I asked this question: Why does the UK have Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003, but not Male Genital Mutilation Act? but despite explaining why it was not a duplicate, it still got closed without any reply to my explanations.
There was a comment by the initial close-voter; I can't remember it exactly, but it was to the effect of:
The UK and US are similar enough politically that the answer will be the same.
Unfortunately, they edited that comment into the auto-generated "Does this answer your question?" comment, which gets deleted once the question is closed, so you must not have been able to see it and reply to it before that happened.
I'm not familiar enough with the questions to be able to judge whether this explanation is valid, but that's the explanation that was given by the close-voters.
(The question has since been deleted, and in all honesty, I think it should stay that way. Regardless of whether it was a duplicate or not, it strongly came across as a push question/attempt to discredit, whereas the earlier question was a genuine, neutrally-worded inquiry. I too am not fond of infant circumcision, but Politics.SE is not the place to rally about it.)
Regarding my VTD: your question consisted of two large quotes one from
'My son killed himself after circumcision' - BBC News (2019)
David Reimer - Wikipedia
And based on that you ask "Why hasn't the UK enacted a male version of Female Genital Mutilation Act 2003"?
Why would they enact an Act based on two cases, even if they are what you say they are, which also seems to be a confusion as the two cases seem hardly comparable in terms of the medical act?
You assert in your "question" that the US one
doesn't discuss suicides and mental illnesses from non-consensual circumcision.
As if those effects (suicide & mental illness) are common consequences of circumcision, based on the two cases you've discovered and so should be discussed?