The ethical challenges concerning female and male circumcision have been the subject of heated debates for decades. This student thesis analyses the similarities and differences between male and female circumcision, focusing on the historical, cultural, medical and ethical aspects. We wanted to assess whether or not there is a clear distinction between male and female circumcision, as is commonly presumed in contemporary medical discourse. Method: This is a literature review mainly based on a search done in PubMed. In addition, we used Embase, Journal of the Norwegian Medical Association (Tidsskriftet for legeforeningen), several religious texts and various other sources. Results: Proponents of ritual circumcision in both females and males support circumcision by making use of a variety of arguments spanning from medical benefit to religious requirement. There is generally consensus that female circumcision is harmful and without beneficial consequences, whereas male circumcision is considered by a large part of the medical community to have benefits that outweigh possible medical complications. In recent years this view has been challenged by several in the medical community. Conclusion: The ethical problems that arise are numerous and pose great challenges to the healthcare service. In our view, when comparing historical, cultural, medical and ethical aspects concerning male and female circumcision a clear distinction between the two cannot be said to exist. Our opinion is that circumcision should not be performed on anyone without informed consent, including young children. Hence, we propose a ban on all forms of circumcision on minors for non-medical reasons.