This is a sensitive subject that many people will probably not agree with, but its corner needs to be fought, its arguments heard. A blight is hitting the bodies of young boys the world over and it needs to be removed, surgically. This blight, rather obviously, is fingernails.
There are many reasons to surgically remove a young boy’s fingernails and so very few arguments standing against. The ability to have the debate is often plighted by dark clouds of anger and personal feelings, heated rhetoric and empty yelling. Hopefully, through careful analysis and detailed examination we can dispel any and all myths and mysteries enveloping the issue of surgically removing a young boy’s fingernails.
For many this practice is deeply ingrained in their religion and cultural identity, that to take this practice, this rite, away from them would be to take away a human right. This cannot be done. The US was founded on the freedom of religion and there is the UN Declaration of Human Rights, in which Article 2 states people cannot be discriminated on grounds of religion (ignore Article 3, it doesn’t affect children). Many would argue against this saying that a child’s right comes before a parent’s decision, but as we know, parents know best!
There’s also plenty of health benefits for the removal of a young boys fingernails. Illnesses and diseases such as Paronychia and Onychomycosis can all be prevented by the post-birth removal of fingernails. Paronychia is an infection of the nail and finger that causes the skin to redden and feel like its burning, pus is often present and the nail plate thickens and browns. Onychomycosis is a fungal infection and constitutes around half of all nail abnormalities and occurs in 10% of the population. 600m people worldwide suffer from onychomycosis, 50% who could have prevented this by having their fingernails gone already. True, many of these conditions can be prevented with good personal hygiene, but why would someone want to bother washing a part of their body repeatedly over their life when it can be surgically removed as a child!? You know it makes sense.
One of the most commonly used procedures to remove the fingernail is phenol matricectomy, known to the Lehman as “chemical cauterisation”, known to the Lehman’s Lehman as “melting it off with acid”. This procedure has a 95%+ success rate and postoperative morbidity is minimal. Scary as it may sound it is a widely practiced procedure, scarier in words than it is in reality. A quick operation when the patient is young to prevent a lifetime fraught with potential infection. Critics argue that death is a potential outcome of such “barbaric” procedures. They are wrong, people die not because of the procedure but because of the doctor’s incompetence.
Ignoring all the boring wishy-washy facts, obviously you care about people’s feelings and the lived experiences of the people who have had this procedure, because how they feel about it trumps scientific fact. Such people are the parents authorising the procedure. Parents want their children to grow up and be just like them, so to pass on this procedure from father to son is a parental decision to make. As everyone says, parents know best! Alas there are those who argue that a child’s right comes before a parent’s rite, however, have these people ever tried asking a baby if they want to undergo a non-consensual surgical procedure? No, they haven’t.
Because it is pointless, babies can’t answer. Even if they could, they are young and won’t remember the surgery when they are older, so cutting them is fine. It’s like pro-cutters say: if they can’t remember, it didn’t happen! So obviously you don’t require consent from the child. Whilst some say that the procedure would be acceptable if you would wait 18 years and let the child make the decision as an adult, the issue here is waiting 18 years for them to be an adult. Why do that when you can ask an adult relative … their parents! Their parents are adults and thus perfectly acceptable for making this decision. Even if their motive for the procedure is because a voice in the sky said so, that counts enough for us!
Let’s not deny, fingernails look gross, especially on men. But don’t you dare argue that the procedure should be performed on girls, it is in NO way the same and for women their nails is almost a centre point of their identity. How are these girls to grow up and become women if you remove such a fragile, ladylike part of their body? Obviously it’s fine for guys, it’s just a piece of flesh … duh.
In conclusion, the surgical removal of young boy’s fingernails is a normal and healthy procedure, one that is culturally acceptable and does not impact them negatively. It is performed for a variety of reasons: parental choice, religion, cosmetic appeal. If you criticise this, or point out how it’s not the same for girls, either you’re a bigot, atheist or sexist. Your choice.
[Editor’s Note: An error was sent in the commissioning email, where we said “Defend Removing Young Boy’s Fingernails” we should have said “Defend Removing Young Boy’s Foreskins”. As the article has been written and payment transferred we’ve decided to cut our losses and publish anyway. Also, many of the arguments supporting are very similar.]
[Editor’s Note (Again): This article is obvious satire. Removing young boy’s fingernails is fucking vile and we can all agree on that. Yet apparently society does not feel the same level of disgust towards circumcision. The surgical removal of a young boy’s foreskin is a hateful, intrusive act performed without consent of the victim and should not be allowed to happen. Here is a video of a circumcision, watch it through and hear the baby scream. Now try and argue how it is an appropriate procedure to perform, I dare you.]