Talk:Circumcision

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Archives for this talk page: , (new)


I'm disappointed that this article isn't funnier[edit]

Much of RationalWiki that I've seen is hilarious, while also being excellent and accurate as a resource. I came here after encountering some humorless anti-circ-'ers on Twitter, looking for both facts and laughs. Nothing about closing your eyes and thinking of the English? That, smegma isn't the transubstantiation of pure infant rights? Something about how sausage is made? Oh well, maybe someday.

Bodily autonomy?[edit]

After it was brought to my attention by a friend, I'm surprised there's nothing on this page about bodily autonomy and the possible psychological repercussions of having one's ostensibly most private parts altered, especially during childhood and/or without consent. Twentydragon (talk) 13:43, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, while I'm pleased that this article is significantly better than it was last I checked on it a couple years ago (though far from perfect...), but the fact that it just sorta glosses over the consent issue is extremely disappointing to me. Especially since I love Rational Wiki so much otherwise. I really do think we could do better than just sorta say "lol SOME PEOPLE (rolling eyes) think that the lack of consent is a reason why circumcision should be delayed until adulthood". That's a major moral objection to the practice and the article treats it like it's some fringe opinion.
The entire article reads like it was written by an American who first encountered opposition to circumcision in the form of misogynists who use it to shut down discussions of women's issues or who equate it in severity to FGM. It's deeply in need of a global perspective, not one limited to the American experience where infant circumcision is taken for granted as a necessary procedure for boys.
Remember that just because you first heard an idea from someone with otherwise problematic positions, does not mean they have a monopoly on that idea. What we have done is cede the position that infant circumcision is wrong to horrible people on the far right and now we're forcing more moderately-minded folks to reject a logical opinion just because it reminds them of bad people.

24.255.217.64 (talk) 22:20, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Sources about Medical Organizations are False[edit]

The vast majority of medical organizations condemn non-therapeutic, male circumcision. You only included a short list of ones that did not, however, the vast majority do after conducting thorough risk-benefit analyses. Please edit this article as it is unfactual. Here is a list of organizations that have come out against circumcision:
  • Canadian Paediatric Society
  • College of Physicians and Surgeons of Saskatchewan
  • College of Physicians and Surgeons of Manitoba
  • College of Physicians and Surgeons of British Columbia [pdf]
  • Australian Pædiatric Association
  • Australian College of Pediatrics
  • Australasian Association of Paediatric Surgeons
  • Australian College of Paediatrics
  • Royal Australasian College of Physicians [pdf]
  • Australian Medical Association
  • Paediatric Society of New Zealand
  • New Zealand Society of Paediatric Surgeons
  • Belgium Advisory Committee on Bioethics
  • British Medical Association
  • General Medical Council (GMC) of the United Kingdom
  • British Association of Paediatric Surgeons
  • President of the British Association of Paediatric Urologists
  • The Royal Dutch Medical Association (KNMG) [pdf]
  • The Netherlands Society of General Practitioners
  • The Netherlands Society of Youth Healthcare Physicians
  • The Netherlands Association of Paediatric Surgeons
  • The Netherlands Association of Plastic Surgeons
  • The Netherlands Association for Paediatric Medicine
  • The Netherlands Urology Association
  • The Netherlands Surgeons’ Association
  • German Association of Pediatricians
  • German Association of Child and Youth Doctors
  • Nordic Association of Clinical Sexology [pdf] joint statement issued on behalf of Finnish Association for Sexology, *Norwegian Society for Clinical Sexology, Danish Association for Clinical Sexology, Swedish Association for Sexology, *Icelandic Sexology Association and Estonian Academic Society for Sexology
  • Nordic Ombudsmen for Children and Pediatric Experts [pdf] (representing Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, and Greenland)
  • Finnish Association of Pediatric Surgeons (Sulamaa Society)
  • Finnish Medical Association
  • Norwegian Council of Medical Ethics [pdf]
  • Norwegian Children’s Ombudsman
  • Norwegian Medical Association
  • Norwegian Nurses Organization
  • Norwegian Nursing Association
  • University of Oslo
  • Swedish Pediatric Society
  • Swedish Children's Ombudsman
  • Swedish Society of Medicine (SLS)
  • Swedish Society of Health Professionals (Vårdförbundet)
  • Swedish Paediatric Society (BLF)
  • Swedish Association of Pediatric Surgeons (SLF)
  • Danish Medical Association (Lægeforeningen)
  • Danish Society of Family Physicians (Dansk Selskab for Almen Medicin)
  • Danish Society for Anaesthesiology and Intensive-care Medicine (DASAIM) [pdf]
  • South African Medical Association
  • Icelandic Medical Association [pdf]

— Unsigned, by: 2603:7000:2406:1600:2875:da4e:ba14:3bed / talk

South Korea[edit]

Seems like an anomaly. All I've heard of this is that they bought into it being medically helpful and started doing it after the Koreas split. Chillpilled (talk) 10:08, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Popular in Japan and Taiwan too. Maybe not popular in Mainland China. I don't know. Spud (talk) 13:16, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
The comparatively recent and unique (for East Asia) popularity of circumcision in South Korea is commonly understood as a product of American military presence during the Korean War. Nope Rocket (talk) 04:34, 15 March 2023 (UTC)

Circumcision causing autism[edit]

How would that even happen? Not surprised to learn that study had pushback. Chillpilled (talk) 19:20, 10 December 2023 (UTC)