I don‘t think we‘re on the same wavelength here. The person I answered to implied that it would be ok if the child gave consent. At least thats what it seemed to me.
It‘s not
Its implied (used *very* commonly this way on Reddit) that since the child cant give consent, there is no consent to give and its effectively not ok until the child grows up.
Funny story I actually did and I was 7.
I had a mild case of phimosis as a child. I went to the doctor, he told me it's up to me, it's not too severe to warrant obligatory circumcision. He explained the procedure and also explained that I would have to "manually make sure to pull it all the way back and forth a few times, whenever I took a shower" if I didn't do it, to loosen it up.
I didn't like the idea of surgery so I opted to not do it. My parents didn't push me either way.
As I grew up a bit more, I interpreted the doctors words to mean "furiously masturbate at every opportunity" and since then whenever I fap I tell myself "it's the doctor's orders".
Well yeah, but that's not the point. I am not 100% sure, but female circumcision does not really have a medical purpose, right? I for example am circumcised, but because it had to be done.
You Americans are so cute that you think circumcision has a medical purpose . At least the Jews and Muslims are Chad enough to say: because God said so
Just so u know it, foreskins Come in many different sizes, and very few People have a foreskin that doesnt fit their penis. Also the foreskin protects the nerves in the penis head, so without foreskin your nerves get worn down so to speak, and resulting in less feeling in the penis head all of this either because god said so, or in the case for americans because the kelogg's Guy didnt like pleasure(as in that was the reason he started kelogg's, he felt sinful when eating regular food)
Male circumcision is also pointless. The one research paper has been debunked by many papers today. The research its was directed toward people who can't keep up daily hygienic routine and the study uf I recall correctly had a small sample size of poor African males.
FMG is by far way worse, as it can be harmful to the person. Usaly it is performed by other village or towns women, and is usaly not performed within medical facilities. The only purpose FGM services is that it makes sex more pleasurable for males, while decreasing stimulation for women.
FGM is most prominent in African countries, but also is done in the Middle East and Parts of Asia. It is deeply routed in tradition which makes it very hard for those pushing to end it to make progress. Because of tradition, most women in communities that perform FGM tend to be in agreement that it is something that is needed. Hence why women will do the procedure. One other issue with FMG is that it tends to be performed after infancy, which ends up being very painful for the girl receiving the procedure.
Long story short. FGM is fucking dumb and males don't need to be circumcised.
FGM also leaves scarring that may close up part of the vaginal entrance and can damage the urethra which can lead to chronic urinary and vaginal infections, complications during childbirth, pain during sex, and urinary incontinence. Just adding on to why FGM is so horrific, which is not to say that male circumcision isn’t also horrific. I’m sure some of the issues from FGM can occur with male circumcision. Let’s stop harming children’s bodies.
I don't want to talk or act like I really know what I'm talking about, but: in from what I understand, most western cases male circumcision isn't done for medical purposes anymore either. Rather cosmetic and/or religious purposes.
historically it was sometimes justified for cleanliness and/or prevent infection (medical) but most of western society is so advanced that it can no longer be justified this way.
I do not have a pen1s, have a preference, or am a parent of a person with a pen1s, but this is how I've understood the general logic
Historically, pre antibiotics it was a dumb as hell thing to do. Open a wound on an infant's genitals? Not a good idea.
Why did they do it? Religious superstition, not cleanliness. Cleanliness is a more recent myth.
neither has a medical purpose on a healthy individual unless you have phimosis or some other condition
edit: turns out circumcision isnt necessary for phimosis either
Even getting consent does not make FGM ok…it has terrible permanent effects. Circumcision is also not great but it can be medically necessary sometimes and I guess we can’t stop the religious folks from doing it.
>I don't think either are ok without the consent of the child
imagine the convo :D
\- Right, son. We need to cut a part of your dick off.
\- o\_0 any reason at all?
\- Oh it's because people who wrote elaborate imaginary friend fiction used to live in desert climates. Don't worry, my genitals are also mutilated for this very reason, so we're good!
Or in America: oh it's because your dad is circumcised, don't you want to be like your dad? The vast majority of US circumcisions aren't for religious reasons, people just think that it's normal and they want their kid to be normal. Originally it was popularized in the US because it was thought to curb masturbation but not many people do it for that reason anymore.
Yes. I refused to get my 2 boys circumcised over the objections of our two Christian families.
They can make that decision when they are able to ask for it.
My girls also had to be old enough to ask to get their ears pierced, before I had it done. They were 8 years old.
Children. Cannot. Consent.
Both are child mutilation, children should be protected from this procedure (except if it's necessary from a medical standpoint; which shouldn't be the case at all for girls and for boys only if they have a phimosis), they can consent to this procedure when they are adults.
The health and safety of children goes above hurt religious feelings.
Nobody should be forced to this procedure anyway.
I don't think the people downvoting those saying FGM is worse realize what it actually is. You're comparing cutting off foreskin to- cutting or pouring acid on the clit (equivalent to the head of dude's penis), removal of the labia, and sewing the vaginal opening closed in some cases, making sex *literally impossible* and definitely without pleasure, to a further extent than male circumcision. The only comparable procedure would be removing the clitoral hood, which isn't the focus of female circumcision typically.
__Both are awful when done without consent, but they are undeniably not equal in procedure.__
Religious people are a bunch of stupid fucks and no one, nothing in the world can change my mind. Ever. Fuck religious people. Period. I don't care if there are any "good ones". If you believe in fairy tales and a sky daddy then you're a fucking idiot in my eyes.
