the real tragedy of east asian males

Descriptively it seems like circumcision is a case of a cost profile, and a benefit profile, which largely cancel each other out, netting either slight positive or slight negative utility, this could be between $6000 worth of negative impact to $8000 worth of positive impact per MC (Lawler et al 1991, howe et al 2004). i think there are also considerations that are difficult to quantify in economic value, such as reduction in sensitivity (Sorrells et al 2007), reduction in female sexual satisfaction (bensley et al 2003), adverse psychological reaction (bossio et al 2018), and a correlation with a reduction of penile length by 0.3 inches (park et al 2016), some of these arguments are disputed in the scientific community. My interpretation of this data is that it is very balanced between both sides, and it's not obvious that MC has positive utility or negative utility.

my understanding of the ethical framework of pro-MC is something like "a minor ought not to have self determination so long as a guardians infringement is statistically likely to produce utilitarian outcomes (content psychological state)" i think one of the niche arguments that is brought up by anti-MC, is that because different ancestry groupings in the US have different rates of STDs, some groupings have a lower benefit profile, since some STD prevention is absent. Thus in my view the cost-benefit analysis is tipped in favor of negative utility for that grouping. i think this is the case for asian americans (from asia continent).

the following is infection rates of various STDs for asian american males and non-asian american males for a year.

HIV (US), Asian - 2.7 / 100000, Non-asian - 9.6 / 100000

Chlamydia (michigan), Asian - 76 /100000, Non-asian - 393 / 100000

Gonorrhea (michigan), Asian - 22 / 100000, Non-asian - 222 / 100000

Primary & secondary syphilis (michigan), Asian - 2.1 / 100000, Non-asian - 15 / 100000

https://www.cdc.gov/hiv/data-research/facts-stats/race-ethnicity.html https://www.mdch.state.mi.us/osr/std/STDbyRace.asp

I think these disparities would be slightly more pronounced if considering only Chinese, Korean, and Japanese.

I think pro-MC generally believes in the concept of child abuse, that being a guardian infringing upon a minor in a way that is statistically likely to create non-utilitarian outcomes. Given the entire body of evidence it is my interpretation that for asian guardians to circumcise a asian male infant is a form of child abuse, and thus should be banned by the state. If the pro-MC view is that MC is a blessing, then such a policy would be a blessing to non-asian males, while asian males already experience some of the benefits of MC by default, but don't have to deal with the cost profile of MC, such a policy would maximize utility for the whole society. The obvious objection is that the state should treat different ancestry groups the same, but I think this train of thought leads to the state should treat males and females the same.

this is an internal critique of pro-MC, the policy i would advocate for would be based on utilitarian ethics, and would see a ban on non-con MC except for extreme medical necessity, in place of routine MC would be the state compelling citizens to practice safe sex practices, and alternative medical treatments

lawler et al 1991 - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1794670/ bensley et al 2003 - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14581975/ howe et al 2004 - https://www.researchgate.net/publication/8187251_A_Cost-Utility_Analysis_of_Neonatal_Circumcision sorrells et al 2007 - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17378847/  park et al 2016 - https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5028213/ bossio et al 2018 - https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28894958/