Well written article that balances it all. One of the core issues is always about forced consent. The other thing is mother nature always creates something for a reason.
If it was a good clean practice we would be doing this on farm animals, but we don't.
The reality is the practice arose from a time where cleanliness could not be done effectively, but even so one might say or think natural selection would push a male species to replicate that is cleaner and more intact for reproduction.
The practice actually reduces pleasure in men and their orgasm ability.
So if one is to do this procedure the only really acceptable time for risk is <1 month, after that it goes up and one study states the rate of complications is 7.4%. (I can get the study, but it shows some pretty gruesome photos).
There has been studies that show even with the low risk option, behavioral issues can be found later in life. When the infant boy is cut without meds, they have more fear of pain and trauma
We all know how critical parent and infant bonding is in the early days.
What was found was 24 hours they are unable to bond due to the trauma
So, in America we have a lot of extra violence with boys and extra disconnectedness when compared to areas such as Europe. Could Circumcision play a factor in this? Dunno.
But for good or bad it is invasive, the last study I could find shows at least 100 deaths, but
But it should be a parents choice on whether to do this, and any parent that is religious that practices this should be granted waivers if laws were passed changing this.
One does have to wonder though, does cutting promote body shaming. For those that are not "cut", are they in essence "dirty"?