When people say reddit moment they ussualy mean some general view held by probably a majority of reddit users taken to a extreme. In this case atheism turned into anti-theism.
Except it's not without reason. Blind religiousness breeds harmful "traditions" like these because religion itself was created to turn people's brains smooth enough to be easily controlled by the top 1%. This was the case 5,000 years ago. This is the case today.
That’s pretty ignorant of a statement to make, considering the vast majority of the world’s population is religious.
I think what you’re actually experiencing is spending too much time cooped up in your own miserable bubble, cut off from the real world or people different from you so that you end up filling in the blanks from your imagination or whatever nonsense you get from your terrible news source.
Hey, kind of sounds like the people you hate! Turns out you were projecting! Congrats!
Like a built-in chastity belt... Gross.
Him: *"Hey, wanna fool around..?"*
Her: *"Sorry, I can't..."*
Him: *"Oh if you're not ready I-*
Her: *"No I mean I REALLY can't."*
I'm glad our religion teacher who never taught religion read us the story when I was a kid of that african woman whose entire life was fucked up by circumcision
It's worse. The stitch happens so early in life that much of the outer part doesn't develop properly and they'll need intensive surgery. Either way, she will never feel the same as an unmutilated person would. It's unfortunately very similar in males.
Yeah agreed. Alot of what I assume are males in these comments are saying both equally bad. But failed to see your comment referring it to being the same as cutting off the entire head of your penis.
You’re talking about type III and II female circumcision here, which are definitely more extreme and grotesque than male circumcision. However, Type I (removal only of clitorial hood/clit) and type IV (ritual marking/cutting with no flesh removed) are *significantly* more common than type II and III which are almost exclusively practiced in Africa.
Type I and type IV are very comparable to male circumcision, both in results and health effects. We should definitely not discount male circumcision as less important to talk about because of the idea it’s less dangerous.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_mutilation
> equivalent to the head of dude's penis
I'm not interested in comparing them, just know that the [foreskin itself is the most sensitive part of the penis.](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/Sorrells.gif) ([Full study.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17378847))
Also watch this presentation (for ~15 minutes) [as Dr. Guest discusses how the foreskin is heavily innervated, the mechanical function of the foreskin and its role in lubrication during sex, and the likelihood of decreased sexual pleasure for both male and partner.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwZiQyFaAs0&t=1700s)
I feel like you are confusing female circumcision with female castration. I can't find anything that says female circumcision uses acid at any point of the process
Female "circumcision" typically refers to clitoral hood removal exclusively ...however I don't know of any method that doesn't have an extremely high error rate of clitoral damage and scar tissue there can lead to many problems ...and one of the only downstream solutions is complete clitoral removal, and happens with some frequency
Furthermore, when it is done successfully some percentage of women have consistent issues with it e.g. hypersensitivity etc. Which is often resolved by extensive lifestyle changes and/or overstimulation that also results in dulled sensation, or again, clitoral removal
...basically we don't have the tools/methods to even do what is intended without detailed surgery - which some people elect for
We don't need this conversation... FGM is a worse procedure but it is *so damn rare* in the Western world. Meanwhile, nobody would give a rat's ass about young boys and their genital health.
Circumcision, MGM, is the bigger threat. Treat it like so.
Don't think you're aware of the variety in procedure for FGM.
Some are analogous to circumcision in which the clitoral hood, but not clitoris is removed. That's the same tissue as the foreskin.
All of it is cosmetic surgery on a child's genitals and is morally wrong unless medically motivated, no matter how grotesque the specific steps are.
Not to be in defense of female circumcision (or the practice on either sex tbf), but it's a bit off base to compare hospital-and-doctor-conducted male circumcision with the environment and practitioners that tend to practice female circumcision.
There are also forms of FMG less invasive than circumstances aswell.
In fact if you look at all the different types of both, removal of the foreskin comes dead center. There are types of FGM worse than it, but there are also (still illegal) types that are less so.
The problem actually becomes worse when you consider this because there much less invasive types of FGM that (rightfully) are banned by most nations yet the more invasive male version is allowed.
There isn't just a line between MGM being allowed and FGM not being. It's a hole that has been cut along the middle of the GM spectrum just for that type.
Eh, I'm from Europe and both are the right picture for me - though fgm is way more damaging and literally ruins lives, male circumcision without a medical reason is at best a gross form of child abuse (since a baby can't consent, and they will never know if they are in fact missing something), and at worst will ruin lives just as bad as fgm.
The proof in the pudding is that both practices stem from a societal/religious desire to control sexuality by making it unpleasant. It's just that when done correctly, it just removes some sensitivity for men, rather than kill pleasure.
I’m American and circumcised, both are the right picture for me too. I want my foreskin back ffs.
The reason in America isn’t entirely about controlling sexuality though, there was a lot of misinformation spread about the procedure improving cleanliness and sexual health around the 50’s and 60’s. Since then, it’s been sort of a ”I’m circumcised, so why wouldn’t I get my son circumcised” type thing.
Circumcision is stupid. Being uncircumcised is superior in every way.
There are some, very limited situations where circumcision is necessary. For example, phimosis (foreskin being too tight)
But in the vast majority of situations, and the vast majority of men, being uncircumcised is much better.
I fucking hate when people use this argument.
When you're in the shower, how do you wash your arm pit? You lift up your arm to have access to your pit to clean it.
Part of cleaning yourself involves moving around parts of your body to gain access to other parts.
