Just published. Needless to say the BBC only quotes British proponents of MGM, not opponents:
Jewish campaign group Milah UK stated that comparisons with female genital mutilation are unwarranted, given that in the case of male circumcision there is “no recognised long-term negative impact on the child”.
A female bishop is all for mutilating male minors’ genitals in the interests of avoiding “extremism”:
The Bishop of Reykjavik, Agnes M. Sigurðardóttir, warned Jewish and Muslim people could feel “unwelcome” in Iceland.
“The danger that arises, if this bill becomes law, is that Judaism and Islam will become criminalised religions,” she said. “We must avoid all such forms of extremism.”
Justice for Men & Boys 
It really is amazing as the reason for FGM is precisely religious and cultural. This issue isn’t about relative amounts of damage but the simple principle that for both sexes its unnecessary surgery only sanctioned by religious/cultural tradition. In that respect the only difference is that MGM is more common.
LikeLike
MGM is far more damaging in sensory loss than almost all FGM since all the erogenous nerves are in the foreskin’s ridged band, frenular delta and frenulum, and most MGM removes all of these. I was cut at 14. It took all of my erogenous sensation away and gave me ED.
LikeLike
Terrible paragraph by Michelle Roberts, the BBC’s online Health Editor. She describes male circumcision as ‘a relatively simple medical procedure’. As a ‘health editor’ she should know that a ‘medical procedure’ is one which adresses an injury, illness or abnormality. Most circumcisions, and what are being opposed in Iceland, are not ‘medical’ but ‘ritual’ procedures inflicted upon perfectly healthy, normal children. She also goes on to refer to the junk science around sexually transmittred diseases! Has she forgotten, we are talking about infants and children here! If she is suggesting that these infants are at risk of sexually transmitted diseases then we have bigger problems than can be solved by cutting pieces off the victims. I expect Roberts is a feminist who simply hates boys and men, and fears a threat to the female monopoly on victimhood provided by the FGM discourse.
LikeLike
Beheading is a simple procedure. It can be over in seconds. The simplicity or complexity of what is assault is irrelevant. These people are idiots. There is no such thing as a medical circumcision. There are doctors who circumcise due to alleged medical reasons, but every one of these circumcisions is negligence.
LikeLike
Genuine ‘medical’ circumcision is about as common as medical leg amputation. Occasionally, due to terrible injury or disease, a child may have to lose a leg. But to invoke this as an excuse for ritual leg amputation . . .
LikeLike
I’ve never come across a genuinely necessary circumcision. The only thing I can think of would be foreskin cancer or a flesh eating bug of the foreskin, but I’ve never heard of this happening.
LikeLike
And the average age of those contracting cancer in their foreskin (incredibly rare anyway) is 76yrs! I don’t know of any case, ever, of an infant or child suffering this.
LikeLike
“The danger that arises, if this bill becomes law, is that Judaism and Islam will become criminalised religions,” she said. “We must avoid all such forms of extremism.”
So if cannibals come to this country, we must allow them to cannibalise people in order to avoid the criminalisation of being a practising cannibal?
LikeLike
What sort of people require a child to be mutilated to feel “welcome”? What sort of people want to make them welcome?
LikeLike