Big-News

German court says NEIN to circumcision

Landmark decision from German high court outlaws male circumcision

A German court just ruled that infant male circumcision is illegal and can subject the perpetrator to prosecution for assault (just like for infant female circumcision)! This is a huge victory for the anti-circumcision movement and children’s rights.

Male circumcision removes the foreskin of the penis. The foreskin contains most of the high sensory nerve endings in the penis and operates as a natural protective buffer and a lubricant.

The national medical associations in Finland, Sweden, Holland, South Africa, and elsewhere have called for a ban on infant male circumcision, which is gynecologically equivalent to removing an infant girl’s clitoral hood and which is illegal in many countries. A recent report by the Dutch Medical Association explains that the male foreskin is an important erotogenic structure for which no medical benefit justifies its routine removal, that it is comparable to certain forms of female circumcision and that it violates children’s rights to bodily integrity.

German high court ruled against male circumcision for religious purposes. Those who cut boys for religious reasons can now be prosecuted for assault, including doctors. Now, neither parents nor the right to freedom of religion guaranteed in the Basic Law can justify this procedure. This is the first time a German court has confirmed punishment for a religious practice.

Every year in Germany, several thousand boys are circumcised at the request of parents. In the U.S., even the majority of boys – largely independent of the religion – are circumcised right after birth. Worldwide, about one-quarter of all men are circumcised. However, massive worldwide resistance is mounting to end the horrific practice of circumcising young boys.

The court was not deterred by the fear of being criticized as anti-Semitic and anti-religious. This decision will shape the future of the debate and hopefully lead a shift in religious consciousness in respecting the fundamental rights of children, all children, not just girls.

Muslim and Jewish organizations surely see the decision as interference with the right to freedom of religion. Both religions are integrated into German culture and have considerable influence. Regardless, at least in Germany, the question of criminalization of religiously motivated circumcision will be regulated by the Federal Constitutional Court.

In this case, a Muslim doctor circumcised a four-year-old boy at the request of the parents. Two days later the boy was still bleeding. The mother took to the emergency room. The prosecutor became aware and indicted the circumciser. After the district court found the procedure to be legal, she appealed. Subsequently, the district court found “serious and irreversible impairment of physical integrity” and ruled in favor of the mother and botched circumcision. Unfortunately, botched circumcisions happen all too often, destroying a young boy for life.

Here is a discussion about the ruling in German. http://community.babycenter.com/post/a34433890/circumcision_now_illegal_in_germany

Also see: http://ncfm.org/2011/04/issues/genital-integrety-circumcision/

This article was re-posted with permission of NCFM

  • Paul Elam

    Great news, and a great start. Who knows, this could lead to it being illegal for wives to practice male genital mutilation on their husbands.

    • DruidV

      AVFM can help the MRM make this a reality stateside as well!

      Outstanding job by German court!

      Excellent news for German male infants!

      FTSU!

  • http://www.artistryagainstmisandry.com Jade Michael

    Making it illegal really sends a clear message to the rest of the world. And that message is keep your hands off our sons’ bodies. Kudos to Germany and let’s hope it prevails elsewhere.

  • AntZ

    We are making a difference. Keep it up. Before the MRM, nobody on Earth gave a shat about men, boys, or fathers. Now, we are still weak, but at least we are no longer silent.

    Let the darkness of feminist terror know that they can no longer maim, mutilate, and murder with impunity.

  • Kukla

    I personally don’t consider it “mutilation” or even bad as long as it’s done correctly and by a professional. It should be a choice though. However, I heard someone say this(the banning of circ in Germany) is “anti-semetic” which is just dumb.

    • Sting Chameleon

      It IS mutilation and serves no medical purpose whatsoever. Why the fuck would you do it?

      • Paul Elam

        chirp. chirp.

    • Zorro

      It’s about time the world dropped its religious bullshit, outdated and worthless medical studies and got on board with the reality that mother nature knows what she’s doing. Boys are born with foreskins for a reason, and it isn’t to give mutilators a career.

      Circumcision is utterly without medical merit!

    • kiwihelen

      What reason do you give that it is not mutilation?

    • JFinn

      So as long as it’s done after the age of 18(“a choice”,) it’s not mutilation. So 99.9% of the cases are mutilation.

      And I agree with you that it would be even worse if done incorrectly by a street hobo(likely to be male and mutilated himself.) Thanks for your concern for days-old babies sliced off for no medical benefit besides reducing the chance of contracting HIV by 0.00whatever% if they have sex(at age 4, for instance.)

