A family says their newborn son nearly bled to death and is fighting for his life after he was circumcised at a New York City hospital.

Tim and Gabrielle Groth said their son, Cole, underwent the circumcision at NewYork-Presbyterian Morgan Stanley Children’s Hospital in Manhattan, where he was born on March 31.

  • blady_blah@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Stop circumcising children. Let men decide if they want to be circumcised when they are willing up to consent at the age of 18. I guarantee circumcision will drop by 95% or more.

    And if that’s the case, then don’t fucking force this on an infant.

  • Matombo@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Until about a year ago or something I didn’t even know that it’s such a common practice in the USA. For me it always was just a religios thing of Jews and for some rare medical cases where the foreskin opening is too tight.

    But now I know that it’s apparently considerd normal? dafuq

    Be assured it’s defenetly not in germany unless you are jewish.

  • joel_feila@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Luckily is was almoat, it happens every year. It’s rare but it possible to bleed to death from this

  • sploosh@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    12 hours ago

    There’s a really easy way to tell whether or not you should decide to circumcise a penis. First, check if it’s your penis. If it isn’t your penis, don’t circumcise it BECAUSE THAT IS NOT YOUR DICK AND YOU DO NOT GET TO DECIDE WHICH FLESH BELONGS AND WHICH DOESN’T ON IT.

      • Noodle07@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        32 minutes ago

        My bro had one for medical reason, there’s no problem with that even though we usually dont do it here

      • Landless2029@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        7 hours ago

        I had a foreskin issue where I couldn’t pull it back. Got it removed around age 10. Wasn’t fun but now my captain doesn’t wear his cap to dinner. Looks normal too.

        • markko@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 hours ago

          I assumed they were specifically talking about babies. If there’s a genuine issue then it makes sense, but I don’t know of anything that’s diagnosable at birth that would require circumcision.

          I know a lot of young adults also get the procedure for the same reason as you. I was in your boat until probably my mid-teens before things fixed themselves, but it clearly doesn’t work out that way for some.

      • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 hour ago

        It’s both. Parents want their babies to have designer penises, so they pay doctors to mutilate them for aesthetic reasons. It is mutilation, and it is cosmetic surgery.

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    72
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    21 hours ago

    Why do they still perform such barbaric rites in the 21st century in the first place?

        • otp@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          13 hours ago

          Yeah, the first time I heard of people protesting against “mutilating children’s genitals [in North America]”, I thought it was a protest against circumcision. I thought, “Wow, we’re finally moving society forward!”

          …nope. It was backwards again.

      • AceSLive@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Not for the newborn it isn’t. Something as personal as your own genetals should be your own personal choice, but in this instance the owner of the penis gave no consent.

      • Treczoks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 hours ago

        It is usually not the personal preference of the person operated on.

        There are a lot of medical decisions that simply should not be left in the hands of parents, and this is one of them, if not the score leader.

  • misteloct@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    21 hours ago

    In parenting classes in my liberal area, the nurses will say “I’m required to tell you that circumcision has medical benefits”. Then they fume how it’s based off bad research and cut themselves short. “However it’s not like your son will be lined up for a nude photo. You can break the cycle of trauma”. I’m lucky to live here.

  • pulido@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    71
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    Why do parents keep choosing to cut up the genitals of their baby boys?

    Is it because the dad had his penis cut up for him, and therefore he must do it to his son because “nothing is wrong with his dick”?

    • makeshiftreaper@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      48
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      24 hours ago

      In America at least most people don’t really consider it until the kid is born. Then in the post birth rush of things happening someone asks if you want to circumcise your kid. Most Dads will say “well I’m circumcised, so I guess” and his dad said “well I’m circumcised, so I guess” and his dad said “well I’m circumcised, so I guess” and his dad said “HE IS BORN OF SIN! We must circumcise him to discourage sinful behavior!”

      Most people really don’t think too deeply about most things, try not to over think it

    • WindyRebel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 day ago

      It’s due to lack of education about not cutting it and indoctrination of what has been societal norms. It’s much less nefarious than you think on the part of many parents. Most people don’t generally think about this ahead of time and research it.

  • kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    23 hours ago

    As a Jewish person im absolutely ashamed that my people still practice mutilation. When a tradition causes severe medical problems it should not continue.

    • Chozo@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      ·
      23 hours ago

      It’s not even strictly a Jewish thing, as much as it is just an American thing at this point. My parents were only mildly Christian and got me circumcised at the recommendation of the doctor. They didn’t really think much about it because being circumcised is just “the norm”. My dad is circumcised, and my mom said she wanted to make sure I looked like my father (why she expected me to be catching so many glances of dad-dong in life, I’ll never know).

      That said, whether or not it should be, a circumcision is still a very routine procedure, so it’s kinda astounding that they botched it so badly. Hopefully the kid makes it without any lasting damage.

    • SpiceDealer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      1 day ago

      I agree with you fully but there’s a discrepancy that needs to addressed. Now, before you get the wrong idea, I’m NOT defending or excusing anybody here. The medical staff and the parents should be held responsible for nearly killing this newborn. Child genital mutilation of any kind should be banned.

      Now, with that out the way, Male circumcision and female genital mutilation (or FGM, which is what I believe you’re referring to when you say ‘only applying to girls’) are not directly comparable. Male circumcision typically only removes the foreskin of the penis whereas FGM removes the both the clitoris and labia (I shudder while typing this out). It would be like castrating the entire penis and testicles.

      Again, this sort of thing should be banned and no child should suffer from the decisions they had no say in.

      • Tedesche@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 hours ago

        I’m curious: the person you replied to didn’t say they were comparable, so why did you feel the need bring it up?

        In my experience, people who point that out when no one has made the comparison are usually insecure about an issue that affects men getting attention and potentially eclipsing the issue affecting women. Like people who point out that female victims of domestic violence die more often from their assaults during discussions about male victims of domestic violence.

        You sure you wanna be that person? Try harder not to be, please.

      • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        12 hours ago

        It would be like castrating the entire penis and testicles.

        That is very much not accurate. Genital mutilation (of both genders) generally focuses on removing the ability to obtain pleasure from sex while maintaining reproductive capability.

        Circumcision is roughly analogous to clitoral hood amputation (one type of FGM). The foreskin also contains a substantial number of sensory nerves (Meissnar’s corpuscles, and ~10k-20k nerve endings specialized for pleasure). Additionally, the glans (head) is subjected to the external environment in a manner which it was not adapted for, resulting in formation of thickened, layer of skin to protect it. These two things, taken together, result in greatly reduced sensory and pleasure capabilities in the penis. The reason for its commonality in the US is the historical puritanical belief that sexuality is wrong and desire to repress sexuality in little boys.

        FGM is wrong. So is male genital mutilation. Inflicting either on those who can not consent is a crime against humanity that should not be accepted as commonplace.

      • Wahots@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        16 hours ago

        I’m fine with adults mutilating their foreskin, but I want the decision left up to the individual. Having the parents do it when they are a baby leaves the individual with no choice

      • moonlight@fedia.io
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        23 hours ago

        It would be like castrating the entire penis and testicles.

        More like removing the glans and foreskin, but that doesn’t make it much better. There are definitely varying degrees of awfulness, but it’s all bad.

        While there are some truly evil and horrific practices like removing the clitoris or sewing the vulva shut, some female genital mutation is “just” removing the clitoral hood, which is directly analagous to the foreskin.

        Most people can agree that this practice is deeply wrong, and that it is still genital mutilation. And so I think categorizing male genital mutilation separately as “circumcision” is downplaying it.

      • fishos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        23 hours ago

        I’ll just say it’s very clear you’ve never seen what a botched circumcision does to a penis. You also don’t seem to know the biology of the male genitals very well either if you think it’s “just skin”.

        Why don’t we instead focus on “bodily autonomy”? No one should have unnecessary medical procedures done against their will and without their consent. It’s a pretty simple rule that applies to everyone and covers most of these issues simply.

  • ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    23 hours ago

    It’s ironic because the whole reason I’m even here on lemmy is because I was permabanned from reddit for telling someone to crawl back in their hole because they were defending circumcision while claiming female genital mutilation was abhorrent. As if mutilating a penis is perfectly fine but don’t dare mutilate a vulva.

