The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is preparing to issue new recommendations regarding circumcision and its supposed ability to low the risk of contracting sexually transmitted diseases.
One new group hopes to have a big voice in the circumcision debate. Intact America is based in New York and backed by a pro-intact Texas millionaire.
Circumcision rates are currently at about 50 percent in the States, with rates varying dependent on region. Intactivists worry that if government officials choose to rely on select African studies, the circumcision rate will again begin to rise. The main studies in question show that circumcised men in Africa, a continent with a phenomenal AIDs infection rate, have a significantly lower rate of HIV infection than the general population. However, intactivists point out, many men circumcised there are for religious reasons; because they’re Muslim or occasionally Christian. So then, are they contracting fewer STDs because they’re circumcised or because they’re pious?
Indeed, one study shows that the rate of prostitutes in a population is a better indicator of the STD rate than is the rate of circumcision.
Intact America leader Georganne Chapin says circumcision is an issue of integrity,
Circumcision is inhumane – not just for the baby but for the parents and the doctors who do it.
Her group hopes to meet with the CDC in the next month.
Psst: You may remember that I don’t agree with circumcision. Click hear to learn why.
Image: Thanks to Jen on Cake Wrecks.
I agree circumcision is painful and disturbing.
Foreskin isn’t extra skin, it plays many roles and is the most erogenous part of penis.
Many, many Jews are questioning circumcision from many perspectives including religious, ethical, and spiritual as well as men, women, and parents. A variety of Jewish and Israeli groups are working to abolish circumcision also.
Jews Against Circumcision
http://www.jewsagainstcircumcision.org
Beyond the Bris: A Jewish Intactivist Parenting Blog
http://www.beyondthebris.com
Questioning Circumcision: A Jewish Perspective by Ronald Goldman, PhD.
http://www.jewishcircumcision.org
Kahal: Giving Up Brit Milah (in Hebrew and English)
http://www.kahal.org
Intact Son: The Israeli Association Against Genital Mutilation
http://www.britmila.org.il
Ms. Nelson,
I believe you have done this important post a disservice by including an image associating this with issues of religion. For that reason I will not be promoting this post. Including the Intact America symbol, instead, would have made this a great little article.
There is scientifice evidence that circumcised men are less likely to contract HIV/AIDS then those who are uncircumcised and it has nothing to do with being pious. It has to do with the thickness of the skin in circumcised men (its more thick and therefore less pourous than those of circumcised men). I am for keeping babies intact (my own son is intact). However, having worked in Southern Africa where the rate of HIV/AIDS is 40% even after years of condom campaigns, I do think that voluntary surgery of adult men is a perfectly sound intervention to control the spread and morbidity of HIV/AIDS.
It’s illegal to cut off a girl’s prepuce, or to make any incision on a girl’s genitals, even if no tissue is removed. Why don’t boys get the same protection? People should be able to decide for themselves whether they want part of their genitals cut off.
For Juliet:
There are six African countries where men are more likely to be HIV+ if they’ve been circumcised: Rwanda, Cameroon, Ghana, Lesotho, Malawi, and Swaziland. Eg in Malawi, the HIV rate is 13.2% among circumcised men, but only 9.5% among intact men. In Cameroon, the HIV rate is 4.1% among circumcised men, but only 1.1% among intact men. If circumcision really worked against AIDS, this just wouldn’t happen. We now have people calling circumcision a “vaccine” or “invisible condom”, and viewing circumcision as an alternative to condoms.
ABC (Abstinence, Being faithful, Condoms) works against HIV. Circumcision appears not to. Remember that circumcision won’t make any difference unless someone is having unsafe sex with an HIV+ partner.
Latest news is that HIV+ men are more likely to infect women if they’ve been circumcised.
Female circumcision seems to protect against HIV too btw, but we wouldn’t investigate cutting off women’s labia, and then start promoting that.
Thank you, Intactivists. I knew I could count on you.
I could have argued in depth about this subject, but I applaud you for taking up the cause here.
