before it's born, before it could ever survive outside the womb...and comparing it with chopping off a healthy body part from a healthy living, breathing, BORN human infant who is a separate person entirely from his mother. When they start offering intra-uterine circumcision then maybe this question will make more sense. Until then, this comparison is like apples and oranges.

Krista - posted on 08/07/2011

That's a tough one, isn't it?



I am against abortion. But I am pro-choice.



And no, those two things are not mutually exclusive.



I loathe the very idea of abortion. It breaks my heart. HOWEVER, if a woman is raped, or there is a fetal abnormality incompatible with life, or if the mother's health is in danger, then I do not feel that I (or the state) have the right to tell her what decision she should make.



And while, on paper, one could say, "Okay, so you only support choice in those certain circumstances", it's not exactly that cut-and-dry. If we restrict abortion to when a mother's life is threatened, how imminent must the threat be in order for the abortion to be granted? Does she have to have a 100% chance of dying? 80%? 40%? And what about rape? Are we going to only grant the right to have an abortion if a woman claims rape? Or when she presses charges? Or if her alleged rapist is found guilty? And what mechanism will be put in place to keep desperate women from falsely claiming rape, in order to be able to get an abortion?



I am pro-choice because I am a pragmatist and I think that restricting abortion will actually cause more problems than it solves. However, I am anti-abortion and feel strongly that our society should be doing more to prevent unintended pregnancies, so that fewer abortions are sought in the first place.



So I can see where you're going, in that no, the fetus is not my body and what right do I have to do anything to it? But really, until we figure out a way to perfect extra-uterine gestation, then my body is involved as well. And I have the right to decide whether or not to proceed with a pregnancy that may kill me. To do otherwise is to basically revoke my status as a person.