deaddmwalking wrote:Omegonthesane wrote:deaddmwalking wrote:
I don't consider it genital mutilation,
It is literal mutilation of the literal genitals. This is like saying you don't consider a Skoda 4WD to be a car.
I am circumcised and I think my genitals are very nice, thank you very much. They are not 'ruined' or 'cosmetically damaged' or 'disfigured' or 'irreparably harmed'. Consequently, I do not think they are 'mutilated', and I do not consider circumcision to be mutilation.
To quote an infamous political enemy of mine, facts don't care about your feelings. If you were circumcised before you were old enough to express verbally your own true desire one way or another, that was an obscene violation of your bodily autonomy no matter how it panned out.
deaddmwalking wrote:In Anglo culture, it's not very common to pierce baby ears, but in Latinx culture it is. I also don't consider piercing to be mutilation though I do discourage my children from doing it.
Things don't stop being medically unnecessary, non-consensual surgery because of what you "feel" about the matter. The specific low risks mean I wouldn't expect a child to have to be that old to make an informed decision with either ear piercings or AMAB circumcision, but that is no fucking excuse to do it to babies.
deaddmwalking wrote:Parents get a lot of leeway in my book to make choices that they think are best for their children - even decisions I think are obviously bad like home schooling. The alternative seems much worse.
The alternative is actually much
better in many cases. Not just because many parents genuinely do not want the best for their children, but also because of how many parents' idea of "best" is diametrically opposed to peer reviewed evidence. This attitude is also utterly disdainful of the rights of children to express autonomy.
deaddmwalking wrote:Parents, right or wrong, are supposed to want what's best for their children. Participating in a superstitious tradition doesn't bother me in the slightest.
The "superstitious tradition" isn't the problem; the "openly violates the child's human rights" is the problem, and it's compounded by the genuine medical risks.
And, again, many parents genuinely do not want what is best for their children, and would e.g. rather have a dead child than a gay or trans child.
deaddmwalking wrote:As an adult, I'd be leery of making that choice myself, so I'm glad it was made for me. I prefer circumcised penises (including my own) and it isn't simply due to familiarity.
Is it not? You never had the chance to see the alternative. You were factually objectively the victim of a human rights violation.
deaddmwalking wrote:My father and I have discussed this decision (he made the decision when I was born) and I agree with his reasoning. Your experience can't invalidate my experience. These are surprisingly weighty topics, but I don't think you can make the claim that there is a universally superior way and everyone should be compelled to follow it.
So compulsion isn't fine when a peer reviewed research committee does it in everyone's best interests, but it's absolutely fine when individuals do it to the most helpless of humanity in the name of their own personal fucking biases. Got it.
It's genuinely obscene to see you describe "all humans should have the right to decide what permanent changes happen to their body" as imposing a single universally superior way.