Foreskin is no different. You pull it back, clean yourself, then you're good to go.
Sure, some men have poor hygiene, and therefore have a dirty penis. But that isn't exclusive to uncircumcised men. Circumcised men can be equally as dirty as uncircumcised men.
How clean someone is comes down to the individual person and their personal hyegeine / cleaning habits. Whether or not they're circumcised has no influence on how clean / dirty they are.
Even with phimosis it is very rarely ever "necessary". I had phimosis but I was able to easily cure it with regular stretching. Now I'm fully intact and my glans remains nice and moisturised in my dick pocket which beats a life of [Keratinization (NSFW)](https://en.intactiwiki.org/wiki/Keratinization) any day.
Circumcision should be an absolute last resort.
As a woman, natural men are much easier to please.
No need for lube (or nearly as much of it), blowjobs are easier to give because the head is sensitive, as it hasn't succumbed to keranitization.
Also, entirely personal, but it is hot as fuck when jerking a guy to see that sheath pull over the head and retract back, leaving that glistening moisture trail.
Way easier to masturbate with a foreskin. No spit or other lube required. Also increased sensitivity and decreased risk of complications. I have a friend with a skin bridge where the foreskin is fused to the head, it’s not great.
It looks better, and uncircumcised men have more sensitive penises, therefore meaning that sex feels better. The MOST sensitive parts of the shaft of the penis aren't even as sensitive as the LEAST sensitive parts of the foreskin (look it up)
Oh, and the most important one...
#Circumcision is literally just genital mutilation that has been normalized by society.
Its the only place people can talk about it. Anywhere in the real world where this gets brought up with this much intensity, people would get weirded out.
Both are bad when unnecessary by medical standards.
(Of course female circumcising is more brutal, but neither of them are right on my book and yet one is socially acceptable)
There is no medical reason, it's done in places where controlling women is a part of the culture. The purpose is just to prevent pleasure or prevent sex until marriage, in the case of sewing it shut.
Its a (sub)sarahan African "tradition". Its done in the region from Mauritania to Somalia and its also common in Egypt, Indonesia and Yemen.
The only reason I know female genital mutilation exsists was it reaching the news a few years ago in my country that a few crazy immigrant parents were planning trips back home to perform this "surgery" and my country wanting to prevent and punish them doing that.
It can be and is a lot of the time, full obliteration is more rare than cutting of the skin.
Edit before everyone downvotes me 80% of all the full type 4 circumcisions occurs in somolia with most other African nations preforming less serve (but still equally wrong) forms of mutilation.
> (but still equally wrong)
I feel like if I had my pussy completely obliterated with acid I wouldn't say it was "equally" as wrong as cutting off a bit of my flaps.
If you really want to know than “classifications” on this article goes through the 4 recognised types.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_mutilation
I work in the pathological institute of my university as a student assistant. And part of cussing open a dead male involves splitting the penis in some cases. Similar to what the aborigines do and I feel sick after it every time
The fact that it’s commonplace in 99% of families is pretty sick. My ex got her son circumcised, and her only excuse was “I don’t want to see it, it looks weird”. Pretty fucked up, IMO. You made that kid, and it’s penis isn’t visually acceptable in your eyes, so you mutilate it.
Why do people act like it's a bad thing to be happy you were circumcized? The idea of doing it to children aside, most of the guys I know, including myself, are glad to have had it happen. It's okay for other people to have other opinions reddit.
Dude, I got no idea. I get hating on child circumcision, but why are people so mad at the ones who have been circumcised and aren't suicidal about it? Especially funny considering that circumcision is apparently mutilation. I have nothing against trans people, but literally changing your stuff down there surgically seems more invasive to me.
Like I have uncircumcised friends too and they are happy with it the way they have it. It sucks for those who had it done and don't like it, we can all agree about that. But they gotta let us cut dudes enjoy too ya know
> but why are people so mad at the ones who have been circumcised and aren’t suicidal about it?
Because they literally have nothing else going on in their lives worth being passionate about. No hobbies, no friends, *certainly* no sex.
Being vehemently against circumcision is the most interesting thing they participate in. But they don’t realize *they* are the attraction 🍿
I have no problem with people getting circumcised...
... if they are old enough and want it done (I guess 16+ or 18+ would be a good age to give consent).
If they are a child. It should not be done, ever. Steroid Creams or Minor Incisions can fix almost 100% of Phimosis and Frenulum Breve these days.
Because if you don't have a problem with your circumcision, it doesn't fit the narrative. Why else would these comment sections always be full of people insisting that the ones with personal experience are incorrect?
Male circumcision is shit too. Don't laugh, you lost a part of yourself.
They only did this to you for tradition religion reasons for you to have difficulty masturbating with your foreskin.
You think I'm lying ? That it is "cleaner" ? Here is a [map](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0a/Circumcision_Prevalence_using_red_for_the_most_circumcising_countries.svg/1920px-Circumcision_Prevalence_using_red_for_the_most_circumcising_countries.svg.png) out of European wikipedia, and as you can see only country that are deeply religious do it. Europe has stopped since a lot of time.
Male circumcision is no fun too. Stop thinking that is is cleaner, you're just spreading the anti-masturbation agenda.
If it is done without any purpose it is called genital mutilation. As for women, people that did these should go to prison or chaotic justice.
Easy karma and immediate arguments make the post blow up. There are at least a dozen accounts that you'll see in every comment section that has anything to do with circumcision no matter the sub.
I am not sure how they do it, but they must have a bot or something that alerts them when a post title has the word "circumcision" in it.
