Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Circumcision classed as possible child abuse in draft CPS document

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 76 posts

Re: Circumcision classed as possible child abuse in draft CPS document

#51

Post by GeoAtreides »

edanm wrote: post #47
GeoAtreides wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're not different: they both irreversibly violate body autonomy for non-medical purposes.

So does getting your kid's ears pierced. So does fixing their teeth for aesthetic reasons.

if those are done without the child consent, yes, obviously they violate their body autonomy.

Re: Circumcision classed as possible child abuse in draft CPS document

#52

Post by sporkxrocket »

edanm wrote: post #47
GeoAtreides wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're not different: they both irreversibly violate body autonomy for non-medical purposes.

So does getting your kid's ears pierced. So does fixing their teeth for aesthetic reasons.

You wouldn't fix a child's teeth until well after they can talk. They have much more capacity to consent at that age.

Re: Circumcision classed as possible child abuse in draft CPS document

#53

Post by dang »

sporkxrocket wrote: post #4

Good, it's barbaric child abuse. No other form of permanent body modification surgery (especially to genitals!) would be allowed on infants who can't consent. An adult wants to get circumcised? Go for it. It's pretty wild that we allow it on babies that can't even speak.

We've banned this account for using HN exclusively for political/ideological/national/religious battle and ignoring our requests to stop. That's not allowed here, regardless of which political position you're advocating.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

(Before somebody pounces with "so we're not allowed to post about $TOPIC now?": no, I'm not secretly advocating for circumcision (of all things) and this comment is not about $TOPIC. I just had to hang it somewhere so I chose the most recent thread.

The issue is the overall pattern of the account's behavior, which is clearly against HN's rules.)

Re: Circumcision classed as possible child abuse in draft CPS document

#54

Post by sporkxrocket »

dang wrote: post #53
sporkxrocket wrote: post #4

Good, it's barbaric child abuse. No other form of permanent body modification surgery (especially to genitals!) would be allowed on infants who can't consent. An adult wants to get circumcised? Go for it. It's pretty wild that we allow it on babies that can't even speak.

We've banned this account for using HN exclusively for political/ideological/national/religious battle and ignoring our requests to stop. That's not allowed here, regardless of which political position you're advocating. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html (Before somebody pounces with "so we're not allowed to post about $TOPIC now?": no, I'm not secretly advocating for circumcision (of all things) and t…

Oh, but every Zionist gets to stay. We know you're a tool for censorship dang.

You happily let this account continue: https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=soldthat

Re: Circumcision classed as possible child abuse in draft CPS document

#55

Post by dang »

sporkxrocket wrote: post #54
dang wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've banned this account for using HN exclusively for political/ideological/national/religious battle and ignoring our requests to stop. That's not allowed here, regardless of which political position you're advocating. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html (Before somebody pounces with "so we're not allowed to post about $TOPIC now?": no, I'm not secretly advocating for circumcision (of all things) and t…

Oh, but every Zionist gets to stay. We know you're a tool for censorship dang. You happily let this account continue: https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=soldthat

We've banned quite a few accounts on either side of that issue—theirs as well as yours—not because of their/your view on the issue itself, but because they/you were posting abusively. It's obviously a divisive topic, and people's strong feelings and political commitments are unfortunately leading them to break HN's rules pretty much irrespective of where they stand on it.

You can't derive much signal from cherry-picked examples, because we don't come close to seeing everything that gets posted here. When accounts are posting abusively and not getting moderated, the likeliest explanation is that we just haven't seen it yet. We don't come close to seeing everything that gets posted here.

Re: Circumcision classed as possible child abuse in draft CPS document

#57

Post by stogot »

GeoAtreides wrote: post #51
edanm wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So does getting your kid's ears pierced. So does fixing their teeth for aesthetic reasons.

if those are done without the child consent, yes, obviously they violate their body autonomy.

Have you ever argued in favor of aborting children? That is mutilation without the child’s consent, almost always for non-medical purposes

Re: Circumcision classed as possible child abuse in draft CPS document

#58

Post by fooqux »

lostmsu wrote: post #40
fooqux wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What about freedom of religion Babies don't have a religion.

Maybe the laws should explicitly encode babies' freedom of religion of their parents.

It isn't hard to find people with different religious views from their parents, so no, I don't think defaulting a baby to any religion should be a thing.

Re: Circumcision classed as possible child abuse in draft CPS document

#59

Post by GeoAtreides »

stogot wrote: post #57
GeoAtreides wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if those are done without the child consent, yes, obviously they violate their body autonomy.

Have you ever argued in favor of aborting children? That is mutilation without the child’s consent, almost always for non-medical purposes

I would answer, but I rather not, publicly, because of HN privacy policy (nonexistent) and handling of personal data (abysmal), and also because is impossible to delete your comments.

Re: Circumcision classed as possible child abuse in draft CPS document

#60

Post by baubino »

wrsh07 wrote: post #49
9x39 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can stretch it to religion, if you consider being inculcated in a certain religion a 1-way door. Circumcision removes nerve endings and results in an exposed glans, which thickens the skin and further dulls its nerve endings. This is a 1-way reduction in sexual capacity, which the child doesn't have any say in. Comparing it to ear piercing isn't the same, which, while cartilage doesn't heal easily, there's no sex…

I don't know that your claims about male circumcision have any basis in fact https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26724395/?utm_source=chatgpt...

The linked study doesn’t measure sexual stimulation, only touch, pain, and heat. The study also found that the foreskin was more sensitive than any other area, which supports the prior commenter’s point.
Post reply on HN