      Incidentally, do you consider female circumcision to not be mutilation as long as it’s not mutilation?

      • JFinn

        Actually, I’d like to apologize for my dickish response. You haven’t shown any deliberate misandry and most people aren’t fully informed on this topic.

        • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

          Mr JFinn,

          You don’t need to aplolgise matey, not really.

          Sure, you were whooped up in your comment but the thing is you get a pass on it because we understand your motivation for the “whooped upness.”

          Kukla sees that too. I’ll bet you a load of ironed shirts on it.

          (Kukla, your thoughts are noted but really, your angle is buggered sideways on this one.)

    • Turbo

      “It should be a choice though”

      Yes, a choice, by the owner of the penis ie: the male to whom the penis is attached. Upon reaching full maturity as an adult, that is, at least 18yo plus.

      • Fr Bob

        I agree… when it comes to something as invasive as this. Then if it is for religious reasons that they want to get it done then it is the individual making that decision and in turn making that commitment on their own. Something that will have meaning for the individual.

    • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

      I wasn’t docked, and if someone came at me with a knife then I’d respond to it as someone facing someone insane and violent.

      Would I have the procedure done today if I knew it would be done properly and it was safe and free and there was no pain and I win a brand new car ?

      (Hands cupped to mouth) NO.

  • Rper1959

    A win for the best interests of the (male) child, maintain their bodily and genital integrity till they are old enough to decide for themselves on religious or other grounds, exactly as it should be.

    • Ben

      I almost agree with you and, indeed, this is a great victory and a sign of the tides ‘a changin’, my friend. However, when the boy is old enough to decide for himself if he wants to chop part of his dick off on religious grounds (or otherwise), I suggest that laws protect him from harming himself and that he be treated with the same scrutiny, concern, therapy and/or psychiatric ward admission that a teenaged girl would face in the event that she expressed interest in having her genitals mutilated. I am pretty sure that even adult, consenting women in western countries would not have the option of electing to have female genital mutilation even they wanted it. As gatekeepers of western constitutional laws, equal protection under the law must be strived for with great fury.

  • Kimski

    OT.

    Dr.F:
    Here’s the last of the programs, as promised.

    http://www.dr.dk/TV/se/for-farligt-for-piger/for-farligt-for-piger-4-4#!/

    • Raven01

      don’t have any Danish proxy servers on hand do you? Viewing outside of Denmark is restricted.

      • Kimski

        Thanks for letting me know, Raven.
        I’ll look into it.

    • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

      Ah Kimski, Pardon my belated reply.

      “You come in at number 1, on post of the thread. So good on ya.”

      Thanks buddy.

  • http://a-wayforward.blogspot.com/ caimis.vudnaus.

    Perhaps I’m crazy but it seems to me this is more important to men’s rights than just on its own merit. While this is a great victory in itself, I can’t remember ever hearing of anything recently that only effected men & boys in such a positive way. The fact it came from Germany which is economically very powerful in the European Union only makes this even more important as I see it.

    I think we may have just witnessed a turning point in men’s right’s. I very much believe this day was the day a major nation finally saw men & boys, even for only a second, as being capable of pain and suffering and more importantly that their pain mattered.

  • gateman

    Lets hope this leads to similar court cases in the USA.
    Bring on the Violence Against Boys Act!

  • blueface

    Now that is good news. Hopefully this is the beginning of a trend.

  • chrixthegreat

    I have been working on this in Canada for a while. The laws in Canada do not need to be changed from what they are, infant circumcision is already illegal under the human rights act. The laws are just not being implemented properly. Problem is, I don’t even know where to start with this. I have come across some letters to the attorney general of Ontario. Some are quite informative.

    http://www.courtchallenge.com/letters/onsg1.html

    fortunately, in Ontario, male circumcision is becoming more rare as is is no longer covered under free health care, there is a growing concern for the rights of neonatal boys, and doctors who can preform the surgery are becoming harder to find. When I was a infant, 2/3 of boys were circumcised in Ontario, now it is only 1/3. Still, I would like to may it no boys getting circumcised
    Any ideas on how to start campaigning.

