Talk:Forced circumcision

Why is this being defined as male only?

A source referred to here starts with: "Circumcision has been forced on hundreds of Christians, including children and pregnant women...", why then the exclusion of half of humanity? Tyreric (talk) 09:59, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

Because on Wikipedia it's known as female genital mutilation. Bon courage (talk) 12:13, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

On the female genital mutilation page it states that it is also known as female circumcision. Tyreric (talk) 20:48, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

It is (or rather mostly was), but that's not the term Wikipedia uses. On Wikipedia, circumcision is male circumcision only. Bon courage (talk) 20:51, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Ok thanks for the explanation, and so much for the neutrality principle! Tyreric (talk) 10:26, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

It's impossible to be perfectly neutral on all issues ever. On an encyclopedia, there have to be at least some general principles that are agreed on. This is, for example, what allows you to call someone's death "tragic" in some contexts.

RadicalJude (talk) 15:15, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

Simultaneous mentions of Female Genital Mutilation

Why should Female Genital Mutilation be mentioned within the "see also" section? Many organisations and health services all agree that male circumcision shouldn't be compared to Female Genital Mutilation. Of course, both are GBV as both exclusively sexually assault a specific gender, but the results are far different to FGM. So why should we also mention FGM here? Lubdhak 972729282 (talk) 12:25, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

Because forced circumcision is considered sexual assault and mutilation. ~2025-34801-10 (talk) 17:03, 19 November 2025 (UTC)

@~2025-34801-10 bur there is a difference between mutilation and circumcision. Male circumcision is mainly the removal of the foreskin. FGM is removing mainly of all the genitals. Male circumcision is done to improve health of that man. Women FGM is done to keep women as second class. Have a look at WP:NPOV because it looks like you are just trying to undermine the agenda of the other gender. Lubdhak 972729282 (talk) 14:08, 21 November 2025 (UTC)

Forced circumcision, especially when performed outside clinical settings or as a form of punishment, warfare or coercion, has been documented in human rights reports as a form of sexual violence. In such cases, the intent and outcome qualify it under many legal and ethical frameworks as sexual assault and mutilation. ~2025-35365-49 (talk) 15:16, 21 November 2025 (UTC)

@~2025-34801-10 and sexual assault is not always mutilation. Read Male circumcision for details. Lubdhak 972729282 (talk) 14:09, 21 November 2025 (UTC)

The existence of medically performed, consensual circumcision does not negate the well-sourced fact that forced circumcision is treated as a human-rights violation, and in many documented cases (e.g. during ethnic violence in Kenya, Uganda and parts of the Balkans) it is expressly described as sexual assault, torture and mutilation in academic and legal sources. ~2025-35365-49 (talk) 15:20, 21 November 2025 (UTC)

Circumcision culture is rape culture.

Statistics on circumcision status of convicted rapists should be added. It seems almost universal that rapists are circumcised even in countries that don't promote genital mutilation ~2026-44095-2 (talk) 05:30, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Do you have any reliable sources that say that? Chess enjoyer (talk) 05:38, 11 February 2026 (UTC)

Aside from being demonstrably false, you would need to provide reliable sources to back up this extraordinary claim EvergreenFir (talk) 05:39, 11 February 2026 (UTC)