Which of these best matches your view on infant circumcision?

It is definitely child abuse. So number (6).

Circumcision is a mark of slavery. Conditioned into the minds of the masses as some kind of Judeo-Christian obedience. 

Child abuse is illegal so not too sure of the difference between 5 and 6.  If it’s not done with consent, I think it should be illegal. Yes, it meets the definition of abuse. How change can be introduced I don’t know, given that it’s a major part of Islam and the Jewish faith. But i’m surprised in the wider world there isn’t more of a protest made about it.  It’s one of the greatest injustices I know of that’s routinely perpetrated on men, or boys.

Your worldview is SO wooden and static!

I'd go with a *sliding scale* of variations on numbers four through six, coming to a final stop on six whenever it's actually feasible.

The ONLY reason I wouldn't just say six, period, is the pretty much guaranteed fulfillment of the potential for abuse on religious and ethnic bigotry grounds. The difference between female circumcision and male circumcision on that is that those tribal groups that practice female circumcision grafted an ALREADY EXISTING tradition onto Islam. It CAN be separated. It is not an integral part of their religion the way male circumcision is for Jews and Muslims. No transition is necessary to avoid giving the scumbucket ethnic/religious nationalists an opening, like it is with male circumcision.

*****

Summary: Stomp on female circumcision as hard as you can, with full force, immediately. Work your way up to doing the same to mutilators of boys as quickly as is humanly possible without encouraging stupid religious and ethnic bigots.

*****

Yes, I understand there's reasons for a transition period, and I freely admit I don't have a freaking clue what that would have to look like, but eventually, we need to be giving some SERIOUS jail time to ALL of them, and keep stomping until ALL of that crap fades out, and SANE people think of it as being the same as sacrificing a virgin teenager for a good harvest.

But even though I advocate flexibility, it's more of an abstract necessity tthing for me than anything else. I don't really COMPREHEND how somebody could actually NOT understand that taking knives to babies' genitals is a very, very bad idea. 

I can't shake the feeling that they've got to have something seriously wrong with them psychologically, if someone supports that crap, ESPECIALLY the ones that defend the mutilation of the OTHER gender while decrying what's done to theirs. ("It's different! This is for your own good!")

Male sexist Muslim-bashing bigots who assume female mutilation is part of Islam and SPEAK WELL OF IT, and feminists hypocritically defending male mutilation and chortling at the idea of cutting up penises, are perfect examples of what I mean. And don't ANYBODY dare try to pretend that either of those aren't a thing, because BOTH types of shltheads have posted right here on Yahoo.

In fact, the supposedly "kind and sweet but exasperated by sexists" Yacko used to wax positively LYRICAL about the necessity and benefits of slicing up little boys' penises. Besides the usual "for your own good" crap, she also cited PROVABLY faulty research claiming there was a .08% (okay I admit it not the exact number, I don't actually recall it, but I'd swear it was of the same order of magnitude) drop in cervical cancer and a similarly tiny drop in STDs if boys were mutilated. 

So hacking at little boys' genitals with knives is GOOD because some quack told an international commission there *might* be a tiny chance their future sex partners will have a slightly lower chance of cervical cancer or STDs? Male mutilation should be done for the SMALL possibility that it MIGHT benefit a TINY minority of women?

Frack THAT idea, AND its holders, AND the saucer they landed in.

OF COURSE I would want us to make exceptions for genuine medical reasons, but those are very, very, very rare. They're *usually* brought up in these conversations as a fig leaf and a diversion.

STOMP OUT CIRCUMCISION OF ALL KINDS. It might not be a huge urgent issue for humankind right now, but it sure as hell is one of the prerequisites for ANY kind of a future developed planetary culture.

We don't kill virgin girls to get a good harvest any more, we don't expose infants on the hillside in the winter any more, we don't burn some poor woman at the stake for following a minority religion anymore, and if mama has twins we don't kill grandpappy to make sure there's enough "souls" to go around any more, either. 

And we shouldn't be slicing up babies' genitals any more. Not female babies and not male babies.

This primitive crap has got to go.

6. The only exception would be reasons dealing with medical necessity. 

People that want to cut healthy body parts off their children really have no business having guardianship of their children. 

I was circumcised at six days old, while my parents' relatives and friends watched and ate cake.  I think it's a barbarian practice.  In those days (long ago now) it was seen as all about being Jewish, but Jewish identity is about what's in your heart, not what's in your pants.

I don't feel as if I was crippled for life.  I've still had a decent sex life.  MOST boys my age were circumcised for 'health' reasons which turn out not to be true.  If I had a little boy, I'd leave him alone, as God made him.

Female circumcision is much more serious.  The whole purpose of it seems to be to keep a woman from enjoying sex, and that really IS barbarian.  That should be outlawed.  Male circumcision is misguided, I believe, a 'tradition' we could do away with, but not a horrible crime for which parents should be imprisoned and the kid brought up in foster care.

Number 5. The people who do it believe in it, but it is harmful and unnecessary.

It makes sex less enjoyable and makes masturbation more difficult, which is probably why religious people do it to their sons. God man man perfectly in His image, so man chops a bit off.

For hygiene, all you have to do is pull it back and wash it daily. 

There is no way for circumcised men to know what they are missing in terms of pleasure, so the practice continues.