Banning circumsicion

[FrustratedFool]

I would argue pain qua pain is something universally not desired/preferred unless for some justifying reason. It seems antithetical to my natural empathy and general temperament to see the infliction of pain on others as acceptable without adequate justification. We perhaps perceive pain infliction differently. I get a strong sense of repugnance and empathic discomfort when I see people in pain, and to do that to someone without good reason would make me feel bad.

It's interesting that you are aware of these risks with having a foreskin. I have a foreskin, as do most people in the UK (and likely Europe and elsewhere) and have never heard of such things. However, the relevant wiki article adds much to support your view that it can have some medical benefits, but it also adds information regarding the risks and other ethical issues that would support my view: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision

It seems to me that outside of religious motivations and outside of very high risk HIV areas, it is a permanent treatment to protect slightly against temporary issues. In which case it seems wholly unwarranted medically. It would be akin to causing a permanent serious scar to slightly decrease the chance of getting athlete's foot (where this can be easily prevented by other means, and easily treated).

I think I agree with those medical associations and ethicists who hold it to not be medically justifiable and to be something that should require informed consent.

Would you be ok with me tattooing my child's penis as an infant if it likewise reduced his chance of having a treatable fungal infection? It seems equivalent. I suspect most would not, and that it is only the cultural acceptability of circumcision in certain locations which causes that inconsistency.