A family says their newborn son nearly bled to death and is fighting for his life after he was circumcised at a New York City hospital.

Tim and Gabrielle Groth said their son, Cole, underwent the circumcision at NewYork-Presbyterian Morgan Stanley Children’s Hospital in Manhattan, where he was born on March 31.

    • SpiceDealer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      19 hours ago

      I agree with you fully but there’s a discrepancy that needs to addressed. Now, before you get the wrong idea, I’m NOT defending or excusing anybody here. The medical staff and the parents should be held responsible for nearly killing this newborn. Child genital mutilation of any kind should be banned.

      Now, with that out the way, Male circumcision and female genital mutilation (or FGM, which is what I believe you’re referring to when you say ‘only applying to girls’) are not directly comparable. Male circumcision typically only removes the foreskin of the penis whereas FGM removes the both the clitoris and labia (I shudder while typing this out). It would be like castrating the entire penis and testicles.

      Again, this sort of thing should be banned and no child should suffer from the decisions they had no say in.

      • Tedesche@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        I’m curious: the person you replied to didn’t say they were comparable, so why did you feel the need bring it up?

        In my experience, people who point that out when no one has made the comparison are usually insecure about an issue that affects men getting attention and potentially eclipsing the issue affecting women. Like people who point out that female victims of domestic violence die more often from their assaults during discussions about male victims of domestic violence.

        You sure you wanna be that person? Try harder not to be, please.

      • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        6 hours ago

        It would be like castrating the entire penis and testicles.

        That is very much not accurate. Genital mutilation (of both genders) generally focuses on removing the ability to obtain pleasure from sex while maintaining reproductive capability.

        Circumcision is roughly analogous to clitoral hood amputation (one type of FGM). The foreskin also contains a substantial number of sensory nerves (Meissnar’s corpuscles, and ~10k-20k nerve endings specialized for pleasure). Additionally, the glans (head) is subjected to the external environment in a manner which it was not adapted for, resulting in formation of thickened, layer of skin to protect it. These two things, taken together, result in greatly reduced sensory and pleasure capabilities in the penis. The reason for its commonality in the US is the historical puritanical belief that sexuality is wrong and desire to repress sexuality in little boys.

        FGM is wrong. So is male genital mutilation. Inflicting either on those who can not consent is a crime against humanity that should not be accepted as commonplace.

      • Wahots@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        11 hours ago

        I’m fine with adults mutilating their foreskin, but I want the decision left up to the individual. Having the parents do it when they are a baby leaves the individual with no choice

      • moonlight@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        18 hours ago

        It would be like castrating the entire penis and testicles.

        More like removing the glans and foreskin, but that doesn’t make it much better. There are definitely varying degrees of awfulness, but it’s all bad.

        While there are some truly evil and horrific practices like removing the clitoris or sewing the vulva shut, some female genital mutation is “just” removing the clitoral hood, which is directly analagous to the foreskin.

        Most people can agree that this practice is deeply wrong, and that it is still genital mutilation. And so I think categorizing male genital mutilation separately as “circumcision” is downplaying it.

      • fishos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        18 hours ago

        I’ll just say it’s very clear you’ve never seen what a botched circumcision does to a penis. You also don’t seem to know the biology of the male genitals very well either if you think it’s “just skin”.

        Why don’t we instead focus on “bodily autonomy”? No one should have unnecessary medical procedures done against their will and without their consent. It’s a pretty simple rule that applies to everyone and covers most of these issues simply.