Our thanks to Patrick for this piece in The Independent. It’s good to see the publicity, but you have to despair of article content like this:
Unlike FGM, which the World Health Organisation (WHO) considers a harmful practice, circumcision is considered to be better for hygiene.
It is also thought to decrease the risk of urinary tract infections, sexually transmitted diseases and penile cancer.
If everyone who read this gave us just £1 – or even better, £1 monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.
Justice for Men & Boys 
One of the more sensible articles on this. But notice the photo gallery of girls crying at FGM ceremonies? They can’t help themselves. I would have shown pictures of African men with their penises hanging off, rotting with gangrene, and a video of a routine infant circumcision.
It’s already illegal in the USA.
LikeLike
Steve660 in the comments seems determined to disagree and claims there are major benefits in preventing HIV. He also says there is no impairment to normal sexual functioning. In this he is FLAT WRONG. I know, as I was circumcised as an adult (for medical reasons) and experienced MAJOR loss of function, which the doctor told me nothing about. And no, it was not a botched operation. Others have stated the same disfunction, which is not surprising considering that up to 80% of the most sensitive tissue is removed. If Steve660 is so wrong on this he is probably wrong on the rest of his claim – for which, incidentally, he offers no evidence.
LikeLike
Sorry to hear that. You were duped, as my parents were. Foreskin amputation is never necessary. I have ED and zero sensation.
LikeLike