    I know this isn’t the main topic here but it just reminds me that body shaming men is okay but body shaming women isn’t. Especially when it comes to sex organs.

    • Hacksaw@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Yeah, I love how everyone loves “big dick energy” and “small dick energy”, but if someone said “loose pussy energy” and “tight pussy energy” it’s practically a hate crime lol.

    • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      23 hours ago

      I feel like your argument loses something by being stated backwards. It (and Hacksaws reply) comes off sounding like you are more angry at women than the patriarchy and want to be able to mutilate and body shame them. Rather than what I hope and assume is the case, that you want all genitals protected from mutilation and shaming.

      • Hacksaw@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Yeah maybe I missed the /s but I just wanted to show that body shaming and genital mutilation is fucked up and society’s (patriarchy) acceptance of it against men is pretty shitty overall. It would be much better if nobody got body shamed or mutilated non-consentually.

      • ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        21 hours ago

        I’m just bringing up the double standard. You’re correct in your assumption that I don’t want ANY genitals being mutilated.

        But it’s not patriarchal that circumcision is normalized for aesthetical reasons. Women circumcise their sons because they don’t like uncut penises. I’ve NEVER heard a man say anything like that outside of not wanting their child to feel different because other boys are all circumcised. Women do it for aesthetics. Men do it because of a fear of being different. There’s a difference.

        It shouldn’t be done at all but the idea that uncut penises look gross is inherently a woman thing.

        • bloup@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          13 hours ago

          Men do it because of a fear of being different.

          I think a lot of people make a very reasonable argument that a huge reason this anxiety even exists is because of patriarchy

            • bloup@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              13 hours ago

              Nobody said it’s a conspiracy. It’s practically a natural phenomenon. Why would anybody be afraid that their child would look different from the other boys? Because they don’t want the other boys to bully him. Why do we all know that the other boys would bully him? Well, the good news is there’s a lot of research on this topic but the unfortunate thing is if you wanna learn more, you’ll have to engage with a word you don’t seem to like for some reason.

              • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                11 hours ago

                It’s the same reason men want their sons to play sports and do manly things. Most of the dads pushing the patriarchal agenda aren’t doing it out of some hyper masculine superego, they just want their kids to fit in. The really sad part is that it’s because they know what it’s like to not fit in. They perpetuate the trauma because they were traumatized.

        • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          21 hours ago

          I’ve never heard a woman say they did or would have their baby boy circumcised because uncircumcised penises are gross, or any other version of aesthetic reasons. The religious reasons are rooted in the patriarchy, as is the “need” to look like one’s father and male relatives.

          In the case of female circumcision, it’s a way of enforcing the position of women as property, making it more apparent if she’s ever had sex so her virginity can be sold to her husband. In its most extreme forms it can require she be cut open in order to give birth, and resewn each time. It can block clumps of menstrual blood and lead to infection and sepsis. In less extreme versions it can prevent her from feeling any pleasure during sex, in order to prevent her from having any except that imposed by her husband.

          • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            13 hours ago

            Anecdotally, I’ve known more mothers who fought for their child not to be circumcised than fathers. I fully encourage men to put their feet down on this issue too. This is very often a battle that the parent who cares more wins on.

          • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 hours ago

            Aesthetics are the most often cited reason for male circumcision in the USA. It is rarely medically necessary, and only religiously motivated among Jewish people.

              • hdnsmbt@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 hours ago

                It would be aesthetics if fathers did it because they think it looks better. But that’s not what’s happening. They do it over fear that their sons will be ostracised for having different looking dicks. That’s a social reason, not an aesthetic one.

                • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 hours ago

                  The social situation in which the other naked little boys ostracize the one with a different dick is patriarchal. Must conform to the “normal” masculine standard. Otherwise the fathers could just teach all the little boys to be more accepting.

                  As for women, I’ve been in plenty of women -only places where there was frank talk about men’s anatomy, and the general consensus has always been, we can love any and all penises as long as the owner isn’t a dick.