German judge bans non-medical circumcision of boys

Circumcision performed on minors is now outlawed in Germany because it counts as bodily harm.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Excellent decision in my view. Will the UK courts have the bottle to follow this decision?

Women's rights groups and social policy makers also condemned the decision, but for the reason that it would have the effect of putting male and female circumcision on the same footing, when they were "in no way comparable" said Katrin Altpeter, social minister in the state of Baden-Württemberg. Female circumcision she said, was a far more drastic act

So according to feminists, it's OK to mutilate a boy's genitalia for religious purposes, but not a girl's? Presumably they also think GBH should be legal because it's not as 'drastic' as murder

Totally agree FTB

But dont hold your breath with UK courts, far too "right on" when it suits them.

If any feminist cant see the parellels they are being disengenuos

Flat_Track_Bully wrote:

Circumcision performed on minors is now outlawed in Germany because it counts as bodily harm.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Excellent decision in my view. Will the UK courts have the bottle to follow this decision?

Women's rights groups and social policy makers also condemned the decision, but for the reason that it would have the effect of putting male and female circumcision on the same footing, when they were "in no way comparable" said Katrin Altpeter, social minister in the state of Baden-Württemberg. Female circumcision she said, was a far more drastic act

So according to feminists, it's OK to mutilate a boy's genitalia for religious purposes, but not a girl's? Presumably they also think GBH should be legal because it's not as 'drastic' as murder

To be fair though, most male circumcision is carried out in hospital with scalpels, whereas female circumcision is often still carried out with a sharp rock. Hardly comparable FTB

Greenjock wrote:

Flat_Track_Bully wrote:

Circumcision performed on minors is now outlawed in Germany because it counts as bodily harm.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Excellent decision in my view. Will the UK courts have the bottle to follow this decision?

Women's rights groups and social policy makers also condemned the decision, but for the reason that it would have the effect of putting male and female circumcision on the same footing, when they were "in no way comparable" said Katrin Altpeter, social minister in the state of Baden-Württemberg. Female circumcision she said, was a far more drastic act

So according to feminists, it's OK to mutilate a boy's genitalia for religious purposes, but not a girl's? Presumably they also think GBH should be legal because it's not as 'drastic' as murder

To be fair though, most male circumcision is carried out in hospital with scalpels, whereas female circumcision is often still carried out with a sharp rock. Hardly comparable FTB

If you have Jewish friends Jock Id go back and ask them. Certainly on the south coast its not as you describe.

Forgive my ignorance then. I didn't know sharp rocks were also used for boys.

I do know that all over the world young women are subjected to a horrible process of having their clitoris removed with any instrument at hand, to stop them enjoying sex. Circumcised boys still have pleasure from sex.

I don't agree with any circumcision, and if anyone wants their 17 yr old daughter not to enjoy sex,my address is .....

Greenjock wrote:

Forgive my ignorance then. I didn't know sharp rocks were also used for boys.

I do know that all over the world young women are subjected to a horrible process of having their clitoris removed with any instrument at hand, to stop them enjoying sex. Circumcised boys still have pleasure from sex.

I don't agree with any circumcision, and if anyone wants their 17 yr old daughter not to enjoy sex,my address is .....

I think underlying your post, we are in agreement. Mutilation of any child is wrong!

It's not exactly mutilation. I have several friends, none Jewish, who re apparently circumcised - it's meant to be cleaner and lead to less problems down there later in life. Not that I'd use them as a positive example if I could help it, but isn't 3/4 of the USA circumcised at birth? It doesn't exactly cement what religion they choose to lead later in life. If that were an issue, the judge would also ban people from taking anyone under 16 to a church in case their heads were turned... It's nonsense and if the German courts thinks it will stop the practise, then they're dim. If anything it'll just push the practise underground which will lead to more problems than before.

No, I think that this should remain up to the parents. In the case of female circumcision, that ought to be banned - for the reasons' Jock portrayed. In fact, I don't even know that I'd ban that either. I am a believer that a liberal society can educate over religion, so I'd shun the practise and teach the next generation of the consequences and the notion of women's rights.

Mock Cuncher wrote:

No, I think that this should remain up to the parents. In the case of female circumcision, that ought to be banned - for the reasons' Jock portrayed. In fact, I don't even know that I'd ban that either. I am a believer that a liberal society can educate over religion, so I'd shun the practise and teach the next generation of the consequences and the notion of women's rights.

They aren't banning circumsision outright, just for those under the age of majority. A liberal society can educate over religion, but a child cannot benefit from that education if the procedure is forced upon them before they understand the potential risks and benefits. Under the German law if they get to the age of majority and want a circumsision then they can have one, but they shouldn't be forced to have their body altered just becuase of the religion of their parents.

Female circumsision is already banned, I wasn't saying that male circumsision is 'as serious', just that it's illogical to say that forced male circumsision should be legal just because forced female circumsision is more serious.
The reason 'sharp rocks' are used for female circumsision might be due to them being illegal in the countries they are performed that way in, or that the state of the health care system in those countries is such that that is the way they are done, but that doesn't really have any baring on whether forced male circumsision should be legal or not

My point was that maybe the womens groups were condemning the decision because illegal female circumcision is much more mutilating than the male version.

What an eye watering thread!

Where do the leftovers go?

GOB wrote:

What an eye watering thread!

Where do the leftovers go?

They become PASOTI posters

Mutilation of children is wrong.... full-stop.

The fact that it is done to girls with a sharp stone - or an old razor or a knife or anything - is irrelevant. In some countries it is done using those implements in less than sterile conditions not because it is illegal but because it is the custom for older women to do it to the children. It is often those same women who resist changing the custom. I could go into some detail about the methods used and the range of life-long consequences....

My understanding is that male circumcision may lessen sensitivity. But female circumcision will stop most physical sexual pleasure. The clitoris is removed and, in the more extreme form, the labia are also removed. In that sense, it doesn't appear to be a comparable exercise!

(As for where the left-overs go .... my Jewish friends had a stock joke that the men who circumcised boys had a very sought-after job. The pay wasn't good but there were lots of tips.)

And there was me thinking it was used to launch aircraft from ships

It's impossible to educate unless people wish to be educated. Humanity has much to learn.

knecht wrote:

Mutilation of children is wrong.... full-stop.

The fact that it is done to girls with a sharp stone - or an old razor or a knife or anything - is irrelevant. In some countries it is done using those implements in less than sterile conditions not because it is illegal but because it is the custom for older women to do it to the children. It is often those same women who resist changing the custom. I could go into some detail about the methods used and the range of life-long consequences....

My understanding is that male circumcision may lessen sensitivity. But female circumcision will stop most physical sexual pleasure. The clitoris is removed and, in the more extreme form, the labia are also removed. In that sense, it doesn't appear to be a comparable exercise!

(As for where the left-overs go .... my Jewish friends had a stock joke that the men who circumcised boys had a very sought-after job. The pay wasn't good but there were lots of tips.)