Hello and welcome to another week.
Our question this week focuses on an issue which is highly divisive, and so controversial that even the President of the Family Division said of it,“These are deep waters which I hesitate to enter.”
The subject is Male Genital Mutilation, often referred to as circumcision. Carried out as a form of religious ritual, or under the guidance of some medical professionals as a form of good hygiene, MGM involves surgery to remove the foreskin covering the glans of the penis.
Those who argue in favour of the practice say it offers certain health benefits, including lowering the risk of cancer, preventing the acquisition of sexually transmitted diseases, and reducing the likelihood of urinary tract infections occurring. Those against the practice cite research which contradicts current held beliefs about the benefits and consider it a form of child abuse.
The President of the Family Division, Lord Justice Munby has also likened circumcision to Female Genital Mutilation, which is currently illegal in the UK:
“Given the comparison between what is involved in male circumcision and FGM WHO Type IV, to dispute that the more invasive procedure involves the significant harm involved in the less invasive procedure would seem almost irrational. In my judgment, if FGM Type IV amounts to significant harm, as in my judgment it does, then the same must be so of male circumcision.”
Our question to you then, is just this: do you agree with Lord Justice Munby, and if so, should circumcision be illegal in the UK?
Researching Reform 
Having observed circumcision – used as a reason to stop a child from crying- in Ireland, I can say it is torture, traumatic, sadistic and barbaric and so one of the worst kinds of child abuse on Mother Earth.
Sadistic blood rituals belong in the dark ages.
I actually cried Matasha on reading your post as it brought back the horrific trauma my son and I endured for years after the proceedure….oh and it made him cry more not less.
“Infant dies after contracting herpes during blood-sucking Jewish circumcision ritual at hospital”
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/035192_circumcision_herpes_Jewish_ritual.html#ixzz3n1nYxzxY
How was this done in the child’s best interests?
Both FGM and Circumcision are crimes against human children in my opinion.
LikeLike
Non-therapeutic circumcision of male minors (Male Genital Mutilation / MGM) is already illegal in the UK, albeit not specifically illegal (unlike FGM, which has been specifically illegal since 1985). MGM also breaches a number of UN and EU conventions. In common with paternity fraud, MGM is a crime which the criminal justice system does not prosecute people for – but SHOULD.
MGM is an abhorrent assault on the human rights of make babies, infants, and children, who by definition cannot give informed consent. I know of no medical benefits from the procedure which bear serious examination, and I strongly recommend a blog piece by William Collins on the matter http://mra-uk.co.uk/?p=519.
Anyone who doubts the assertion that MGM is already illegal in the UK, and breaches UN and EU conventions, should check out what James Chegwidden, a London-based barrister with no connection to J4MB, had to say in a presentation in 2013 https://j4mb.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/150727-j4mb-notes-of-james-chegwiddens-2013-keele-uni-presentation.pdf.
MGM is, inter alia, a human rights issue. MGM is child abuse. Our political party is calling for it to be made specifically illegal, in line with FGM, at the earliest opportunity.
Mike Buchanan
JUSTICE FOR MEN & BOYS
(and the women who love them)
http://j4mb.org.uk
LikeLike
Pingback: Researching Reform: Should male circumcision be illegal in the UK? | Justice for Men & Boys
The mutilation of our little boys’ penises by removing the foreskin completely, doesn’t just come under the Type IV classification of the World Health Organisation: ‘All other harmful procedures to the female genitalia for non-medical purposes, for example: pricking, piercing, incising, scraping and cauterisation,’ it is directly analogous to the WHO Type 1a FGM classification: removal of the clitoral hood or prepuce.
One can only marvel at the lack of moral conviction of our judiciary and our political classes who run in craven fear of the religious backlash they would incur, were they to do the right thing. One can equally marvel at their utter hypocrisy in succumbing to feminist pressure specifically outlaw FGM. Presumably their fear of feminists is greater than their fear of Islamic fundamentalists and Judaists.
The bottom line here is: if it is healthy flesh, leave it alone!
LikeLike
The wording is confusing but I think Lord Justice Munby was saying that if type IV FGM, which is less invasive and objectively less harmful than circumcision, is considered harmful enough to require explicitly protecting infant girls from then circumcision is surely harmful enough to require the same protection for infant boys.
LikeLike
This sort of logic could also make it illegal to cut a child’s hair or toenails ! Surely the acid test is whether or not lasting physical harm results? Answer “yes” to female genital mutilation but no to cutting off beards,toenails,deadlocks,or foreskins as no lasting damage is done in those cases otherwise all the jews and arabs would be cripples………..
