Denmark Doctors Call to Ban Circumcision For Boys Under 18

[Deleted]

Virtually no one dies from circumcision, to the point that it was never even brought up by my doctor as a possible complication.

The worst issues would be bridges, skin tags, and minor infections, and even those are fairly rare.

A grown male is slightly more resilient than a baby.

[Deleted]

Going to chime in here, something I rarely do. Circumcision should always be done and if it was a world wide practice, we would have eliminated HIV without finding a cure. But don't take my world for it, try the WHO.

No, because that study is garbage.

[Mangusei]

Good. All the SJW can fuck from this topic, because if you are a true SJW you should be fighting against this.

[JohnBrown1917]

My point is "why argue this point at all? is this practice hurting anyone? No...

It acteally is.

My other point was I doubt you'll ever hear anyone complain about being circumcised.

Outside the internet? doubt it. Going by the medical community in my country, it barely happens.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-du...78M3R620110923

So why fucking bring it up at all, do you guys want a handbook on how to live you life, and a law to govern every fucking thing you do? ffs I know I don't. And I also don't give a fuck if some want to circumcised thier kid, It's "thier Kid" not mine. gg

If its a harmfull action, then yes, I want a damn good reason for why it should be allowed on a baby.

If i want to have my child circumcised I will regaurdless of what people think. I think its a quality of life change that I want to provide for him.

You're American, stop getting your panties in a twist about what other countries want.

[Amirila]

Im my culture, which is where my child would grow up I know he would want to be circumcised, and the difference in being circumcised at birth vs. at 18 is huge, money, complexity, risk, everything. So yes it makes sense, I'll take the chance of exactly zero he will be mad about being circumcised lmao.

But I doubt Denmark and most of Europe shares your culture in this matter, their country/culture, their choice

[JohnBrown1917]

Im my culture, which is where my child would grow up I know he would want to be circumcised, and the difference in being circumcised at birth vs. at 18 is huge, money, complexity, risk, everything. So yes it makes sense, I'll take the chance of exactly zero he will be mad about being circumcised lmao.

Europa does not have that culture.

[Deleted]

Im my culture, which is where my child would grow up I know he would want to be circumcised,

No you don't. You assume that he would, but that is hardly knowing.

If someone wants to get circumcised for some random religious/cultural reason, go ahead. But having your parents make that decision for you is stupid.
Good thing that at least some countries in Europe seem to start sharing this view.

[Nathreim]

There are none feel free to list them so I can debunk them.

Male circumcision reduces the risk that a man will acquire HIV from an infected female partner, and also lowers the risk of other STDs,
penile cancer, and infant urinary tract infection. In female partners, it reduces the risk of cervical cancer, genital ulceration, bacterial
vaginosis, trichomoniasis, and HPV. Although male circumcision has risks including pain, bleeding, and infection, more serious
complications are rare.

https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/preventi...rcumcision.pdf

[JohnBrown1917]

Also another important part of the article about the dutch medical community.


""This is not an innocent procedure, we see complications in about 5 percent of the cases, as well as some long-term and psychological implications," he said."

[God Save The King]

According to American doctors, the benefits slightly outweigh the drawbacks of circumcision
European doctors tend to find the opposite.

Fairly easy to just say it's more or less neutral, probably leaning to more harmful than helpful since the invention of soap and routine bathing. That said, since it involves a more or less irreversible procedure, it should be left to the patient once they are of consenting age.

I'm an American male and I'm glad I have a choice in the matter.

[Masark]

Male circumcision reduces the risk that a man will acquire HIV from an infected female partner, and also lowers the risk of other STDs,
penile cancer, and infant urinary tract infection.

https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/pdf/preventi...rcumcision.pdf

The minor fact that the USA has a vastly higher circumcision rate than Denmark, but also has a decidedly higher HIV rate suggests any positive effect is vanishingly small.

[Deleted]

[I]Male circumcision reduces the risk that a man will acquire HIV from an infected female partner,

Dubious claim.

and also lowers the risk of other STDs,

And has a increased risk of other STDs.

penile cancer,

A very dubious claim not borne out other studies.

and infant urinary tract infection.

Strangely only in the US.
Could be because they advise the parents to 'wipe' under the foreskin (the american idiot doctors) are unaware that the foreskin is 'fused' to the glans at this point, its like cleaning under the nails.

In female partners, it reduces the risk of cervical cancer, genital ulceration, bacterial

And strangely enough has an increased transmission risk of HIV to heterosexual women.
It pure and utter garbage.