And also for not minding the pic that went with the post. I thought it was pretty hilarious. At least there’s something to laugh at? Because this topic sure as hell isn’t a laughing matter…
Intact America
http://www.intactamerica.org
Catholics Against Circumcision
http://www.catholicsagainstcircumcision.org/
International Coalition for Genital Integrity
http://www.icgi.org/
Jews Against Circumcision
http://www.jewsagainstcircumcision.org/
Not Just Skin
http://www.notjustskin.org/
Most of the US men who have died of AIDS were circumcised at birth. Whatever circumcision does, it DOES NOT prevent AIDS. Now that cut men have been shown 50% more likely to infect their partners circumcision is trully ill-advised even for adults.
AIDS and other STDs have no bearing on infant’s right to keep his whole body and make his own choice about how to avoid STDs.
Foreskin feels REALLY good. HIS body, HIS decision.
Juliet: The claims about the nature of foreskin tissue are based on a few in vitro (in glass) studies of the foreskins of dead old men, made to bolster the circumcision claims. The three trials of circumcision in Africa were cut short, and several times as many circumcised men dropped out, their HIV status unknown, as non-circumcised men were infected.
The latest news, out of Uganda, is that circumcising men offers no protection to women, and may INcrease their risk by as much as 50%. Women are already at greater risk, so that is a big negative for circumcision.
Voluntary, adult circumcision would be acceptable, except for the huge risk that it will make men think they are immune and want sex without condoms, further disempowering women. Few of the circumcision proponents seem inclined to confine it to voluntary or adult.
For Mark Lyndon:
Great to quote statistics the way you have on various African countries. What you don’t realize or probably understand is that in Africa men refuse to wear condoms and when denied sex because of it, they are the first to beat up the woman that denied them what they consider their right and then rape the woman. So your preaching will go nowhere. You are dealing with many cultures that don’t think logically and really don’t care what they do, what diseases they carry and who they infect. Putting it very bluntly, there is little or no value on human life in many parts of Africa. Also many men don’t care how many women they sleep with over there. Any wife that questions her husband’s sexual habits is bound to be beaten, or even worse killed for questioning his habits. So while you make great statements, blaming circumcision for HIV men being more likely to infect women if circumcised, goes to how many women did he have sex with in the last 24 hours. Lets not forget the new South African president, Jacob Zuma, has 3 wives and still finds it necessary to have unprotected sex with a “family friend” who is HIV positive and then takes a shower to clean his penis band claims he cant get HIV from her. He refuses to wear condoms and states that its beneath him to have sex with any woman that insists he wear a condom.
Circumcision has no bearing on that behavior and while you clearly are against it, I have experienced both sides of that debate having been circumcised as an adult. My biggest regret is not being done as an infant where the results are that much better, less pain and emotion involved. Prevention is better than cure. Most intactivists are either circumcised men that feel an injustice has been done to them or the women who have enjoyed a very happy fulfilled sexual life with a circumcised lover and then have to go to the other extreme and preach how wrong it is, yet very few can actually speak from firsthand experience on both sides. Ironically, there are many circumcised men that believe they have been robbed of something. Sure they have. They have been robbed of smegma and the smell it produces. They have been robbed of ever having to deal with foreskin issues (many will never admit that foreskins ever have issues) like phimosis, tearing while having sex and other ongoing and very painful problems. If you had your foreskin prodded and stretched and forced back by a doctor from time you were a toddler into your teens because of real foreskin problems, you may have a different take on it. An intactivist like that doctor would rather abuse that toddler and listen to him scream of pain every time he has a problem as he is trying to “help” him keep his little foreskin intact and ensure that he has genital integrity at any cost. This is not to mention the embarrassment of having to drop your drawers every time you see the doc and have him “work” on your penis. Mark, THAT is child abuse.
Steroid creams for penile skin tears are very dangerous that with constant use will almost guarantee that circumcision has to take place eventually as it has thinned out the skin to where it is paper thin.
Lets not forget about how tears in the foreskin promote the passing of HIV, AIDS and STD’s as they are raw open cuts that offer zero resistance to any of them. Intactivists NEVER bring up the real issues.
You quote latest news. You either forgot or ignored that later news than this is that for women circumcised men are better lovers. That is from the same sources that you used to quote your African statistics. News flash – July 20.