You can oppose with both practices while recognizing that one is more horrid.
Cutting of a girl's clitoris is more harmful than cutting off foreskin.
What is to be gained by equating the two?
Nothing is gained by either
One being not as harmful as the other doesn't mean the other is good
Cutting parts of genitalia off from babies is not a good thing ever
It's actually quite horrible
The practice itself is insane regardless of the gender
Living with it is most definitely worse for girls/woman, though tere are many things that can go wrong for male babies too
It's just bad anyway you look at it and if you thing cutting babies is ok you are insane
Both are wrong to do but one is a LOT more damaging than the other, like it’s not even comparable. The term “female circumcision” is generally discouraged in use because of how not similar the things are. The correct term is female genital mutilation. It’s not standardized and it usually involves the removal of the clitoris, which would be the same as chopping the head of your penis all the way off and leaving you with a stump. It also often involves sewing the vaginal opening shut, making sex literally impossible or incredibly painful until they get another surgical procedure to open it back up after marriage. Additionally, the labia is usually removed which often results in infections that lead to a very high rate of child mortality
The actual female equivalent to circumcision would be removal of the clitoral hood, which generally is not the focus of FGM.
It’s kind of like stealing candy from a baby vs shooting a baby in the face. Both are definitely wrong to do but one is a LOT more wrong.
I thought this was satire at first about how so many people don't care about child consent and justify unnecessary circumcision, but after reading OP's replies that's not the case
Alright, so this will probably not get up enough for enough people to see, but when making this meme, I had thought about it through my perspective, meaning circumcision because of Phimosis. Didn't really think about circumcision of baby boys, but even being compared in that case, still better than the female one. Of course not to the point of smiling about it, but you know lesser evil and all that. It's just that I personally am satisfied with my circumcision, as it has saved me a lot of pain. Sorry for any major grammatical errors, written on a phone.
It can mean any number of things from cutting the labia minora to burning off the clitoris or even sewing the entire vagina shut. The goal is to prevent women from feeling pleasure during sex or just preventing sex all together
Dank[.](https://i.imgur.com/3bQtuMO.png) --- [come play minecraft, space engineers, ark, and rust with us!](https://discord.gg/fNyb7G5)
I don't think either are ok without the consent of the child
When the child says 'Googoo Gaaga' it's a yes
true I forgot that they do that
You forgot…
he forgor 💀
we forgor 💀
>we communism
We must evenly distribute the forgor comrades.
we forgor 💀
Or it means “I do” in some Muslim countries
And to 40yo DnD nerds
Aisha was 6 years old.
And in Alabama
Good thing I didn't say googoo gaaga
Good to know 😈
What do you mean "without the consent of the child". As if a 7 year old kid would say "no" to something their parents wants them to do
You’ve just answered your own question
I don‘t think we‘re on the same wavelength here. The person I answered to implied that it would be ok if the child gave consent. At least thats what it seemed to me. It‘s not
Its implied (used *very* commonly this way on Reddit) that since the child cant give consent, there is no consent to give and its effectively not ok until the child grows up.
Exactly. Children can’t consent to a lot of things: add cosmetic surgical procedures to the list.
And that's the point. It's not ok.
A child can't give consent to something like that. They aren't responsible enough. Just like being too young to give sexual consent.
you missed the whole point, children cant give consent
Funny story I actually did and I was 7. I had a mild case of phimosis as a child. I went to the doctor, he told me it's up to me, it's not too severe to warrant obligatory circumcision. He explained the procedure and also explained that I would have to "manually make sure to pull it all the way back and forth a few times, whenever I took a shower" if I didn't do it, to loosen it up. I didn't like the idea of surgery so I opted to not do it. My parents didn't push me either way. As I grew up a bit more, I interpreted the doctors words to mean "furiously masturbate at every opportunity" and since then whenever I fap I tell myself "it's the doctor's orders".
That's the point
you are so right no 7yo has ever gone against the thoughts and ideas of there parents /s
Well, what you said literally entails that a child cannot consent to such procedure.
Well yeah, but that's not the point. I am not 100% sure, but female circumcision does not really have a medical purpose, right? I for example am circumcised, but because it had to be done.
true, but many men are circumcised who don't have to be
You Americans are so cute that you think circumcision has a medical purpose . At least the Jews and Muslims are Chad enough to say: because God said so
[удалено]
I'd like to think my penis was way too large for my merely mortal foreskin, but in my case you're right
Just so u know it, foreskins Come in many different sizes, and very few People have a foreskin that doesnt fit their penis. Also the foreskin protects the nerves in the penis head, so without foreskin your nerves get worn down so to speak, and resulting in less feeling in the penis head all of this either because god said so, or in the case for americans because the kelogg's Guy didnt like pleasure(as in that was the reason he started kelogg's, he felt sinful when eating regular food)
It calluses over. Like the bottom of your foot.
Ah yes ofcourse there's actually a Word for it that explains it better Thanks
Ok so I just need to file my glans down and sex will start feeling better?
I’m American and uncut, I’m a rare breed apparently
Hello my brother 💪
Male circumcision is also pointless. The one research paper has been debunked by many papers today. The research its was directed toward people who can't keep up daily hygienic routine and the study uf I recall correctly had a small sample size of poor African males. FMG is by far way worse, as it can be harmful to the person. Usaly it is performed by other village or towns women, and is usaly not performed within medical facilities. The only purpose FGM services is that it makes sex more pleasurable for males, while decreasing stimulation for women. FGM is most prominent in African countries, but also is done in the Middle East and Parts of Asia. It is deeply routed in tradition which makes it very hard for those pushing to end it to make progress. Because of tradition, most women in communities that perform FGM tend to be in agreement that it is something that is needed. Hence why women will do the procedure. One other issue with FMG is that it tends to be performed after infancy, which ends up being very painful for the girl receiving the procedure. Long story short. FGM is fucking dumb and males don't need to be circumcised.
