Denmark defends circumcision as a human right – even though 74% are against it

Our thanks to Tim for this. How can it be a human right to circumcise a male minor, when (according to UN and EU conventions, and common sense) it’s an assault on the human rights of male minors who – by definition – cannot give informed consent? This is madness.

Tim suggests we should perhaps protest outside the Danish Embassy in London.

About Mike Buchanan

I'm a men's human rights advocate, writer, and publisher. My primary focus is leading the political party I launched in 2013, Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them). I still work actively on two campaigns I launched in early 2012, Campaign for Merit in Business and the Anti-Feminism League. In 2014 I launched The Alternative Sexism Project, aiming to raise public understanding that the sexism faced by men and boys has far more grievous consequences than the sexism faced by women and girls.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
  • This is unbelievable. I bet in Denmark you’d have social services on you for just smacking a child, but lop off all his sexual pleasure for life and that’s “freedom”. WTF.

    • Agreed. How can assaulting the human rights of male minors (according to UN and EU conventions) be itself a human right for those who carry out the assaults? Sheer madness.

  • If adults choose to be circumcised for their religion fine. But babies? It beggars belief.

  • rahsoft2015

    “the Danish government officially accepts an Egyptian convention which recognizes circumcision as a human right”

    basically they legalised the right of the religous to circumcise boys in what can only look like capitulation to religion(eg islam and judaism). eg the right of religion to over ride the right of the individual. There was an article in the guradian/bbc somewehre recently about america in which childern of very religous parent had denied non life threatening medical treatment for religious reason to their kids. however it did have long term knock on effect and therefore opened up the parents to being prosecuted( which I can see happening in Denmark). The americans refer to this as something( sorry i forgot the actual definition) along the lines of the right to express religion, but not neccesarily the right to practice the religion( eg enforce your views on others)

    interestingly the arguement of human right seems to ignore the human rights of boys not to be circumcised. So I wonder, it the danish government opening itself up to being sued under the ECHR for abuse of a child when they get older( duty of care) especially as there is no medical reason to do so unless there is a specifc medical condition?