So for you to stand and quote all these quotes is one thing and not believe there is another side, but to have dealt with real foreskin issues is something that gives you a real life view on the situation. I know, because I was that kid that was abused by an Intactivist doctor who’s personal views completely clouded his professional responsibility. As such, I promote circumcision as a preventative measure and while not risk free, it sure beats the psychological pain and suffering I had to endure.
Oh! One other thing, I was born and raised in Africa as well. So being in the trenches and seeing what really happens at the circumcision schools and the deaths that occur (31 in South Africa this year so far and they are still in the season to circumcise) gives you a different perspective as well. Just like using the Star of David on the cake at the beginning of this article, they too have their tribal and religious beliefs that you are trampling on by promoting foreskins. I would like to see the circumcision rate at 100% because that will ensure much less disease. Back when the US circumcision rate was over 90%, sexual transmitted diseases were way less than they are today. That is a fact you cant dispute. Circumcision has been proven for over 2000 years by the Jewish population to have significant health benefits. I happen to be a Christian and believe it. So may not agree with me. The bible is not wrong. Never has been and never will be. Its THE book to live by and I do and will continue to do so!
Intactivists are known to be very radical and push their agenda down people’s throats till they choke them. Listen to how one sided they are and are guaranteed to rant and rave. They also never believe scientific or medical facts and downplay reality to push their agendas. And that is a FACT. You will see their responses…
My son was circumcised. But, then again, we are practicing Jews. I am indifferent to the cake picture, but wonder why you chose it over anything else?
My stance on anything to do with anyone else’s choices on what to do or not do with their children is simple: to each their own.
I just hope that people feel the same way when they hear that my husband and I chose to circumcise our son. It was NOT done in the hospital (he was born completely natural at a birthing center with a midwife and my husband present), but at the pediatricians office 8 days after he was born, with sufficient pain medication on the circumcision site. We were both present and he was breastfed before and after the procedure. He cried for less than 30 seconds total.
I am not an “advocate” for circumcision, nor am I against it. Like I said.. to each their own. Our was based on a religious factor.. and yes, an ancient one, at that, but we felt it was right for us and our family. That should be sufficient reason enough.
I really not trying to debate here but does a Jewish circumcision “count” if it’s done in the doctors office???
I thought they had to do the whole prayer/family/naming ceremony thing.
I can tell you one thing, circumcision does not prevent HIV. I’m a RN and I’ve taken care of numerous HIV+ patients. As far as I can recall, most (if not all) were circumcised. I’m not sure why the researchers say it’s a cure all in Africa, but in America it’s not stopping any diseases at all!
I think it’s prudent to let the child keep his foreskin and he can always choose a circumcision later in life if he wants. It doesn’t seem like a health care decision a parent should be making, at least in my humble opinion.
@Binary Blond– For some reason (and I shouldn’t admit this), I don’t equate circumcision for strict religious reasons with the circumcision on a mass scale “because I want him to look like me”. Most Americans don’t circumcise because of religious reasons, period. Most I know say they did/will do it because “dad is”, “he’ll be made fun of”, and “it’s dirty if you don’t”. All poor reasons, as I’m sure you’d agree.
I always say: If we’re going to do cosmetic surgery on newborns for no good reasons, lets also hack them up for other “useless” parts: the appendix, the baby toe.
As for the pic, I’ve written numerous other blogs on the circumcision topic, and you may be surprised to know (or maybe not) that there are relatively few photos for public use relating to circumcision. Plus, IME, this topic gets pretty heated (I’m surprised “NotStyro hasn’t commented here yet!), so I thought we might as well start off the discussion on a lighter note. Jen at CakeWrecks e-mailed it to me after I mentioned her blog in a circ blog about Penn & Teller’s show on the topic, ending a series on a lighter note then, too.
(I’m glad you had such a good birth, btw)
If circumcision does offer some protection then it should be a decision made by a sexually active adult male to have it done or not, just like getting a vasectomy is an elective procedure. Uncircumcised Europe having lower rates of stds and HIV than mostly circed USA kind of disproves circumcision as having some kind of protective effect in the western world. The CDC needs to be very careful to say this must be voluntary, but again, there is no real world evidence it works in advanced countries, actually the opposite seems to be the case as circed USA has more sexually transmitted disease than uncircumcised Europe and the UK.
