I'm delighted to be one of the authors of this article, which argues that non-consensual genital cutting, paradigmatically on children, should only be performed if medically necessary.https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15265161.2019.1643945?scroll=top&needAccess=true …
There's no such thing as "retrospective consent." What you're describing is called ratification. The % of men who won't ratify the circumcisions forced on them as children (I'm one of them) is much higher than you think: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28894958 But since it's THEIR bodies...
-
-
...then no matter what the %, there's no legitimate basis for trampling on THEIR inherent right to keep the healthy body parts they're born with. Your "probabilistic" rationalizations are no exception, especially since they'd never be applied to any other healthy body part.
#i2Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.