Religious/Ethical Circumcision is Male Genital Mutilation

Firstly, I must rebuke the statement claiming my source was outdated. While David's case is old, the source is not. It reports incidents as recent as 2013, so to claim my source was outdated was untrue. As for the issue of misdiagnosis, David's circumcision was a result of misdiagnosis. Both the Reimer twins had a problem with the tightening of the skin over the glans of the penis (source stated that it is actually not at all uncommon in babies) which was then treated with circumcision. This proved to be unnecessary as, in light of the complications with David's circumcision, his brother was not circumcised after all and the issue involving the tautness of the foreskin eventually resolved itself. From this we can assume David would have also recovered without the need for surgery. Instead, he had to go under the knife several more times and live his childhood as a girl. (1) I will state again that I'm not against circumcision completely, but I am against neo-natal circumcision. The disgusting truth is that circumcision, even in the US, is barbaric. Doctors are wary to anaesthetise a baby for various reasons and it's not uncommon for a baby to be strapped or held down while his foreskin is torn from his glans (which are fused at birth, thus increasing the likelihood of the glans tearing too) while fully conscious (2 and 3). The source I used previously also states that this is true (a statement coming from a nurse who had her own son circumcised years before understanding how the procedure is carried out. When she realised that she had put her son through this excruciating procedure, she felt immense guilt. This leads nicely into my next point. Besides the obvious immediate pain circumcision causes, there are long-lasting effects too. Upon noticing that their genitals look different to that of other boys, a boy can go through a process of shame, embarrassment or even loss. They feel that a part of them was literally cut away and killed without their consent. On the mother/father's part, it is common for them to regret letting their son(s) undergo the circumcision as, after all, they want to prevent the infliction of pain upon their offspring. Several mothers say that years later, disregarding whether or not their son had been physically or emotionally scarred by the circumcision, they can still recall the ear splitting screams of their child and a father was described as inconsolable after his son suffered complications following circumcision.(2) The double standard I attempt to highlight is that we can agree that the case of Reimer and of the mothers traumatised by their son's circumcision, yet it is legal. Yet, in the case of FGM, which also has both physical and psychological drawbacks, is seen as completely inhumane and is condemned, though both male and female circumcision are, in my opinion, equally sickening. Lastly, I must state that circumcision is a choice- or at least it should be. If a male wants to be circumcised in later life, he can make this decision for himself. It should not be made for him. Sources: http://intaction.org... http://www.circumcision.org... https://uk.answers.yahoo.com... (further sources supplied within link) http://www.forwarduk.org.uk...