If you tried to get your newborn daughter a labiaplasty so that she would be "more appealing to boys once she's old enough", you would rightfully be scolded and kicked out of every respectable medical practice you asked at. It's fucking gross to be sexualizing a literal newborn like that, and yet I used to regularly see people on Reddit use that as a good reason to circumcise your son.

And any "hygiene" justification is just grasping at straws. Do we cut off people's ears so they don't have to spend 30 seconds cleaning them every day? No. Just teach your kids how to clean themselves and it's a non-issue.

I feel that's a lot more common in the USA than in other countries. Google says in Germany where I live it's 10%. And worldwide it's 30% and in the USA it is 70%. I mean there are worse things out there but to me it is just weird to mess with infants like that.

it's dumb and bad and wrong

It's a procedure in search of indications. Unethical and surprisingly still common and covered by insurance. No doctor would perform aesthetic surgery on a child for any other reason save ear piercings, i don't think it's as common as it used to be, but an infant couldn't consent to that either.

For some reason, I've encountered lots of moms (occasionally would get a "hell no" from dad though) whose biggest concern after their son was born is when the circ was going to be performed. I wish the medical organizations would put some more focus on the ethics and aspect of consent/assent. There's a lot of talk about research in public health about how it may or may not affect STI rates, and then the argument gets stuck on risks/benefits rather than ethics.

It ultimately is a procedure rooted in cultural and religious practice, and the American medical establishment is pretty slow, especially in that aspect.

I feel less than other men , apparently.

I support banning non-therapeutic infant circumcision. I also recommend non-surgical foreskin restoration to anyone curious about greener pastures.

Bitter.