Cheryl – Yes, it counts, even without the “ceremony thing”, as you call it. Without starting a religious conversation (and taking the comments off topic): God witnessed it, so it counts.
@C King: I’m sure the intactivists who have been so articulate before on my posts regarding circumcision could state this better, because clearly I’m a woman with no firsthand experience that compares to yours.
But I will say that doctors are beginning to learn or have already wised up in the care of intact boys. The medical community, which itself now states,
“benefits are not sufficient… to recommend that all infant boys be circumcised.”
http://www.aap.org/publiced/BR_Circumcision.html
They make it clear that it is a personal–not medical–decision.
But yes, nowadays they won’t pull back the foreskin on little guys; they’ll simply wait for it to retract on its own. Which for most males it does, because it simply takes “manual stimulation”, which boys are known to do once in a while. 😉
I speak not as a radical, but as a mother with two sons who are intact and from that experience. I also have a handful of friends happily, happily married to intact men, so I think that the “better in bed” thing is an urban myth, or in the very least, personal preference. (But I’m going to look into that study, which sounds intriguing.)
One place that many men (with varying degrees of experience in the circ department) commented was my first blog in a series of posts on this topic. You can read their comments there. They are incredibly insightful, even if you don’t agree with them.
http://eyr.lil.mybluehost.me/2009/02/23/11-reasons-not-to-circumcise/
(p.s. I’m sure that in the past 50 years, as circ rates decreased, there were probably MANY reasons for an increase in STDs, least of which is whether men are circumcised. Could we agree that society’s sexual norms have changed enormously over that time?)
@Binary Blond I think Cheryl meant, “Does it count statistically?” Do they count Jewish circumcisions that are outside a health care provider’s office in the rate of overall circumcisions? And actually, I don’t know the answer to that, but will check.
Just to address some things said above:
Juliet seems to give the circumcision/HIV studies some credibility. The studies are false and fraudulent. The driving force behind these studies is Robert Bailey who has been a staunch and radical circumcision advocate for more than 25 years. When little was known about HIV, Bailey was advocating circumcision to prevent it.
Medical science can accurately predict the course of an epidemic based on experience with other epidemics and mathematical models. For instance, we can predict based on a comparison with polio and the Salk vaccine. HIV has a low contagion rate and can only be transferred via exchange of tissue, usually semen, vaginal fluids or blood. The virus has an extremely short life span outside the body. Polio has a very high rate and can be transferred simply by touching a contaminated surface. That surface could have been contaminated days before. The polio virus also exists in the natural environment but HIV does not.
The Salk vaccine wiped the infection from the populace in a single generation with a 70% effective rate. If circumcision was 61% effective as Bailey and cohorts claim, HIV would have never been able to establish a beach head here and it would be as rare in The US as ebola, malaria and other tropical diseases. We would also see stark differences in the infection rates between populations that have high circumcision rates and those that don’t. These differences are NOT observed anywhere in the world. In fact, The US has the highest HIV infection rate of all the industrialized nations and is the only one that has a significant male circumcision rate. Further, the ethnic group with the highest circumcision rate, African Americans, also has the highest HIV infection rate with 48% of all infected males being African Americans and 80% of all infected females being African Americans.
Robert Bailey is a professor of epidemology at The University of Chicago and as a result of his profession would be well aware of this. This is prima facie evidence that the studies are false and fraudulent and conceived to deceive.
To C.King: African men care about death just as much as anyone else. Proof is shown by the numbers showing up at clinics for circumcisions thinking it will offer protection.
As for foreskin problems, fewer than 1% of males will ever experience these and the vast majority are easily addressed. Only 1 in 18,000 Swedish men go to their grave minus their foreskins and Sweden has an excellent public health system. Only 1 in 1,000 males will have phimosis that can not be resolved without surgery. Infant male circumcision is an extreme measure to prevent this. The genital infections males contract are the same exact infections females contract, the same bacteria, virals and fungals. These pathogens can not discern or discriminate between male and female cells. This means that the same exact medications that are effective in females are equally effective in males. When was the last time you heard of a female being circumcised to address these infections? The only reason it is used for males is because it is socially acceptable and far more profitable for the physician than simply diagnosing with a culture and prescribing the appropriate medications.