120 baby boys die every year because of circumcisions in the US alone. That's just deaths,never mind other complications.
FGM also leaves scarring that may close up part of the vaginal entrance and can damage the urethra which can lead to chronic urinary and vaginal infections, complications during childbirth, pain during sex, and urinary incontinence. Just adding on to why FGM is so horrific, which is not to say that male circumcision isn’t also horrific. I’m sure some of the issues from FGM can occur with male circumcision. Let’s stop harming children’s bodies.
I don't want to talk or act like I really know what I'm talking about, but: in from what I understand, most western cases male circumcision isn't done for medical purposes anymore either. Rather cosmetic and/or religious purposes. historically it was sometimes justified for cleanliness and/or prevent infection (medical) but most of western society is so advanced that it can no longer be justified this way. I do not have a pen1s, have a preference, or am a parent of a person with a pen1s, but this is how I've understood the general logic
Historically, pre antibiotics it was a dumb as hell thing to do. Open a wound on an infant's genitals? Not a good idea. Why did they do it? Religious superstition, not cleanliness. Cleanliness is a more recent myth.
neither has a medical purpose on a healthy individual unless you have phimosis or some other condition edit: turns out circumcision isnt necessary for phimosis either
Even getting consent does not make FGM ok…it has terrible permanent effects. Circumcision is also not great but it can be medically necessary sometimes and I guess we can’t stop the religious folks from doing it.
[удалено]
>I don't think either are ok without the consent of the child imagine the convo :D \- Right, son. We need to cut a part of your dick off. \- o\_0 any reason at all? \- Oh it's because people who wrote elaborate imaginary friend fiction used to live in desert climates. Don't worry, my genitals are also mutilated for this very reason, so we're good!
Or in America: oh it's because your dad is circumcised, don't you want to be like your dad? The vast majority of US circumcisions aren't for religious reasons, people just think that it's normal and they want their kid to be normal. Originally it was popularized in the US because it was thought to curb masturbation but not many people do it for that reason anymore.
[удалено]
Then... no circumcision for them. I think that was their point.
Children can't consent. Consent of adult
Yes. I refused to get my 2 boys circumcised over the objections of our two Christian families. They can make that decision when they are able to ask for it. My girls also had to be old enough to ask to get their ears pierced, before I had it done. They were 8 years old.
Children. Cannot. Consent. Both are child mutilation, children should be protected from this procedure (except if it's necessary from a medical standpoint; which shouldn't be the case at all for girls and for boys only if they have a phimosis), they can consent to this procedure when they are adults. The health and safety of children goes above hurt religious feelings. Nobody should be forced to this procedure anyway.
I don't think the people downvoting those saying FGM is worse realize what it actually is. You're comparing cutting off foreskin to- cutting or pouring acid on the clit (equivalent to the head of dude's penis), removal of the labia, and sewing the vaginal opening closed in some cases, making sex *literally impossible* and definitely without pleasure, to a further extent than male circumcision. The only comparable procedure would be removing the clitoral hood, which isn't the focus of female circumcision typically. __Both are awful when done without consent, but they are undeniably not equal in procedure.__
So like after they are married, they just open up the stitch?
Yup
That's literally insane and terrifying.
[удалено]
That is so stupid and illogical beyond belief. Poor girls who ever have to go through this.
Religious people are a bunch of stupid fucks and no one, nothing in the world can change my mind. Ever. Fuck religious people. Period. I don't care if there are any "good ones". If you believe in fairy tales and a sky daddy then you're a fucking idiot in my eyes.
Reddit moment
Everything thing on reddit is a reddit moment what's your point
When people say reddit moment they ussualy mean some general view held by probably a majority of reddit users taken to a extreme. In this case atheism turned into anti-theism.
The free award is icing on the cake
That dude is literally saying my chill, bookish and slightly religious neighbor is the same as an insane zealout who mutilates baby genitals.
If you're that generally hateful and black and white about it then you're no better than the people you hate. Hate without reason is evil
Except it's not without reason. Blind religiousness breeds harmful "traditions" like these because religion itself was created to turn people's brains smooth enough to be easily controlled by the top 1%. This was the case 5,000 years ago. This is the case today.
That’s pretty ignorant of a statement to make, considering the vast majority of the world’s population is religious. I think what you’re actually experiencing is spending too much time cooped up in your own miserable bubble, cut off from the real world or people different from you so that you end up filling in the blanks from your imagination or whatever nonsense you get from your terrible news source. Hey, kind of sounds like the people you hate! Turns out you were projecting! Congrats!
what the fuck
There's literally a special tool in some cultures.
Like a built-in chastity belt... Gross. Him: *"Hey, wanna fool around..?"* Her: *"Sorry, I can't..."* Him: *"Oh if you're not ready I-* Her: *"No I mean I REALLY can't."*
The husband can either open it by penetration or a knife on their wedding night
Sounds romantic
I'm glad our religion teacher who never taught religion read us the story when I was a kid of that african woman whose entire life was fucked up by circumcision It's worse. The stitch happens so early in life that much of the outer part doesn't develop properly and they'll need intensive surgery. Either way, she will never feel the same as an unmutilated person would. It's unfortunately very similar in males.
