Why do feminists oppose abortion but not male circumcision as a right to ones own body ?
Ladies and Gentlemen as a humanist this is worst kind of hypocrisy next only to politicians who victimize the common public at the eve of elections !!!
All will be made accountable in the aftermath !!!!
- ElanaLv 76 months agoFavorite Answer
Most feminists (in the West at least) support the right to abortion (as a decision made by the pregnant person).
Feminists are all over the map about what rights a parent has towards a child. EVEN YOU will agree that parents need to do (and must have the right to do) all kinds of things to keep the kid healthy and safe.
The question is where infant male circumcision falls in that spectrum. I know where you stand. I happen to agree with you - and there are a *LOT* of feminists who would agree with us, but certainly not all.
I'm not claiming that feminism has had a stellar record with boys health issues. I recall a number of years ago, feminists were trying to promote the HPV vaccine as a duty boys should take on as a service to their future partners, completely ignoring (at the time) the insufficient testing this vaccine had with boys.
Yes, NOW we know that the vaccine is very useful (and appears to be relatively safe) for boys (as well as girls) but at the time we didn't, but that didn't stop feminists from promoting something that could have been as deadly as thalidomide with boys to promote the health of girls.
In any case, would you prevent parents from dictating the HPV vaccine to either boys or girls?
The reality is that medical opinions on procedures and drugs CHANGE over time. There was a time many centuries ago where FGM was considered medically useful to improve hygiene issues with women. Clearly that's BS. Currently there is some indication that circumcised boys are less likely to spread AIDS in third world countries but there isn't much difference and there is no measurable difference outside of the third world.
Some parents (and doctors) will use that as a justification for infant male circumcision. Some feminists will back them up on that, some won't. Most will avoid making pronouncements (or at least take them out of the realm of sexism) by arguing that FGM is far worse than IMC, basically trying to change the argument to safer grounds.
Yes, I agree that IMC is blatant sexism against men and boys. If they wanted to be circumcised, when they are competent to make that personal decision, they can do it. If women wanted FGM, when they are competent, why not? The fact that very few men (and almost no women) would do that is not the point, it is their decision, not their parents' or their doctor's.
But the issue is no where near as nasty, nowhere near as compelling, as a woman's right to choose whether or not she will be pregnant, or her right to not have FGM. It just isn't.
I agree it is a double standard, but that doesn't mean I'm going to put as much energy into ending IMC as I would into ending FGM or anti-abortion laws. Some wrongs takes precedence, and no, that isn't sexism.
- jon pikeLv 76 months ago
Because abortion is someone else's body you are gestating. That's what happens at conception. Congratulations!
- FoofaLv 76 months ago
Some probably do but that's not particularly their issue. BTW there are plenty of pro-life feminists, just so you know.
- WaldoBCLv 66 months ago
double standards.... rules for thee but not for me.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- robin_lionheartLv 76 months ago
No doubt some feminists do oppose abortion, but I think most feminists are pro-choice.
And feminists are among the strongest advocates against circumcision, both male and female.
- EnguerarrardLv 76 months ago
Children are under the authority of their parents. I reject the argument that circumcision is a form of genital mutilation; that's whining, and is about as relevant as complaining about piercing the ears of infants. Circumcision in no way interferes with urinary or sexual function. Pick a better argument.
- ajtheactressLv 76 months ago
There really isn't a parallel there, skippy.
This feminist is not in support of circumcision of male infants. But supports a man's decision to be circumcised.
His body, his choice.
- Steven SLv 76 months ago
??? Two entirely different things. One on an infant, one on an adult. This makes no sense.
- 6 months ago
Because they are inhumane and self-centered hypocrites. They don't even look at the male body as human. The only time they'd fight for something like that is if they had a son and he had some kind of resemblance to her and belonged to her. They are inherently hypocritical and selfish by nature. A big part of what keeps them sane and allows them to function is their belief that something wants them and will take care of them.
Edit : Except why the **** would any sane human being with an external reproductive organ want to go uncircumcised? That **** looks and feels repulsive. I was circumcised as an infant and re-circumcised twice as an adult and had a scrotoplasty because I have ehlers-danlos syndrome.