The steroid cream (betamethesone 0.05%) you say is used for skin tears is never used for skin tears. It is used for phimosis. Betamethesone is also not known to cause any problems much less dangerous problems. It is also only prescribed for short term use not exceeding 6 weeks. Only 1/10th of 1% of phimosis problems require betamethesone treatment and once successfully treated are permanently resolved with the possible exception of diabetics experiencing the problem in old age.
Your claim that circumcised men are better lovers is without merit. The researchers used a very biased African population for their study subjects that were guaranteed to get these results. That is clearly research bias so the results are false. Other studies in populations that do not have this bias have found entirely opposite results.
Your birth in Africa and your experience with the initiation schools also probably explains your bias. Men in America do not share this bias and those who retain their foreskin are almost universally pleased that they do. Also, your statement that there have been 31 deaths this year to date is inaccurate. There have actually been at least 52 deaths. This gives new meaning to “having a penis to die for!” Oh and by the way, every year there are more than 200 infant deaths in The US as a result of infant circumcision. This is a secret the medical profession carefully guards.
The AAP, The AMA and all other medical organizations disagree that there are significant health benefits to infant circumcision. Most are vocally against it. Australia is currently contemplating completely banning the practice with the support of the President of The Australian Medical Association. It has already been banned in public hospitals there.
Circumcision by Christians is not a Christian act. The New Testament clearly states it is a symbolic rejection of Christ. Read the scriptures from The Feast of Tabernacles in The Gospel of Luke to Paul’s ministerings to the Galatians. The message is clear. Circumcision is anti-Christian.
Binary Blonde: Do you realize you are taking a stance for freedom of choice but you took the choice away from your son? You chose for yourself a natural birth experience but then chose a very unnatural act of violation for your son. You say it was “right for our family” but the family will never use that penis. The only one it will affect is your son and he got no say or consideration in the decision.
Cheryl, you are correct. Approximately 80% of HIV patients in The US are circumcised. Did’t protect them and won’t protect anyone else.
Frank
Frank: When you are Jewish and understand that pact between a new family and God, please feel free to comment and I will take you seriously. Thanks.
Many, many Jews are questioning circumcision from many perspectives including religious, ethical, and spiritual as well as men, women, feminists, and parents. A variety of Jewish and Israeli groups are working to abolish circumcision also.
Cut: Slicing Through the Myths of Circumcision – A Movie by Eliyahu Ungar-Sargon
http://www.cutthefilm.com
How “Cut” Saved My Son’s Foreskin: A Movie Review By Diane Targovnik
http://www.beyondthebris.com/2011/05/how-cut-saved-my-sons-foreskin-movie.html
Jewish Circumcision Critics Integral in National Circumcision Debate
http://intactnews.org/node/84/1309957856/jewish-circumcision-critics-integral-national-circumcision-debate
Jewish Circumcision: An Alternative Perspective by Jenny Goodman, MD.
http://www.cirp.org/library/cultural/goodman1999/
On Alternative Rituals by Ronald Goldman, Ph.D.
http://www.jewishcircumcision.org/ritual.htm
*sigh* And now I’ve gone and done what I said I wouldn’t do. Which was to take these comments off topic… again. So, if anyone has anything to “point out” to me about my religious views on circumcision from this point on, please contact me privately as I will not be commenting (hijacking?) here further. There is a contact form on my blog. Though, I can’t promise I’ll reply, I’m a little busy putting my son at the center of my world.
To the Mohel Who Cut Me by Shea Levy
http://www.beyondthebris.com/2011/06/to-mohel-who-cut-me.html
On Circumcision, Authority and the Perpetuation of Abuse by Jonathan Friedman
http://www.beyondthebris.com/2011/06/on-circumcision-authority-and.html
Hi Frank. I knew I could count on you and Hugh7.
@Binary Blonde: For the record, you’re not hijacking the comments section. My blogs on circumcision have become stomping ground for people of all opinions on the matter and in the comments, there have been respectful arguments. Obviously, because the two aforementioned commenters have become familiar to me. (And I so appreciate them!) I thank you for opening up and contributing here.
