If the first thing he might say is “I wish I’d been asked”… Maybe circumcision isn’t a decision to make for him. End Routine Circumcision

If it sounds wrong when you say it out loud… “Consent for permanent modification, signed by someone else.” It probably is.

You wouldn’t make irreversible changes to a system that isn’t yours. So why a child’s body? Circumcision is permanent. He deserves a choice.

A child isn’t finished yet. Their voice, their identity, their autonomy... still loading. So why make irreversible choices before they can speak for themselves?

One day, he may ask. Not as a baby. Not when it’s done. But when it actually matters. And there’s no going back to give him that choice.

A full melody… changed before he ever had a say. Not medical necessity. Not his choice. Just a decision he has to live with.

Parents want what’s best, that’s not the question. The question is: are we getting complete, unbiased information before making permanent decisions? Every parent deserves that.

We obsess over: • What they eat • How they’re raised • How they’re protected …but still normalize removing healthy body parts. That contradiction deserves a conversation.

“Why was I cut?” “…tradition?” If the reason sounds weak when you say it out loud, maybe it’s time to rethink it. Children deserve better than “because that’s what we’ve always done.”

He’s a human being, not a customization project. You don’t get to pick what to remove. Especially when he can’t say no.

You can’t remove function and call it “no big deal.” His body. His future. His choice. #StopCircumcision #ChildRights

In case you missed the latest intactivist news www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQUS...

He was born whole. Remove one part and you change the whole.

You can’t put it back. You can wait to circumcise, but you can’t undo it. So why rush a permanent surgery on someone who has no say?

Some things are common sense: Protect the baby. Don’t harm the baby. It shouldn’t be controversial.

Lucky charm? ☘️ Or unnecessary risk?

Imagine needing a form to justify removing healthy body parts from a baby. Now imagine the reasons people give for doing it anyway.

A newborn can’t speak. A newborn can’t understand. A newborn can’t consent. Yet we allow permanent surgery on their bodies. How does that make sense?

If this procedure is so beneficial… why aren’t adult men lining up for it?

Most of the world leaves boys intact. So why is newborn circumcision still routine in some places?

Infant circumcision was long defended as “tradition” or “routine.” Now legal authorities are starting to ask whether cutting healthy tissue from a child without medical need crosses a line.

“It’s tradition” has justified a lot of things throughout history. Should it justify surgery on a child?

Some practices continue for generations simply because nobody questions them. What happens when people finally do?

In case you missed this week's intactivist news www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpJY...

The majority of men in the world are intact. Circumcision isn’t the default globally, it’s the exception.

We all agree FGM is wrong because children can’t consent to genital cutting. So why is genital cutting of boys still normalized?

If doctors recommended removing healthy body parts from newborns “just in case,” people would call it insane. Why is circumcision the exception?

If there’s no disease to treat… why is circumcision routine?

Were you told it wasn’t required, or were you told it was routine?

At what point does tradition stop shielding a practice from legal examination?

What information should parents receive before deciding whether to circumcise their child?

At what percentage of tissue removal would you start to call infant circumcision a significant loss?

Tradition isn’t evidence. So what’s the actual justification?

Is hygiene a sufficient reason for irreversible surgery on a baby?

Many parents were told infant circumcision was cleaner. Healthier. Necessary. Have you ever gone back and checked the data yourself?

Do you believe the law should apply equally to all children? Let’s talk about it.

Don’t modify a body before its owner has a voice.

Consent matters. Irreversible choices like circumcision should belong to the person who lives with them.

The conversation is changing around infant circumcision. When prosecutors start questioning it, the world should pay attention.

Every baby is born whole for a reason. Protection shouldn’t be mistaken for something that needs to be removed.

Male circumcision removes functional, sensory tissue. Most people were never told this.

Remember this valentine's day Love protects. It doesn’t remove. ❤️

These voices matter. Men are speaking up about harm that’s often dismissed or ignored. Listen. Acknowledge. Protect future children.

If we require consent for tattoos, piercings, and cosmetic surgery, why don’t we require it for circumcision?

We would never accept this level of pain for a baby girl. Why do we accept it for boys?

The biggest fumble isn’t on the field. It’s routine infant circumcision.

The halftime show they don’t want you to see. Fully developed pain receptors. No consent. That's infant circumcision.

TIMEOUT. Circumcision removes up to half the penile skin system. Let that sink in.

Real love is evidence based. No medical association recommends routine infant circumcision. This Valentine’s Day, show love by leaving him whole.

The exclusive POTS meeting with only pans is less than 6 hours away! Last chance to have only-pans access on the discord for supporting with just $10! ko-fi.com/potsltd