LikeLike
@ Forced Adoption
You couldn’t be more wrong. MGM is directly comparable to FGM types 1(a) and 4 (WHO). It causes lasting damage to physical and mental health in many males, sometimes death (including from suicide). I invite you to watch a video presentation on the Global Survey on Circumcision harm, given by an American, Tim Hammond, at a Genital Autonomy conference in May, THEN tell me MGM doesn’t cause lasting physical (and psychological) harm:
Then I suggest you read William Collins’s piece, to which I linked earlier. The purpose of MGM is to reduce the sexual pleasure experienced by adult males. This was admitted by a leading Jewish scholar in the 12th century.
Finally, what does a man who was circumcised at 18 years of age have to say about the impact of the procedure?
I recently gave a talk at the AGM of the UK’s leading anti-MGM charity, 15 Square:
MGM is the amputation of very nerve-rich healthy flesh. How could that NOT be a grievous human rights assault?
LikeLike
That analogy had to be the worst one I’ve ever heard. Circumcision does permanent damage, cutting hair or nails does not. Obviously Arabs and Jews and American men aren’t cripples but then neither would you be if you had your little finger chopped off, or a few toes (apart from the big ones). Just because you’re not crippled doesn’t mean you’re not damaged, not mutilated.
Type IV FGM includes a pin prick that draws blood. It causes no permanent damage but it’s still explicitly illegal. It’s logically incoherent to make that illegal and yet not circumcision which does permanent damage.
LikeLike
I went to a public boarding school for boys only (Charterhouse). It was obligatory in those days to swim naked and there were 600+ of us but everyone I knew or saw WAS CIRCUMCISED ! I never saw a foreskin during the 4 years I was there and none of us were any the worse for that.Probably Eton could have told you the same story back in the forties as a circumcised penis was in those days a mark of class distinction not one of mutilation ! Our own Prince Charles and his brothers were ALL circumcised but you have left it a bit late to arrest the Queen………. !!
LikeLike
Another absurd ‘contribution’. Are you seriously saying that because MGM was once almost obligatory for baby boys in privileged families, it should continue today?
Your weak joke at the end tells me you haven’t even bothered to watch the video presentation on the Global Survey on Circumcision Harm.
So far your contributions have centred on you, and what you believe. I suggest you show some empathy for future victims of this butchery, which so far you haven’t displayed. At least engage with the materials provided, and become knowledgeable on the subject. Being a victim yourself hasn’t made you knowledgeable.
LikeLike
Lord Justice Munby’s judgement on male circumcision is outlined in section 72 and, unfortunately, is factually wrong on a number of points.
“It is at this point in the analysis, as it seems to me, that the clear distinction between FGM and male circumcision appears. Whereas it can never be reasonable parenting to inflict any form of FGM on a child, the position is quite different with male circumcision. Society and the law, including family law, are prepared to tolerate non-therapeutic male circumcision performed for religious or even for purely cultural or conventional reasons, while no longer being willing to tolerate FGM in any of its forms. There are, after all, at least two important distinctions between the two. FGM has no basis in any religion; male circumcision is often performed for religious reasons. FGM has no medical justification and confers no health benefits; male circumcision is seen by some (although opinions are divided) as providing hygienic or prophylactic benefits. Be that as it may, “reasonable” parenting is treated as
permitting male circumcision.”
FGM is done for religious and other cultural reasons. However, it’s not done by Jews or Muslims in general. So, he’s either ignorant about it or he’s making out that Judaism/Islam should be treated specially. Neither of these is acceptable. If he’s making a comparative judgement on it then it behooves him to educate himself properly and Jewish/Muslim traditions are no more deserving of protection than any other when they cause harm.
FGM does have medical benefits, or at least there is some research that provides a similar correlation between FGM and HIV transmission rates as there is between MGM and HIV transmission rates.
LikeLike
Paul, thanks for making so many sound points.
While some people argue for MGM on health grounds – although, as I say, none bear close examination, and the HIV transmission rate reduction argument has more holes than the average colander – who would justify FGM on those grounds? Not me, nor anyone I know.
Very often we hear the ‘hygiene defence’ for MGM, though it takes only moments to clean a penis with soap and water. To argue for MGM on hygiene grounds is akin to ‘solving’ the ‘problem’ of dirty nails by cutting fingers off.
Also, something you’d never gather from the mainstream media, but FGM is overwhelmingly carried out by middle-aged or elderly women at the behest of women. So who are the police and CPS targeting? Men, needless to say. Hmm, why has there never been a successful prosecution for FGM in the UK? It’s a mystery…
LikeLike
Reblogged this on World4Justice : NOW! Lobby Forum..
LikeLike