+1 y

Why do some people in this day and age STILL want to circumcise (mutilate) baby boys?

This is a controversial topic but being a guy myself who had educated, British , non religious parents I feel I am lucky in that I was born and didn't have the part of my anatomy that protects the most sensative area of me, sliced off without my consent.
So here are my questions:

1) Why remove something that serves a function and evolution has provided over millions of years (protects the head, keeps sensitivity and self lubricates it) that "may" cause a problem for a small % of guys later in life.

2) If FGM (female genital mutilation) is considered so barbaric, why not male?

3) Would it not be better to let the child decide themselves if they want to be circumcised when they are older (it can't be undone), instead of choosing what you should do to another persons body? Bearing in mind this doesn't routinely happen to ANY part of a woman.

4) What right in particular does a female (the mother) have to make a decision on a body part that she has never had and will never have?

5) If the argument is "it looks better", what if it was sociteies view that slicing part of a womens breast or vagina off - back to FGM - looked better? Still ok?

Mine has caused no problems for myself, im 26, and it doesn't either for the vast majority of guys, I'd probably not be speaking to my parents by now had they had it done to me. Im also baffeled as to why (mainly American and religious) doctors think they know better than millions of years of human evolution.
+1 y
So two out of the 4 guys answers are extremely immature making them void, (the other two are against the procedure) and a couple of the womens ones have heard something about it "being unlean or religious", point proved by you guys yourselves!
Why do some people in this day and age STILL want to circumcise (mutilate) baby boys?
Add Opinion