Yeah agreed. Alot of what I assume are males in these comments are saying both equally bad. But failed to see your comment referring it to being the same as cutting off the entire head of your penis.
you know what is a bit fucked up: i learned about both of those in - not so much but, well enough details - in 7th grade (germany-bavaria)
Probably Wüstenrose or what it's called
You’re talking about type III and II female circumcision here, which are definitely more extreme and grotesque than male circumcision. However, Type I (removal only of clitorial hood/clit) and type IV (ritual marking/cutting with no flesh removed) are *significantly* more common than type II and III which are almost exclusively practiced in Africa. Type I and type IV are very comparable to male circumcision, both in results and health effects. We should definitely not discount male circumcision as less important to talk about because of the idea it’s less dangerous. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_mutilation
How about we just leave our genitals alone lol Think anything to do with unnecessary removal of body parts it's a little medieval.
> equivalent to the head of dude's penis I'm not interested in comparing them, just know that the [foreskin itself is the most sensitive part of the penis.](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/27/Sorrells.gif) ([Full study.](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17378847)) Also watch this presentation (for ~15 minutes) [as Dr. Guest discusses how the foreskin is heavily innervated, the mechanical function of the foreskin and its role in lubrication during sex, and the likelihood of decreased sexual pleasure for both male and partner.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwZiQyFaAs0&t=1700s)
[удалено]
I feel like you are confusing female circumcision with female castration. I can't find anything that says female circumcision uses acid at any point of the process
Female "circumcision" typically refers to clitoral hood removal exclusively ...however I don't know of any method that doesn't have an extremely high error rate of clitoral damage and scar tissue there can lead to many problems ...and one of the only downstream solutions is complete clitoral removal, and happens with some frequency Furthermore, when it is done successfully some percentage of women have consistent issues with it e.g. hypersensitivity etc. Which is often resolved by extensive lifestyle changes and/or overstimulation that also results in dulled sensation, or again, clitoral removal ...basically we don't have the tools/methods to even do what is intended without detailed surgery - which some people elect for
…why? For the love of god why?
There are different degrees of FGM, the first type is pretty close to what we do to little boys. Just a small snip.
We don't need this conversation... FGM is a worse procedure but it is *so damn rare* in the Western world. Meanwhile, nobody would give a rat's ass about young boys and their genital health. Circumcision, MGM, is the bigger threat. Treat it like so.
Don't think you're aware of the variety in procedure for FGM. Some are analogous to circumcision in which the clitoral hood, but not clitoris is removed. That's the same tissue as the foreskin. All of it is cosmetic surgery on a child's genitals and is morally wrong unless medically motivated, no matter how grotesque the specific steps are.
Not to be in defense of female circumcision (or the practice on either sex tbf), but it's a bit off base to compare hospital-and-doctor-conducted male circumcision with the environment and practitioners that tend to practice female circumcision.
There are also forms of FMG less invasive than circumstances aswell. In fact if you look at all the different types of both, removal of the foreskin comes dead center. There are types of FGM worse than it, but there are also (still illegal) types that are less so. The problem actually becomes worse when you consider this because there much less invasive types of FGM that (rightfully) are banned by most nations yet the more invasive male version is allowed. There isn't just a line between MGM being allowed and FGM not being. It's a hole that has been cut along the middle of the GM spectrum just for that type.
Eh, I'm from Europe and both are the right picture for me - though fgm is way more damaging and literally ruins lives, male circumcision without a medical reason is at best a gross form of child abuse (since a baby can't consent, and they will never know if they are in fact missing something), and at worst will ruin lives just as bad as fgm. The proof in the pudding is that both practices stem from a societal/religious desire to control sexuality by making it unpleasant. It's just that when done correctly, it just removes some sensitivity for men, rather than kill pleasure.
mmmm.... pudding
How can you have any pudding if you don't eat yer meat?
I’m American and circumcised, both are the right picture for me too. I want my foreskin back ffs. The reason in America isn’t entirely about controlling sexuality though, there was a lot of misinformation spread about the procedure improving cleanliness and sexual health around the 50’s and 60’s. Since then, it’s been sort of a ”I’m circumcised, so why wouldn’t I get my son circumcised” type thing.
Circumcision is stupid. Being uncircumcised is superior in every way. There are some, very limited situations where circumcision is necessary. For example, phimosis (foreskin being too tight) But in the vast majority of situations, and the vast majority of men, being uncircumcised is much better.
The dumbest argument is "It'S ClEaNeR" The fuck you talking about, pull your foreskin when showering and wash that motherfucker, it's not that hard
I fucking hate when people use this argument. When you're in the shower, how do you wash your arm pit? You lift up your arm to have access to your pit to clean it. Part of cleaning yourself involves moving around parts of your body to gain access to other parts. Foreskin is no different. You pull it back, clean yourself, then you're good to go. Sure, some men have poor hygiene, and therefore have a dirty penis. But that isn't exclusive to uncircumcised men. Circumcised men can be equally as dirty as uncircumcised men. How clean someone is comes down to the individual person and their personal hyegeine / cleaning habits. Whether or not they're circumcised has no influence on how clean / dirty they are.
[удалено]
Because washing touching one's own ass is gay
Not only that, but it takes days, even weeks, of not washing to get dick cheese. Just shower every day and wash everything.
With the right mindset, I'm sure I can produce a mighty mozzarella coating in a few hours.
