Cut893 said:

What are peoples views on circumcision and naturism, has anyone been circumcised since becoming a naturist?

This is something I keep thinking about getting done, as would prefer to have my foreskin removed, personally I think it looks nicer, more hygienic and overall better 

Circumcision is MGM….Male Genital Mutilation. It ought to be regarded in exactly the same way as FGM-for it is the same. Mutilating a male child is obscene    

I agree with you, it is something that should be done when an adult, it is then the man's discussion to be circumcised or to keep a foreskin 

Woodbeforebreakfast said:

Circumcision is MGM….Male Genital Mutilation. It ought to be regarded in exactly the same way as FGM-for it is the same. Mutilating a male child is obscene    

Completely agree - it should be illegal.  I think there's a fundamental human right to bodily integrity, and ritual infant circumcision violates that right, because it's done without consent.

There are additional aspects and thoughts I offer to this, other than the question of consent from a child. 

First, there are religious beliefs to take into account.

Second, the overall question of parental freedom. Parents have the right, and obligation, to make decisions affecting their own children, and as a parent of grown up children (two boys, one girl), I testify that children don't have very good judgment on a number of things.  So parents are  constantly making choices as to whether to seek the child's approval for something (something legal it goes without saying) or not. They should be free to continue to exercise that freedom without creeping regulation. We don't allow children to make their own decisions about many things, but we gradually give them more latitude as they grow. It's a hard thing. 

Third, referring to my second point, a somewhat parallel example involves parents should having the right to decide whether or not a child undergoes transgendering procedures, but in some places here in the colonies, they don't. I'm not changing the subject here; genital "mutilation" as it is being called occurs in both instances. But in the transgender case, it is massive. 

Fourth, I think the attempt at an analogy between female and male circumcision is a bit of a stretch, although somewhat valid I suppose. Male circumcision is relatively widespread. 

Fifth, if we require that children forego circumcision until reaching the age of 18, after which make their own choices (despite still having generally poor judgment), then I might agree so long as the same restriction applies to transgendering or other consequentlal life altering choices. 

I might conclude by asking what is the massive harm being addressed here? As one who was circumcised as an infant, I haven't suffered in any way. Are we trying to solve a non-existent problem?