[THE Bigzoman]

Look. Im an atheist. And as much against Abrahamic religious bullshit as it is humanly possible to be.... BUTI would say that a definitive ruling on this would be a slippery slope on parental rights. What would be next? Boys MUST play with Barbies to promote gender equality? Girls arent allowed to have an Easy-Bake oven because that would regress their fragile egos? Should we artificially sterilize everyone and only allow reproduction from those whose ideas we like? Also, how in the fuck is this ANY different from Trumps "lets create a Muslim registry" nonsense? Hint: Its NOT. It's just trendy right now to apologize and bend over backwards for certain groups and then apply a totally different standard for another and that's bullshit.

Oh the ones listed under your "slippery slope', only one would fall under cosmetic surgery.

[THE Bigzoman]

Religion doesn't really explain the phenomenon of circumcision in the US though, as it hasn't been a Christian thing since the mid-1st Century. As far as I am aware, only Judaism requires it and Islam is quite keen on it.

The creator of Corn flakes didn't like the fact that young boys beat their meat.

That's literally the only reason it's still a thing.

He also advocated for a drop of acid on the clitoris, but we don't do that anymore. Something about hating women.

[Astalnar]

Circumcision has no real negative impacts, but a whole lot of positive ones. It should be done right after birth unless the parents choose to not want it done.

What a backwards policy they're trying to implement there, ethics committee my ass.

Right, because erectile dysfunction is a feature, not a problem...

[Kalis]

The creator of Corn flakes didn't like the fact that young boys beat their meat.

Were Americans wanking into their cornflakes? That's not milk!

What is wrong with you people?!

[THE Bigzoman]

Were Americans wanking into their cornflakes? That's not milk!

What is wrong with you people?!

Oh, it gets better.

They especially recommended black men to get it done, because it would make interracial rape less likely.

So glad I was cut. Imagine all the thick white girls who can sleep safely at night now.

- - - Updated - - -

Hyperbole.

Breasts are required. For a variety of purposes.

- - - Updated - - -



Yes but it'd be quite the hassle. Incomparable.

In a world with formula and shit?

Not really.

[Mehrunes]

So, you don't see freedom of religion as a basic human right? You think it's ok to ban Jews and Muslims from a country?

Freedom of religion, like all other freedoms, should end where freedoms of other people start. Bodily autonomy is a right and as such religious practices of the parents that would infringe on it can kindly fuck off from the child. And prohibiting a practice does not ban people of a religion from a country. Denmark already banned ritual slaughter over two years ago. Miraculously, Jews and Muslims didn't evaporate from Denmark or else none would be there protesting the proposed circumcision ban.

Conflating female circumcision with male is completely ridiculous. Circumcised penises are all over the world and nobody is suffering from them. I sort of doubt this new law isn't intended to limit the amount of Muslims and Jews coming in, and encouraging others to leave.

Circumcised vulvas are all over the world too and the thing with cultural practices is that they are accepted by people performing them. Lo and behold, women in countries practicing FGM see them as normal. And there are types of FGM that are less intrusive and impactful than circumcision, so ridiculous my ass. Also, Nordic countries are big on human rights and children's rights in particular, so chances are the reason behind this law is nothing more than protecting the bodily autonomy of the children and not your conspiracy theory rooted in your hurt religious feelings that cause you to see oppression of religion everywhere.

[Kalis]

Oh, it gets better.

They especially recommended black men to get it done, because it would make interracial rape less likely.

So glad I was cut. Imagine all the thick white girls who can sleep safely at night now.

I for one am glad that you're not off raping every night and masturbating into your breakfast cereal every morning.

[Mehrunes]

Going to chime in here, something I rarely do. Circumcision should always be done and if it was a world wide practice, we would have eliminated HIV without finding a cure. But don't take my world for it, try the WHO

There is compelling evidence that male circumcision reduces the risk of heterosexually acquired HIV infection in men by approximately 60%. Three randomized controlled trials have shown that male circumcision provided by well trained health professionals in properly equipped settings is safe. WHO/UNAIDS recommendations emphasize that male circumcision should be considered an efficacious intervention for HIV prevention in countries and regions with heterosexual epidemics, high HIV and low male circumcision prevalence.

Male circumcision provides only partial protection, and therefore should be only one element of a comprehensive HIV prevention package which includes: the provision of HIV testing and counseling services; treatment for sexually transmitted infections; the promotion of safer sex practices; the provision of male and female condoms and promotion of their correct and consistent use.

So before you go off spouting your uninformed opinions, try doing some research so you have an educated contribution do the discussion.

Look at all of that elimination, lel. Especially since WHO also said on other occasions that circumcision shouldn't replace other preventive measures and that it isn't even more cost effective. Before you go on rambling about people spouting uninformed opinions try to read your sources first and check if they actually support your claims. Not to mention that the results are much, much lower in non-risk populations and even the results for risk-populations have received conflicting data from other sources.

It's funny because you're going on about "educated contribution" without even really understanding the stats that you're quoting.

The beauty of Gen-OT (or well, humans in general I suppose).