Hacker News Reader

That link had already been posted: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14292131

Also, whether something is mutilation or not is about more than how much it hurts when it's done. In this case a child is deprived of a part of their body that performs a clear biological function.

View on HN

I would disagree that the foreskin performs an essential biological function, and by the dictionary definition that would not make it mutilation.

I said clear, not essential. Your pinky finger also does not perform an essential biological function, i.e. you can keep on living without it. But it performs a clear one, providing more grip strength and options.

Please link to the dictionary definition you're using.

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/mutilation

( If you're responding quickly, click the time link to get a reply field. )

From the definition: "make imperfect by removing or irreparably damaging parts" Cutting off the foreskin entirely fulfills that description.

I suggest you look at this: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en/

Using the term mutilation when it is most often used in that context is absurd.

Mutilation has a clear meaning in the dictionary and its application here is perfectly fine.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com