For C King. If there are six African countries where circumcised men are more likely to be HIV+ than intact men, then how exactly is circumcision going to help? Someone doing what Jacob Zuma is going to get HIV anyway, and there’s evidence that men who are already HIV+ are 50% more likely to infect men if they’ve been circumcised.
I don’t have time to answer all your other points, but I disagree with almost everything you say. Just a couple of things.
The new testament of the Bible specifically says not to circumcise.
Europe doesn’t circumcise (except for Muslims and Jewish people), and they have significantly lower rates of STI’s (including HIV) than the USA.
I’m intact btw, and I’ve never had any of the problems you talk about.
For Binary Blonde: There are intelligent educated women who think they have a religious duty to have part of their daughters’ genitals cut off, and they will passionately defend the practice, and insist that they’re doing their daughters a favor. Doesn’t make it right.
There are also plenty of Jewish men who resent having been circumcised. I believe that everyone should be able to decide for themselves whether or not they want part of their genitals cut off.
C. King,
I can tell you from personal experience that circumcised men do not make better lovers – they make difficult lovers. All else being as equal as possible (no two people are 100% the same) I would chose the intact man hands down, every time.
Oh yeah, I’ve had both and know what I’m talking about. I’m not just whining – circumcised partners don’t come close being as good in bed as intact partners. I’m not saying circumcised men can’t be adequate – they can, it’s just that as groups, intact men are far better than circumcised men.
I’m sorry that from what you write it seems you were prematurely retracted by a doctor who was possibly a pedophile and that this led to embarrassment and consequent foreskin problems. However, I do not feel that the few and far between problems with the foreskin (and they are rare in males who haven’t had injuries to their penises at a young age by ill-informed adults), or even your own sad personal story justifies cutting off functional, healthy tissue from people who are too young to consent.
There was a great article in Mothering Magazine regarding the HIV/Circum. debate. I have three girls, so never had to get off the fence regarding the debate. That said, I fully support parental decisions on both sides. You have to do what you feel is right for your child and your family.
Ok, got my flame suit on 😉
Sorry, I’m sitting here nursing a baby with only one hand free to type, but someone (somewhere) said there’s “less pain and emotion involved” for infant circumcision than there is for adult circumcision. I don’t mean to be disrespectful, but WHY do we assume that a baby can’t feel the same extreme pain and discomfort AND emotion that an adult male is capable of? Then they’re expected to sit in their own urine and feces during the healing process. This just seems like an odd argument, yet I continue to hear it from those lobbying hard for instant infant circumcision.
It is not foreskin that spreads disease, it is sexual promiscuity that spreads it. I have not spread a disease because I have not slept with anyone but my wife of 25 years. As long as I keep my sexual practice within the realm of that union, I will never contract nor spread an STD.
The same argument is used by gun control advocates. Take away all guns because then murder and violent crime rates will go down. It is not the gun that spreads murder or violence…it is the heart of men that does.
This is a religious and moral matter very simply because personal responsibility for ones actions and choices is at the core of the problem. We always look at changing the peripherals; remove guns, remove foreskins, etc. when what needs to change is the hearts of men who commit acts contrary to the Will of God.
I feel this decision should be made by the mother of the child. My son was circumcised the day after he was born as were all of my sisters sons, except one. That nephew had many itchy infections and was not being cleaned properly as his mother was very squeamish. She did not understand that she was to keep clean that area constantly. All the other boys never experienced that trouble and my other sisters and I were only concerned with the first week of healing around where the foreskins had been removed. My husband and all of his 5 brothers were also circumcised but none even remember it at all, as they were babies too. No, we are not Jewish nor Muslim but Catholic and this was done strictly for health reasons too. I don’t understand how it would keep HIV at bay but I do see how it would prevent other types of bacteria from spreading, especially to women. Just keep the area very clean as you would keep you hands and mouth as clean as possible. If there is no water to clean with or to drink, I don’t see how anything is safe from bacteria…HIV does not wash away either. Bad oral hygiene and bad sexual habits most likely will help someone contract HIV and all the other diseases out there. I, for one am glad my hubby and son and now grandson have been circumcised.