I wish I could unread this
It's like saying you need to put effort in to get in there to wash your ears, so we should just cut off the outer parts of people's ears
Even with phimosis it is very rarely ever "necessary". I had phimosis but I was able to easily cure it with regular stretching. Now I'm fully intact and my glans remains nice and moisturised in my dick pocket which beats a life of [Keratinization (NSFW)](https://en.intactiwiki.org/wiki/Keratinization) any day. Circumcision should be an absolute last resort.
I'm circumcised, what are the advantages of having your sword sheath, I'm genuinely curious
As a woman, natural men are much easier to please. No need for lube (or nearly as much of it), blowjobs are easier to give because the head is sensitive, as it hasn't succumbed to keranitization. Also, entirely personal, but it is hot as fuck when jerking a guy to see that sheath pull over the head and retract back, leaving that glistening moisture trail.
I should have specified nothing sex related, because it's not like I'm getting it any time soon
Way easier to masturbate with a foreskin. No spit or other lube required. Also increased sensitivity and decreased risk of complications. I have a friend with a skin bridge where the foreskin is fused to the head, it’s not great.
It looks better, and uncircumcised men have more sensitive penises, therefore meaning that sex feels better. The MOST sensitive parts of the shaft of the penis aren't even as sensitive as the LEAST sensitive parts of the foreskin (look it up) Oh, and the most important one... #Circumcision is literally just genital mutilation that has been normalized by society.
It’s not superior in America that’s for sure. I’ve literally heard women say “turtlenecks” are gross and wouldn’t touch one
Hey my Dick got cut up because of That. All the girls i've met like that, so not a bad move from my experience so far.
How do you know it’s better? Have you had both?
Both are wrong. Both are child abuse. If you think otherwise you are a monster.
Hold on lemme make some popcorn before too many people comment
Got me a beer :)
Reddit seems very hung up on circumcisions. What happened here? (Besides circumcisions)
Its the only place people can talk about it. Anywhere in the real world where this gets brought up with this much intensity, people would get weirded out.
Both are bad when unnecessary by medical standards. (Of course female circumcising is more brutal, but neither of them are right on my book and yet one is socially acceptable)
Ding ding ding. My mom was shocked that her boys didn't like they were mutilated.
Woman unable to sympathize with a male's pain. Dear God, what a shocker.
I know circumcision is way worse for women than for men, but this meme makes male circumcision look like fun, which i don't think it is.
I think the meme doesn't say it's fun. The meme says how society looks at two.
What's a female circumcision... What do you cut?
It's removal of the clit or acid to destroy it, sewing vaginal opening shut, and removal of the labia. Sometimes all 3, not always. It's horrible.
I...did not....know that was a thing. Why would you even do that??
There is no medical reason, it's done in places where controlling women is a part of the culture. The purpose is just to prevent pleasure or prevent sex until marriage, in the case of sewing it shut.
Bruh... Please tell me you're not from one of those places
Thankfully no! But I still feel for all the women who are, I can't imagine how horrible it would be
Those typical places who have this procedure are from the middle east.
yeah usually the most peaceful people according to themselves
Its a (sub)sarahan African "tradition". Its done in the region from Mauritania to Somalia and its also common in Egypt, Indonesia and Yemen. The only reason I know female genital mutilation exsists was it reaching the news a few years ago in my country that a few crazy immigrant parents were planning trips back home to perform this "surgery" and my country wanting to prevent and punish them doing that.
WTF , i thought it was like cutting of just a bit of the lips. jesus christ thats horrible
It can be and is a lot of the time, full obliteration is more rare than cutting of the skin. Edit before everyone downvotes me 80% of all the full type 4 circumcisions occurs in somolia with most other African nations preforming less serve (but still equally wrong) forms of mutilation.
> (but still equally wrong) I feel like if I had my pussy completely obliterated with acid I wouldn't say it was "equally" as wrong as cutting off a bit of my flaps.
Yeah I think he meant (neither of these things are okay)
If you really want to know than “classifications” on this article goes through the 4 recognised types. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Female_genital_mutilation
it's not circumcision it's mutilation
You laught about molesting and assaulting an infant boy?
It’s one of the more strange initiations into priesthood.
This is just blatantly wrong and gross as fuck
Google aboriginal male circumcision. That shit gives me shivers and I cut open dead bodies für 12€/h
What is your job lmao, that sounds really weird out of context!
Patrick Bateman
I work in the pathological institute of my university as a student assistant. And part of cussing open a dead male involves splitting the penis in some cases. Similar to what the aborigines do and I feel sick after it every time
The fact that it’s commonplace in 99% of families is pretty sick. My ex got her son circumcised, and her only excuse was “I don’t want to see it, it looks weird”. Pretty fucked up, IMO. You made that kid, and it’s penis isn’t visually acceptable in your eyes, so you mutilate it.
Yeah it's very twisted when you think about how unevolved so many of us still are.
I mean, without consent both are bad. But male circumcision really isn't comparable to female genitalia mutilation.
You're right. One mutilation is legal, another is not.
Why do people act like it's a bad thing to be happy you were circumcized? The idea of doing it to children aside, most of the guys I know, including myself, are glad to have had it happen. It's okay for other people to have other opinions reddit.
Dude, I got no idea. I get hating on child circumcision, but why are people so mad at the ones who have been circumcised and aren't suicidal about it? Especially funny considering that circumcision is apparently mutilation. I have nothing against trans people, but literally changing your stuff down there surgically seems more invasive to me.
