This is a very interesting topic that I'd like to chime in on as an uncircumcised male who's considered undertaking the procedure several times in the past. I won't be addressing the recent "what ifs", however, since to me it feels like discussions about altering sexual organs pre-birth and in the womb seems like... Well, like it deserves its own thread, I guess.
In any case, the only reason I've ever considered undergoing this procedure in the past as an adult is due to the element of 'sensitivity'. It is indeed a fact that uncircumcised male sexual organs are more sensitive, and this is both a good thing and a bad thing depending on my partner at the time. In the early stages of a relationship or when meeting someone, and especially if I'm heavily attracted to them physically, it can be a bit of insecurity as a guy to feel your orgasms come about a bit too early. This always improves with time, and is far less of an issue if I'm eating well and exercising regularly, but at times I've considered it based solely on those inner thoughts of "what if I could last longer the first time, and really blow their minds/backs out?"
With that being said, I do have a friend who willingly underwent circumcision in his early teens who I've talked to a lot about this. He's always been super proud of it (typical Leo boasting about their dicks) but the tale of the surgery and the pain of going to the bathroom for a while after was enough to put me off of the idea entirely. At the end of the day, it's still a surgery and there's always a risk when it comes to those, so I believe they should be limited more to health necessities. Undergoing such a risk that involves a rather painful recovery process just to deal with insecurity isn't something I advise other people, so I'd be a bit of a hypocrite if I did something like that myself. That and, as mentioned, having a sensitive penis isn't as much of an issue once you understand that it's just that, and that there are plenty of ways to make sure you don't 'fire off shots too early' that don't involve getting surgery.
But I believe the main question of this thread was the thought of if parents should be the ones to decide. For that, I'd say it depends on the reasons...
Cultural and religious reasons? I don't have enough experience in this field, but the guys that I know who are circumcised for this reason have never once been angry or spiteful at the decision being made for them. In fact, all of them have all told me on separate occasions that they will continue the tradition with their children, and seeing as it has a long-standing tradition and doesn't have any negative repercussions if done properly, I'd say this is alright.
Esthetic or hygiene reasons? What if the father or the mother simply decides that they should request this be done to their child simply because they think it is better for either hygiene or beauty purposes? This is where, to me, it can get a bit sketchy since it's not so much a tradition (which I can respect) but something done out of vanity. If there is no religious or cultural purpose then I find that it's a bit of an unnecessary extra step that you're taking simply to fit into a cultural norm, and the matter becomes a bit more questionable. With regards to hygiene, I can say that there is an extra life lesson for those who aren't circumcised which is to keep that bad boy very clean in certain ways. Parents who are unaware or don't want to give this kind of lesson to their child and opt to have them circumcised just to avoid that, while not necessarily harmful, expose a much truer flaw in their personality which can be symptomatic of other bigger issues that I'd be more worried about.
What if it's to 'help' them in the long run with their sex life? What if the parents consider that a circumcised penis is something that is likely more pleasing, and therefore better for the child's adult life? In this scenario, I'm somewhat burdened by my own insecurity so I can see it as being somewhat more reasonable, but it still boils down to a decision to put your child under (yes, very minimal) risk in order to better their lives in ways that may not even be necessary. I can see this, though have no way of knowing, as being the main reason that circumcision is so normal in the USA. If the norm in society is to be circumcised, then it's more natural to want your child to fit in better and not have rejection or insecurity issues in the future. This at least indicates that the parent simply wants what's best for their child which is healthier I'd say than simply not wanting to tell them how to clean themselves properly or because they simply think it looks better.
The bottom line is that there will always be a parental decision to circumcise with regard to certain cultures and religious beliefs. If we were to, say, completely abolish this being done to children at birth regardless of the reason then likely either a black market or a certain 'break off' element of society would form where parents would still get their children circumcised but in less ideal conditions, since faith and culture are two incredibly powerful driving forces in human nature. However, if we're not talking about this specifically, and the parents are considering circumcising their child, I'd say they have a right to choose simply based on the fact that other parents of certain backgrounds will and can choose to have it done. It's a normalized procedure in society at this point and hardly something that will tarnish or ruin their lives (unless something goes wrong).
In much simpler terms, should it be the parent's decision? Ideally no, because it is something that can be rectified later on in life if one so chooses. However, realistically speaking, it has been for a
very long time for a myriad of reasons and thus it will likely continue to be a decision that parents can make for their children whether we agree with it or not, unless we collectively all decide that it's something for each individual to choose later on in life when they have the capacity. If we're going down that route, however, then I'd also expect there to be some odd situations where a child of a certain religious background is then going to become the odd one of the bunch which also doesn't help. So far, keeping the option open for parents has helped people realize their beliefs while also allowing those who don't have it to simply turn it down.
When my daughter was born, I made the choice not to get her ears pierced, while being totally open to getting them done whenever she might want, if at all.
When my son was born, I couldn't find a good reason to circumcise him, so I did not. It's cosmetic. I asked my hubby if it was normal for guys to whip them out and compare, and he laughed and said "not really, no." Anyway, he isn't circumcised and when he was growing up, felt very uncomfortable about it. But now realizes it's not a big deal at all, everything is just far more sensitive.
We took a while to make this decision, but I feel like we made the right choices for our family. <3
Also, to me, this is just the sanest and most wholesome approach to the topic. At worst, not being circumcised does lead to some insecurities and questions, and so long as those are tackled and spoken about then most guys will realize at some point that, actually, having some extra bits isn't that bad at all, and it's better to be safe than sorry when it comes to any sort of medical procedure. More parenting like this, please!
Your support makes Blue Moon possible (Patreon)
