"Circumcision Good for Women’s Health"

Submitted by Mastodon on Sat, 2017-10-14 00:35

Article here. Excerpt:

'“Intactivists”–the nutty name anti-circumcision activists have given themselves–who aim to outlaw infant circumcision, claim that the procedure has no benefits and constitutes child abuse.

Baloney. There are at least mild health benefits for men, to the point that the American College of Pediatricians recommends that the choice of whether to circumcise be left to parental discretion.

Now, it seems that circumcision is also good for women’s health in the reduced transmission of STDs and other benefits. From The Lancet study:'

---

Wikipedia on the author here.

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

Please leave comments on the site politely educating the author.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Matt on Sat, 2017-10-14 17:19

Even if circumcision did have the "benefits" so many claim it does, the fact still remains that forcing it on another human being is still unethical, and doing so takes away the individual's right to weigh the benefits and risks and choose for himself.

It never ceases to amaze me how the pro-circ lobby just doesn't seem to understand this. I guess by their logic, if I were to go into their home uninvited and puncture a hole in every wall of their home to improve the air circulation, I would be completely justified, because improved air circulation reduces the chances of contracting viruses.

The fact that holes could affect the structural integrity of the house and make it collapse, or that the owners of the house don't wish to be cold at night or have far less privacy is beside the point. Ultimately, I found one benefit in my action, so it's justified. SMDH.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by xtrnl on Sun, 2017-10-15 00:12

If it's good for women, that's all that matters.

In today's world, women are more than willing to do harm to men if women benefit from doing so.

Women must be protected, but men are the sex it's okay to harm.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by el cid on Sun, 2017-10-15 13:44