Talk:Religion and circumcision

Shems Aposthia and Earlier INstances of Circumcision in the Bible

Shem is only mentioned once in this article and no mention of his Aposthia is made, despite it accomplishing a very similar effect as circumcision and being a religious sign that predates Abrahams covenant by several generations. Also, where there prophets before Shem with Aposthia, and who was the first prophet to actually be circumsized. Shouldn't this article indicate the first prophet to practice circumcision as the originator of the practice in Judaism instead of Abraham? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CensoredScribe (talk • contribs) 15:50, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

current circumcision status for those religions who favour circumcision

The article is good on history but poor on the current state of play re the requirement to be cut to join any of the cutting religions . Who has good sources to amend this lack ?--— ⦿⨦⨀Tumadoireacht ^Talk/_Stalk 21:37, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean by a "cutting religion" - do you mean a religion that support hair-cutting (vs. one like Sikhism that does not)? Jayjg ^(talk) 22:02, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Jayjig,Jayjig,Jayjig - faux naive is so 1972. You know very well from our many discussions elsewhere and the title of this article and the title of its attendant talk page that cutting religions refers to those religions that choose or mandate the full or partial chopping off of the male foreskin for a variety of reasons from "Our God said to do it" to "It is cleaner" to "It makes us more like women" to " It cuts down on sexual friskiness" Do you think that with your vast knowledge and enduring interest in the subject that you might be able to help with improving this article on the current rather than historical practices of the Lopping Religions as I asked above ?--— ⦿⨦⨀Tumadoireacht ^Talk/_Stalk 17:19, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with your terminology or your sources, so it's hard to understand what you are referring to or what article changes you are proposing. Could you possibly clarify? Jayjg ^(talk) 21:20, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

Which word are you having most difficulty with  ?--— ⦿⨦⨀Tumadoireacht ^Talk/_Stalk 15:32, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Introduction

The introduction is quite long for this small article. Parts of the introduction are nowhere to be found in the rest of the article, don't have much or anything to do with religious male circumcision or are at best dubious:

"but the highest percentages of circumcised males is in the USA, for health, hygiene and aesthetic reasons." "Circumcision for medical reasons is quite widely performed in China and Japan, being the largest single medical procedure performed in both countries, but religious circumcision in each is comparatively rare, and largely confined to Muslim communities."

"The practice is also widely practiced in some predominantly Christian areas such as the United States, the Philippines, South Korea, Ethiopia, Kenya and West Africa, as well as among Christians in Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Palestine and Israel" should be replaced by something like "the great majority of Christian denominations are neutral about biblical male circumcision, neither requiring it nor forbidding it. The practice is widely practiced for non-religious reasons in some predominantly Christian areas such as the United States, the Philippines, South Korea, Ethiopia, Kenya and West Africa, as well as among Christians in Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Palestine and Israel".

If in 30 days, there are no replies to my comment, the first two parts will be deleted and the third one will by replaced by the rephrasing I offered. Chrono1084 (talk) 19:23, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Male genital mutilation

There is an article called "Female genital mutilation". The disambiguation page defines it as:

"... any procedure that involves injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons."

The introductory paragraph states that it is *also* called "female circumcision".

For non-sexist consistency this article should, it would seem, follow the same standards. I.e. it should be called "Male genital mutilation" and mention that the practice is also called "male circumcision".