Intactivism

These are the cultural reasons circumcision happens

1. The parents want it done, which brings up the issue of autonomy. If the child can't make their own decisions, the parents do what is best. There are laws stating FGM (Type I - III) are illegal. Type Ia on this chart. But for boys, the role of choice and autonomy remains unjustified. Feel free to read this article on FGM and note the cultural comparisons. The rest of the reasons are underneath this overarching theme of autonomy and choice.

2. The father was circumcised. AKA previous male bodies define their experience as a man to not include a foreskin. They then reinforce their understanding of gender roles onto the child, and the costume doesn't fit with a foreskin involved. 

3. He needs to match his peers. Masculinity has reinforced that "boys will be boys" and that includes lashing out, and being agressive on people or ideas they don't understand. This creates fear. Fear that a boy's body will be shamed by others. 

Other culture problems would be institutionalized power, but that would be challenging to discuss in this case.

Rape culture silences victims. Rape culture enables perpetrators and demands that victims prove their innocence. Rape culture demands victims prove they were not in fact asking for it, through their behaviour, their clothing, or simply their presence in the wrong place at the wrong time. Rape culture always sides with the systems of oppression.

A few months ago, I wrote a post about circumcision being a feminist cause, and I want to revisit patriarchy and rape culture as it relates to circumcision. Because I continually see rape culture manifest around this issue.

Male victims of genital mutilation are silenced in profound ways. (If you find yourself buckling at the use of mutilation here, congratulations, that’s rape culture.)  Indeed, people don’t even want to use the word ‘mutilation’ because somehow it will discount the mutilation of females. Sorry folks, the dictionary doesn’t work that way. Mutilation is mutilation is mutilation. Outcomes may be different for survivors of FGM simply because childbirth places a woman’s life at risk, whereas men will never push a human being out of their penises. But does that discount their assault?

Simply because a man can’t birth a baby, does that mean he can’t be a victim of genital mutilation? Does the dictionary definition of mutilation change, simply because the organ is a penis rather than a vulva? And what about victims of FGM who suffered clitordectomies, instead of infibulation? The outcomes of those procedures are most certainly different, yet would we dare tell the victims of clitordectomy that they haven’t been mutilated, and they shouldn’t be outraged because some women have it worse? That would be pretty callous to say to a victim of genital mutilation, wouldn’t it?

So why is it okay to have the same silencing rhetoric for male victims? And isn’t it perpetuating rape culture to have some standard of damage done before someone gets to identify as a victim of sexual assault? Because strapping a baby down to a board and cutting his sex organs is sexual assault, even if he doesn’t remember (aha! rape culture!), even if he’s fine and claims he likes it that way (of course, he has no control penis to compare it to, so this is a logical fallacy), or even if everyone around him agrees an altered penis must be better, because everyone they know has an altered penis. Someone needn’t identify as a victim to in fact, be a victim.

But perhaps more men aren’t identifying as victims because of rape culture. Because rape culture ridicules and shames our male victims. Because rape culture silences the suffering of male victims. We have a cultural narrative driven by patriarchy which ridicules male weakness, and those who might identify as victims. Indeed, even when a man identifies as a victim and dare call his assault genital mutilation, rape culture silences him because he’s not a female, so it can’t possibly be as bad.

Busting a cultural myth: not all victims of FGM suffer worse than all victims of MGM. There are victims of male genital mutilation who are much worse off than their female counterparts.

Which brings me back to the point I make in my previous post: genital mutilation isn’t a pissing contest, and the same rights are violated, regardless the continuum of potentially tragic outcomes.