I have recently done a 180 on this issue. I never thought that circumcision was a big deal, and aesthetically I have always thought the circumcised penis was better looking.
But after working with an asylum client and doing research on Female Genital Mutilation, from a consistency perspective I realized that I had to switch. Many groups argue the inconsistency of railing against FGM when male circumcision is so common. Now, I agree with this in principle but not degree – FGM doesn’t reduce so much as destroy, isn’t a snip so much as a ripping. But the argument is sound.
Sex is a central part to the human experience. But STD transmission involves decisions made later in life than birth, when we can make our own decisions. The fact that this is being used as an argument in favor of circumcision, regardless of the geographical context, is upsetting. Proper safer sex tactics, education fixing social stigma and gender inequalities, and the dispelling of traditional superstitions regarding sex should be the focus in STD reduction.
Finally, from a rights perspective, I’m with those who say it’s not your choice. I’m not emotional about the subject, but I do think that it’s offensive when women advocate circumcision – women are a valuable part of the conversation, but the fact that it’s an issue they can’t truly empathize with makes it an uneasy thing for me to hear them advocate. @diavolobella presents a great case for ensuring we have the proper information (and thank you so much for that). We do need to know about the health risks – but to prevent and recognize when they’re happening. I doubt that foreskin is dangerous enough to warrant preventative removal – if the threat was significant enough so that the surgery couldn’t wait until a life-threatening or serious situation arose, I don’t think we’d still have foreskin – that’s a pretty huge evolutionary drawback….
A person’s body is their own. Regardless of whether by chance it would have been better to do it earlier, the person with the foreskin makes that decision. This has to be a consistent position from anyone, I argue, from a pro-choice perspective. It’s an important complimentary recognition of private sexual and reproductive rights decisions. And it’s not minor, really – it’s a profound intrusion on a person’s sexual life that we’ve never thought was a big deal because we never really thought about it at all.