  • Tawil
  • Ben

    That’s great news but it will never be banned in my country because our Supreme Court justices are pussies. They will never stand up to the religious groups in this country. As soon as I started reading this, I knew that religious organizations were going to claim somewhere in the article that this encroaches separation of church and state. They can fucking blow me. This is one reason that I despise religion. Even non-religious people in my country suddenly turn into ultra orthodox relgious zealots whenever opposition to male genital mutilation arises, especially the women. And they have the audacity to debase and pour massive shame upon ME — a circumcised man — for merely being critical of the practice. However, they don’t stone their daughters when they have sex in exchange for gifts, which happens all the fucking time. I don’t see them getting all religious over their right to do that and using their religious might to intimidate Supreme Court justices to rule that that practice is legal. The only way that circumcision will ever be banned in my country is if we fight lawlessness with lawlessness. If the feminists in my country really want to do some good, they should go to the Democratic Republic of the Conga or somewhere. But NO! They want to stay HERE and bitch at and shame men in their own country who want to outlaw the practice of routinely chopping off part of baby boys’ dicks at birth. This proves that they don’t give a fuck about human rights, only total power for women.

  • scatmaster

    You do realize you passed the TWO MILLION MARK!!!!!!!!
    FTSU!!!!!!!

    • Tawil

      Thats cause for celebration alright, Scats. By now it should also be possible to predict future trend based on the trend to-date. While I haven’t seen the figures, I’m assuming the number of unique visitors is doubling or perhaps tripling each year (am I close?). If right, one year from now AvFM could be 4 or 5 million visitors.

      Out of curiosity, anyone know how many subscribers here?

      • Paul Elam

        We have 2,814 subscribers. As to traffic it is hard to predict when we will peak, but everything is still in growth mode now. I am estimating that within two years AVfM will be getting roughly 5 million visits a year.

        The number of unique visitors doubled in the last year as well.

        We have no assurances, but right now it’s all good and getting better.

        • Tawil

          That’s a healthy number of subscribers in two years – especially with the high contribution rate to posts, activism etc.

          This site remains faithful to the core traditional MRM project of FTSU while putting a distinct postmodern twist on it (a combo I’ve never seen before)- just the kind of stuff to get society sitting up and taking notice. With that in mind I can’t imagine visitor numbers plateauing anytime soon…

        • Stu

          I estimate that subscribers will peak at about 1 billion and views per day about double that :)

          I didn’t say when :)

          • Paul Elam

            I estimate your estimate is correct, give or take a hundred million.

    • Paul Elam

      Oh yeah, I know. :)

    • Not buying it

      Man oh man that makes me really hopeful & happy I have been encouraging any & all of the men in my circle of family, friends & coworkers, ..etc, to take a deep look at aVfm website & see for themselves what it all about & keep an open mind & to find the truth that I found for themselves. Awesome guys, I am truly excited.

    • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

      Good man Scatters I knew you’d be the first to break the good news.

      I see you’ve used seven (7) exclamation marks for your exaltation here, and that’s a bloody rare thing for our Scatters. Not three or four for this news, but seven.

      That comes in at a blustering 285714 hits per mark of exaltation.

  • Lee

    Very good news! Its about time people stop pretending that there is a legitimate health benefit to that nonsense. It is genital mutilation, plain and simple.

  • Honestjon

    What pisses me off is the fact that when a men’s group in San Francisco tried to ban male circumcision in that city, the Governor of the state passed a law to make it against the law to ban circumcision anywhere in the whole state!

  • JFinn

    This probably isn’t about Germany trying to protect babies from barbaric acts. It’s probably about fighting Muslim immigration. But I’ll take whatever precedent I can get.

  • Stu

    It will be interesting to see what happens to this woman.

    http://news.ninemsn.com.au/world/8491093/naked-chinese-woman-blocks-ambulance

    • http://mrathunderinthehammer.blogspot.com/ Dannyboy

      Stu,
      Most likely with her family getting a bill for the bullet.

  • http://Human-Stupidity.com Human-Stupidity.com

    When I read about the German decision, it was not clear if this was final. I understand there still is the constitutional court for potential appeal. Or parliament that could act in the name of Jewish or Muslim religious freedom.

    Couple of interesting comments I found ….

    In Manila they recently used a soccer stadium to genitally mutilate 1,500 boys without anesthesia to make a world record.

    Look at the faces of these boys!
    http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.standaard.be%2Fartikel%2Fdetail.aspx%3Fartikelid%3DDMF20110508_005%26kanaalid%3D822&h=0d557

    Unbelievable!

    At least the Guinness Book of World Records is refusing to recognize it. http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/306467
    Reply
    +1
    Marc A’s avatar

    Marc A · 59 weeks ago
    A new study shows that circumcised men are almost five times more likely to suffer from premature ejaculation. (Tang WS, Khoo EM. Prevalence and correlates of premature ejaculation, J Sex Med 2011)
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21492404
    Reply
    -1
    Marc A’s avatar

    Marc A · 53 weeks ago
    Brand new study from Denmark. “Circumcision was associated with frequent orgasm difficulties in Danish men and with a range of frequent sexual difficulties in women, notably orgasm difficulties, dyspareunia and a sense of incomplete sexual needs fulfillment.”