I had an uncle who went through circumcision as an adult and he was in pain. I don’t know the reason why he did that but it was something he wanted done. I have heard other married women speak of their husbands who were not circumcised and wished that they were. It is a personal choice of the parents and maybe even an economical one. I believe it is a painful experience and we have yet to learn what the repercussions are. Child labor and delivery is a difficult thing and painful too but I don’t feel that pain today but I know my body is changed from that experience. I think having children in your twenties is the best time as a woman’s body usually can bounce back into shape but for some men to say they feel a lot more than a circumcised man makes me wonder, how do they know that?? My uncle never made such a statement (I doubt that he would have said that to anyone other than his own wife though) but who knows for sure if it is true?
c king goes on and on in the typical way of a circumcision supporter and quotes the usual old tired and not very accurate surveys we have all read about but misses the point that the highest number of hiv suffers in the west are in the u.s. where doubtless they were almost all circumcised already proving it does’nt really help significantly. one has also to point out that given his discription of the sex life of an ethnic african any protection if there is any will only be short lived and may just allow its owner a few more years worth of dirty cheating sex until the odds become stacked so high he succumbs to hiv anyway so all circumcision will do is prolong his activities spreading hiv for a bit longer .why the u.s. is so deeply involved in this is dubious in itself and smacks of secret agendas , without a doubt the routine circumcision of babies is unethical and unnecessary and physically damaging and i worry about the mentality of adults who dwell on this subject constantly .
The Jewish movement to interpret our covenant symbolically is increasing all over the world, both in Israel and America.
Challenging the Circumcision Myth by Jan Jaben-Eilon, Jerusalem Post, 4/10/11 (PDF)
http://lisabravermoss.com/uploads/Challenging_the_Circumcision_Myth.pdf
Cut: Slicing Through the Myths of Circumcision – A Movie by Eliyahu Ungar-Sargon
http://www.cutthefilm.com
Brit B’lee Milah (Covenant Without Cutting) Ceremony
http://www.nocirc.org/religion/Naming_ceremony.php
Being rational about circumcision and Jewish observance by Moshe Rothenberg, MSW
http://www.noharmm.org/rationaljew.htm
As a result of being circumcised at birth, I had a myth about uncircumcision since
I was 6 years old. Ten years ago, I got on one of those NOCIRC websites and saw a
list of the features lost due to circumcision. I had thought they left out something
on that list, so I e-mailed them to inform them they had forgotten something.
I told them they had neglected to mention the bulge like feature located toward
the rear (base) of the penis. Someone with the group replied that they didn’t know
what I was refering to. I explained to them again, this time in more detail. Later,
someone replied to me,” I’ve never been circumcised, and I still have no idea what
you are talking about.” Then He asked,” How do you know what all is normally
there if being circumcised is all you’ve known?” I e-mailed back,” I’ve seen it on
male dogs since I was a kid… You know?…It’s that bulge a couple of inches behind
the head that swells into a knot during an errection so a man can lock into his
woman. Your group left that one off of the list.” Needless to say, the folks had to
take some “time out” to explain to me that is not a part of human anatomy, and
never was. They told me,” You may have not had a way of knowing it untill now,
but that feature is found only on K-9 animals.” I was 47 years old at the time of
this conversation. When I was a kid, I never asked my mother about that because
my dad had a strict rule against talking about sex related matters. I had assumed
that if a male human baby is circumcised, that bulge will not develope. All the boys
I went to school with were circumcised and some of them also thought that bulge
should have been there. Some even thought we male humans have that bone in
the penis that carnivore animals have. Biologists and zoologists call that a baculum.
Another train of thought that had me convinced of the bulge myth was when I heard
of stories of men getting caught cheating with another man’s wife. Some men will
imeadiatly spring out of an open window and run away. And some men caught in
the act will still lay with the woman and try to explain things to the angry husband.
I had thought those were the uncircumcised men who were still locked into the
other man’s wife and can not pull free to run away.
What the nocirc group explained to me came with mixed emotion. I was relieved to
know that was not another thing I lost to circumcision. But after so many years of
thinking what I thought, I am to this day really dissapointed that we human men
and boys do not have that knot like bulge that male dogs, wolves, foxes and
cyotes all have.