I'm just as shocked as the posters above, but for a different reason.
Why should I see this is as mutilation? I happen to think that circumcised penises look better, and if pornography is any indicator.. so do a lot of people.
Furthermore, my parents circumcised me for health reasons, not religious reasons (my father is a rabid atheist). There was credible evidence (and still is credible evidence) that it provides a health benefit. Common sense alone tells me that a damp dark place is not as clean as an exposed area. Science most assuredly backs this claim (not penis cancer, those studies were not very well controlled -- but bacterial infections) and so I have no problem with it.
Female Genital Mutilation is either done out of ignorance or malice; male circumcision is usually neither. FGM is also done to remove pleasurable sensation s for women, whereas circumcision does not.
You're comparing apples and oranges -- it HAS to be done as a child, so there is no chance to ask them what they'd wish. It's not like tattooing, where you can wait 18 years and they can decide.
So in that respect, screw you. I like my exposed head.
