Circumcision

Dare I speak of the unspeakable?

Why, yes, I think I shall do just that.

Annie posted an excerpt from an interesting study that seems as flawed and untruthful as it is misguided and cruel.  To summarize, the study claims that male circumcision causes no irreparable harm or loss of sexual function.

Pray tell, how would anyone know that?  You can’t claim a control group in this matter.  Those who are uncircumcised do not know what it feels like to grow up being circumcised, and the reciprocal is likewise true.  And because each person, male or female, experiences different sexual sensations and sensitivities, it’s impossible to make any such claim without a parenthetical note stating your entire study is bullshit.

Then come the great Jewish defenders (because the practice is and of itself a Jewish religious tradition without any medical need or reason).  If I call the practice barbaric, I’m anti-Semitic.

Not.

I’m realistic and a believer in personal choice and rights.  It has nothing whatsoever to do with disliking Semites in any way.  I’m far from bigoted. . .  Well, I don’t like stupid people, but that’s different.

Yet I’m suddenly an enemy of Israel for saying circumcision is uncivilized and unnecessary.

It is uncivilized and unnecessary, damn it!

In fact, it’s butchery of the most despicable kind, for it’s perpetrated on babies when they feel the pain yet have no ability to offer an opinion.  What if they don’t want their bodies modified, cut up with abandon and no justification?  Should the choice not be left to them when they can fully evaluate the issue?

Medicine proved decades ago it was not required for health.  Therefore, the only reason to continue the practice is to wield some level of control over men.  For you see, we stopped female circumcision a very long time ago because it was considered primitive, invasive, destructive.  But not so with men.  They need to be controlled, restrained, shown who’s in charge and how much damage can be done if they don’t stay in line with primal beliefs stemming from ancient mythologies and superstition.

Stop hacking away at newborns as though they are a cut of meat at the butcher’s shop.  Leave them as they are.

And for those who are religious, I ask this simple question: If your god made you in his/her/its image, why on Earth would you promptly modify that before the person in question even has a say?  Does your god’s image disgust you so much that you must adapt it, even with blade in hand, so that it becomes more aesthetically pleasing or acceptable?  Or does that same image disgust your deity so much that you’ve been commanded to change it before the life in question can decide if your god deserves worship and obedience?

Disgusting.

4 thoughts on “Circumcision”

  1. you are right about every thing except female circumcision
    it still is being done in some parts of the world for the same reasons as male circumcision

  2. The primary flaw in the study is that it tested sensitivity of the glans. That is irrelevant, since the foreskin is removed, not the glans. The experts mentioned in the ABC News version of the story acknowledged that the foreskin has nerve endings, but didn’t think that maybe that’s important to study when talking about circumcision. Unsurprisingly, no media reports have noted this, except for Wired’s health blog.

  3. Jim: I apologize for the lack of clarity, but I was speaking primarily of the United States. Even so, I’m unsure as to whether or not that’s true. Wasn’t it only recently that Georgia outlawed female circumcision? And that makes me wonder about the nation en toto.

    Tony: So true. Unfortunately, the media will grab on only to that which makes headlines. Too often that excludes the truth and the facts . . . and what’s really important.

  4. Jason,

    Particularly with circumcision since, oh, say, right around the time the first studies in Africa appeared. “WooHoo, look at us, America rawks! \m/”

    😡

Leave a Reply