More on Male Circumcision

Yesterday’s entry on xenophobia in the Swedish circumcision debate has sparked some reader reactions. One reader writes:

I think what you think is intolerence towards non-Lutheran religious beliefs is actually a real concern about human rights. I’d like to hear you present a few good arguments in favor of cutting in a person’s body without their consent (when it’s not out of medical necessity). That’s the only thing that matters here. And, if you think this should be permitted, where do you draw the line? Can I cut my son (should I have one) when he’s seven even if he protests? At 18? Can I cut my neighbour in the face because I believe in it?

To me it looks like you’re in favor of circumcising newborns without their consent. Why?

My reply:

What bothers me is that many people are so eager to make a distinction between themselves and “the foreigners” without realizing that Jews and Muslims are—and have been for a long time—part of Swedish culture. The Jews have circumcised their sons in Sweden since the first Jewish congregation was established in Stockholm in the 1770s. It is absurd to speak of the Swedish Jews as foreigners, and it is xenophobic to speak of Jewish culture in degrading terms. It suggests to me that many are less concerned about the circumcised boys than they are to make themselves superior.

I think parents should have the option to circumcise their newborn sons. The procedure is done annually on many millions of boys, and there are very few reports of complications. Most complications result from unprofessional surgery, where people with no medical expertise try to perform the procedure. Done correctly by trained professionals in a safe environment, male circumcision is harmless.

To Jews and Muslims, circumcision is about being part of an ethnical group. It does not have as much to do with religion as many outsiders think. Now, some have argued that this is not a valid argument. I disagree. Medical professionals in Sweden and around the world perform minor surgery on newborn children for that purpose alone. This is why doctors cut the extra toes and fingers on babies born with polydactyly. This is also why many parents to newborn intersexuals (hermaphrodites) have do decide what sex they want for their child. There are no strict medical reasons for doing anything to these children, but fitting in is considered a valid reason in itself.

I can imagine that male circumcision becomes less important for Jews and Muslims in the future. Many people within these ethnical groups wish to see a change. But personally, I see no problem with male circumcision. A newborn boy is the responsibility of his parents, and they should have the right to do what they think is best for their son as long as it does not involve really severe risks.

An older child has a say in what his or her parents do. That is the case on most issues, and it is only natural that it also involves a decision on circumcision. When a child is mature enough to voice an opinion, it should be respected.