Okay, this is a thought in progress, so bear with me.
I think all abuse depends on perspective.
Routine infant circumcision, meaning specifically the circumcision done to infant boys at birth for no medical reason
, is always (sexual) abuse from the perspective of the baby because he is having part of his body amputated. It happens to be a sexual part of the body, and the removal does have effects on sexual functioning later in life, so it's not too farfetched to consider it sexual abuse. A person could argue that since a baby does not have the words to describe how he feels, then there is no way to know that he perceives RIC as an abuse or an assault against his body. However, ask the vast majority of people if they would feel they had been abused (or assaulted, which might be a more accurate term, but I'm not really here to argue semantics) if as adults they were drugged and had a section of skin and tissue the size of an adult man's foreskin removed from their upper thigh, high enough to normally be covered by clothing. How many of them would not feel abused in some way?
RIC is often, but not always, considered abuse by the men and women who have been affected by the practice. This includes both men who grow up to find that their penis was changed from it's natural state for no reason at birth, and men and women who realize that circumcision has affected their sex life.
Just because circumcision falls under the category of abuse does not mean the parent who chose it is an abuser, or they don't love their kids, or that they abuse them in other ways. I've always been of the mindset that it's nice to be considerant of adult's feelings, but the bodily integrity of a person is much more important than feelings. It might take hurting a few feelings to get the idea out that RIC is not acceptable any longer. As long as we tone down the language of how terrible RIC is in the effort to not offend anyone who feels bad about circumcision we are telling people that it's not really that big of a deal. The message they get is, "Oh, it's bad, but not bad enough to really raise some noise about, so it's not that
Does any of that make sense?