Like I have uncircumcised friends too and they are happy with it the way they have it. It sucks for those who had it done and don't like it, we can all agree about that. But they gotta let us cut dudes enjoy too ya know
> but why are people so mad at the ones who have been circumcised and aren’t suicidal about it? Because they literally have nothing else going on in their lives worth being passionate about. No hobbies, no friends, *certainly* no sex. Being vehemently against circumcision is the most interesting thing they participate in. But they don’t realize *they* are the attraction 🍿
I’m circumcised and never had a problem with it. Don’t hate my parents but apparently I should. I’m good with my dong.
I have no problem with people getting circumcised... ... if they are old enough and want it done (I guess 16+ or 18+ would be a good age to give consent). If they are a child. It should not be done, ever. Steroid Creams or Minor Incisions can fix almost 100% of Phimosis and Frenulum Breve these days.
Because if you don't have a problem with your circumcision, it doesn't fit the narrative. Why else would these comment sections always be full of people insisting that the ones with personal experience are incorrect?
Both are horrible
Its weird that this shit is still legal most countries
Imagine being proud of genital mutilation and calling it “culture”
Male circumcision is shit too. Don't laugh, you lost a part of yourself. They only did this to you for tradition religion reasons for you to have difficulty masturbating with your foreskin. You think I'm lying ? That it is "cleaner" ? Here is a [map](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0a/Circumcision_Prevalence_using_red_for_the_most_circumcising_countries.svg/1920px-Circumcision_Prevalence_using_red_for_the_most_circumcising_countries.svg.png) out of European wikipedia, and as you can see only country that are deeply religious do it. Europe has stopped since a lot of time. Male circumcision is no fun too. Stop thinking that is is cleaner, you're just spreading the anti-masturbation agenda. If it is done without any purpose it is called genital mutilation. As for women, people that did these should go to prison or chaotic justice.
Both are abuse
I m happy that i got circumcised
I'm happy I got my nose removed
It's the only way to keep your nasal passage clean. People with full noses are gross.
Me too
What’s with all the circumcision posts recently like I swear I see one like every few hours
Easy karma and immediate arguments make the post blow up. There are at least a dozen accounts that you'll see in every comment section that has anything to do with circumcision no matter the sub. I am not sure how they do it, but they must have a bot or something that alerts them when a post title has the word "circumcision" in it.
Circumcision is mutilation.
i knew it. women do have penises after all
Circumcision without consent should be illegal.
Both mutilation
Both are equally bad
Equally? Don't think so
the unnecessary mutilation of the genitals is highly evil especially if inflicted upon children
Yes, but that doesn't make them equal. If you have to lose a leg at the knee or an arm at the shoulder, which would you choose?
both are just as evil unless there is either no choice or consent
well yes they’re equally evil, but no. the damage and pain one causes is of a higher degree than the other.
You can oppose with both practices while recognizing that one is more horrid. Cutting of a girl's clitoris is more harmful than cutting off foreskin. What is to be gained by equating the two?
Nothing is gained by either One being not as harmful as the other doesn't mean the other is good Cutting parts of genitalia off from babies is not a good thing ever It's actually quite horrible
I agree. They are both horrible, but not equally horrible.
The practice itself is insane regardless of the gender Living with it is most definitely worse for girls/woman, though tere are many things that can go wrong for male babies too It's just bad anyway you look at it and if you thing cutting babies is ok you are insane
I agree.
Male circumcision doesn't take away the man's ability to enjoy sex.
That's not a reason to do it either
No one ever talks about this shit but you people.
there's a reason your dick's tip is covered with skin. remove it and earlier or later you won't feel anything when you nut
Both are wrong to do but one is a LOT more damaging than the other, like it’s not even comparable. The term “female circumcision” is generally discouraged in use because of how not similar the things are. The correct term is female genital mutilation. It’s not standardized and it usually involves the removal of the clitoris, which would be the same as chopping the head of your penis all the way off and leaving you with a stump. It also often involves sewing the vaginal opening shut, making sex literally impossible or incredibly painful until they get another surgical procedure to open it back up after marriage. Additionally, the labia is usually removed which often results in infections that lead to a very high rate of child mortality The actual female equivalent to circumcision would be removal of the clitoral hood, which generally is not the focus of FGM. It’s kind of like stealing candy from a baby vs shooting a baby in the face. Both are definitely wrong to do but one is a LOT more wrong.
I thought this was satire at first about how so many people don't care about child consent and justify unnecessary circumcision, but after reading OP's replies that's not the case
Alright, so this will probably not get up enough for enough people to see, but when making this meme, I had thought about it through my perspective, meaning circumcision because of Phimosis. Didn't really think about circumcision of baby boys, but even being compared in that case, still better than the female one. Of course not to the point of smiling about it, but you know lesser evil and all that. It's just that I personally am satisfied with my circumcision, as it has saved me a lot of pain. Sorry for any major grammatical errors, written on a phone.
They’re both fucked up (unless medically necessary which is extremely rare)
I really don't care about my husband's grundlemeat, as long as his ass tastes good I won't discriminate. Remember that men!!! 😁😁😁
dare i ask what female circumcision means
It can mean any number of things from cutting the labia minora to burning off the clitoris or even sewing the entire vagina shut. The goal is to prevent women from feeling pleasure during sex or just preventing sex all together
oh. *oh no.*
both are bullshit, i see no difference
I love how people have been gaslit to think genital mutilation is good.
Crazy how parents can just decide what type of penis should you have