Calling A Spade A Spade

Routine circumcision is not a medical issue, but a problem in the sociology and psychology of sex. Hedgehippie, you find circumcision distasteful because you are Canadian and have First Nations ancestry. Canada is much more anti-circ than the USA is. Moreover, even in the USA, men born in reservation hospitals are usually intact. American Indians have largely remained aloof from routine circ.



American couples choose to circumcise their boys because one or both of Mom and Dad are accustomed to seeing a bald penis. They don't want to be reminded of foreskin every time they change a boy's diaper or give him a bath. American parents fear that an intact boy will be bullied and ridiculed in the locker room. That girls will refuse to date their son when they discover that he is intact.



What I am about to tell you may strike you Canadians as incredible. Americans whose ancestors immigrated to the USA before 1920 have had phenomenally high circumcision rates. So high that tens of millions of Americans have never seen a natural penis in the flesh. I would guess that a majority of American women have never been intimate with an intact man. Many American women knew nothing at all about circumcision and foreskin until they took their first prenatal class. In my youth, textbook diagrams of the male equipment pretended that there was no such thing as foreskin. A generation ago, many USA maternity wards circumcised all baby boys without asking the mother. Sex ed did not talk about it. Growing up in provincial midwestern factory towns, I saw only 5-6 intact guys before college, and the lewd talk among us guys never mentioned circ. I suspect that most parents, mine included, never said anything about it to their children.



By 1960-80, the only middle class white people who had any awareness of the natural penis were the doctors and nurses who performed circumcisions in maternity wards. America is digging itself out from under this vast ignorance, and the difficulty of doing so is why intactivism has been a slow and difficult struggle. American medicine refuses to lead here. It insists that the foreskin is an optional body part, that parents are free to remove at will, without having to give a valid medical reason. This situation is ethically untenable.

Ignorant people like elprup can neve be reasoned with. They do not even have any logical, rational arguments to back up their position so continue to trot out the same old tired tripe. She also sounds like she is a man hater so will always want to do somwething vicious to any male she can, even a defenceless baby.

I am 67 years old ,,got my foreskin glad it wasant cut off,,,just got to keep clean,,,

Well said, DisabledHippie. The amazing thing is that despite the evidence, there are people out there who want to continue to mutilate babies. There is more than fifty years of sound medical knowledge debunking circumcision, not to mention the simple fact that millions of men live quite comfortably without being subjected to this operation.

Isn't it interesting how the Opposers turn everything around to be the opposite of what is true, to try to con one into doing things their way... Like, its actually cleaner to have the foreskin ON than to cut it off.

I'm glad that you had one of the few out there that wasn't primarily concerned with their wallet. It's good to know that such doctors that are truly interested in the welfare of their patients actually do still exist :)



Diesel

I have learned not to trust doctors in their advice either. They just want to make some money. Going on about how it's "cleaner" and other such bullshit...



**restrains himself from further ranting**



Diesel