I see two options to this entire mess...
1. Get circumcized as a child like normal.
2. Get Circumcized as an adult/older
___________________________________________
1. If you are unhappy that you were circumzied - then restore.
2. If you had it done as an adult - I don't know why you'd want to restore.
If it helps prevent HIV then it's for the better, even if you don't support it.
Also - Do not refer to it as "genitile mutilation"
Quote:
1. to injure, disfigure, or make imperfect by removing or irreparably damaging parts: Vandals mutilated the painting.
2. to deprive (a person or animal) of a limb or other essential part.
|
If you use definition one - the word "irreparably" does not apply here. Becuase it can be corrected. So that option is tossed out. And if you use option two, the word "essential" is used. A foreskin is not essential - therefore that is no longer an argument that's valid. It has been, and always will be a parental choice.
It is safer and healthier to have a circumcision - some research says it dosen't matter, but at the same time. It's ONLY reserach. Not fact. Better to be safe than sorry.
Quote:
|
Furthermore, female genital cutting is widespread in Africa, how can we convince an African family that cutting girls is "wrong" while cutting boys is "alright"?
|
Male circumcision aids in good health, and now helping prevent HIV.
Female cirumcision - can result in urinary tract infections, cysts, hemorrhaging and infertillity, it's not like it's the exact same operation used on a penis only with a vagina. The side effects are much different and much more severe than "Missing your foreskin" - which can be grown back anyways. That is why it is frowned upon.