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=21672947

    more such interesting comments here
    http://ncfm.org/2011/04/issues/genital-integrety-circumcision/

  • http://mrathunderinthehammer.blogspot.com/ Dannyboy

    This is Great news from Germany.

  • Roderick1268

    Good on Germany!
    Male circumcision is an appalling, disrespectful and an ignorant thing to do to a baby, boy or man.
    There are operations for men whose foreskins are to tight or uncomfortable. I had the procedure myself as an adult.
    The fact the healthy babies are mutilated for the vanity of rich Feminist hags is an abomination. The gloating of evil narcissistic witches attempting to ape immortality, with the private parts of newborn boys, is like something out of a horror story.
    Rod.

  • Rad

    Glad it is just for young boys.

    For example, a dude with severe phimosis would be seriously fucked otherwise.

    From the court decision, “The fundamental right of the child to bodily integrity outweighs the fundamental rights of the parents.”.

    There are some problems with the reasoning. To say that is to say that there is a conflict of rights in this case, meaning that the parents could claim a right to mutilation, it is just that the child’s rights outweigh it. Meaning the principle involved was not identified — with a resolution that there cannot be conflicts of rights, provided they are properly defined.

    But, “The child’s body is permanently and irreparably changed by the circumcision. This change runs counter to the interests of the child, who can decide his religious affiliation himself later in life,” it said.” is a hilarious bitchslap to Jews and Muslims.

  • dhanumis456

    The ruling is not binding. So the practice can go on. The law can only be used in some case of conflict, like when a parent chooses to complain against a case gone wrong, as was the case with the woman in the story (that doctor could not be sued). In other words, a doctor can be sued now for a case gone bad. That is all this ruling accomplishes.

    You cannot expect the male mulitation to be given the same importance as the female’s.

  • Watertiger

    What most people do not know is that the babies this is done to are not given ANY pain killers what so ever! They strap the infant into a “spread eagle” frame and cut away. (Waits while every man on the board cringes)

    I’m proud to say my 6 year old male cousin is intact!

    Roderick1268 – Actually it was Victorian era doctors that came up with this clever surgery to prevent men from masterbating….idiots.

    • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

      Watertiger I know about this.

      I have worked as a theatre technician for some years and have seen this countless times.

      Unfortunately I can’t “unsee” it as it’s burnt into the retina of my memory forever.

    • DruidV

      I’m proud to say my 7 year old son is also intact.

      “Keep your butcher knives off my son, you fucking quacks!!!!”

      was pretty much my mantra before, during her pregnancy and right after he was born.

  • Raven01

    My son is also intact. I still remember a number of people would ask if I wanted him circumcised or not a few flat out said it in a different way that surprised me.

    The asked if I was cut or not. I responded that my status had no bearing on whether or not I wanted my child mutilated and, if they were so curious they should just ask to see my junk instead of involving my sons body and sharp objects.

    Really, if I had lost the baby finger on my left hand in a work accident would even one person suggest that I should also remove my sons digit. You know so he is “just like me”.
    Hell, who says he even has to be just like me. I consider myself a fair specimen of men and a pretty decent person but, there are tons of people nothing like me that could say the same.
    My only concern should be that my kids are healthy, decent people. And, that cannot start with hacking little bits of them off.

  • David

    I noticed this article is lacking whether this happened due to some error of the doctor, or if this is just the chance we are seeing as an acceptable risk.
    If anyone know how common “botched” circumsicions are, and how common it is even when ‘proper procedures’ are followed, it would be greatly appriciated.

  • SSpitfire

    I understand that everyone has their own thought about this, and mostly are against circumcisions, but I feel that a guy should be circumcised if both parents agree to it. I have experienced both, and I prefer circumcised only. Some guys don’t clean down there properly which can lead to infections, and could cause their sex partner to get infected also. I’ve known a few girls, along with myself, had bad experiences performing oral on uncircumcised guys. In my culture, it is normal for a guy to be cut down there. I’m not saying that ALL GUYS should be that way…that isn’t what I’m saying at all. Everyone has the right to do and think how they want…I just wanted to write in the last couple of sentences before someone mistaken it the wrong way.

    • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

      I’m so glad to hear your preferences. How would you feel if I preferred women with their labia sliced up and said I was perfectly OK with doing that to little girls as long as their parents agreed?