Infant genetal mutilation is a blood sacrifice to the demon Yahwe.

[puzzlegal]

Do you want to talk about imposing cultural norms on infants that will brand them for life? Okay, let’s talk about language. You only get one milk tongue. What language you speak (and with what accent) not only brands you for life it determines who you can interact with. It is FAR harder to learn a language as an adult, and most people don’t have the capacity to do so really well, even with a lot of effort.

A snipped foreskin, or a tattooed hand is NOTHING compared to the impact of your mother tongue.

And wouldn’t the world be a better place if we all spoke the same language? We could do that in a generation, force every child to learn the same language. Maybe Han Chinese, just based on how many native speakers there already are. And hey, there are plausible arguments that it’s easier to do arithmetic in Chinese, so it may help the brain to learn Chinese rather than something clunkier like English. Yeah, they’d be cut off from their grandparents, maybe even from their parents, but think of how much better the world would be?

Do you support that? Why not? And you are going to get your panties tied in a knot over minor cosmetic surgery?

If you want to argue that male circumcision is a horrible and damaging thing, then sure, make your case. I think it’s damaging enough that I don’t think it should be done without a compelling medical or cultural reason. But yeah, I haven’t seen any argument that it’s so bad it should be reserved for life-saving situations. And yes, I think it’s relevant that the vast majority of men who were circumcised as infants are okay with it having been done.

But if you just want to argue that parents shouldn’t make irreversible decisions for their children, then I think you haven’t thought very hard about what parenting entails, and about just how many irreversible decisions parents routinely make for their children. Most of the big ones don’t involve the child’s body, but even there – whether to vaccinate, what foods you expose your children to, what sort of nutrition you provide, what physical skills you teach them when they are young (skiing? swimming?, piano?) – those all have permanent impacts on the child’s life, and can limit their choices as adults. And the ones that aren’t about the body – what language you teach them, what religious tradition (or lack thereof) you bring them up in, whether they grow up comfortable with dogs, or with strangers, … In general, I think those have more far-reaching consequences than the physical ones. At least, the physical ones that are currently allowed in US society.

[Blalron]

Parents are rarely put into a situation where they have to explain circumcision to their child (at least secular parents). It just doesn’t come up in conversation. The parents themselves are mostly hazy on why they did it, but I’d bet dollars to donuts that they didn’t spend hours pouring through medical journals weighing the pros and cons or anything like that. Although “hygiene” is the number one stated reason in surveys of parents, the most predictive factor is the circumcision status of the father.

In instances in which the father of the expected baby was circumcised, 81.9% of respondents were in favour of pursuing elective circumcision. When the father of the expected child was not circumcised, 14.9% were in favour of pursuing elective circumcision

I’ve been hearing some rumblings in the Intactivist community of a radical new protest strategy: Target events where parents and children interact in public, like outside of schools and at Little League games. Hold up signs or grab a megaphone “HEY KIDS, ASK YOUR PARENTS ABOUT CIRCUMCISION! WAS PART OF YOUR PENIS CUT OFF AS A BABY?”

I don’t have the balls to do something like that, but I’m curious to see how that would play out. It forces parents to justify their decision to their children, something they seldom have to do. Perhaps it will shame them into changing their behavior if they have more children.

[Novelty_Bobble]

@puzzlegal

Do you want to talk about imposing cultural norms on infants that will brand them for life? Okay, let’s talk about language.

I’m happy if any cultural norm that I “impose” on my child is reversible. Languages can learned or not learned at any stage in life. Used or not used. Accents can be changed. I’m for giving people the freedom to choose what they want to do with their body and not causing them irreversible changes that they didn’t request. They’ll get exposure to their mother tongue to get them started, what they choose to do after that is up to them.

A snipped foreskin, or a tattooed hand is NOTHING compared to the impact of your mother tongue.

A language is not a body part.

And wouldn’t the world be a better place if we all spoke the same language?

No

We could do that in a generation, force every child to learn the same language. Maybe Han Chinese, just based on how many native speakers there already are.

maybe not use the concept of “force” at all? I think a totalitarian approach to language or religion is the precisely the wrong way to go.

And hey, there are plausible arguments that it’s easier to do arithmetic in Chinese, so it may help the brain to learn Chinese rather than something clunkier like English. Yeah, they’d be cut off from their grandparents, maybe even from their parents, but think of how much better the world would be?

cut off? is that a pun? But in any case I don’t accept your premise that either the world would be better place or that it is necessarily a bad thing to be cut off by a grandparent just because you can speak Chinese. That doesn’t sound like a grandparent worthy of the title.

Do you support that? Why not?

nope, give people maximum opportunity to do what they choose to do. If someone wants to proactively choose to be circumcised as an act of religious or cultural solidarity then I support them 100%

And you are going to get your panties tied in a knot over minor cosmetic surgery?

because it is a body part, it is irreversible, it is religious and cultural branding and it is not freely chosen by the person at provides negligible benefit if any at all. And “minor” is relative.

If you want to argue that male circumcision is a horrible and damaging thing, then sure, make your case. I think it’s damaging enough that I don’t think it should be done without a compelling medical or cultural reason.

I don’t think “cultural” reasons can ever be compelling enough to justify making permanent cosmetic changes to a babies body. That way madness lies.

But yeah, I haven’t seen any argument that it’s so bad it should be reserved for life-saving situations. And yes, I think it’s relevant that the vast majority of men who were circumcised as infants are okay with it having been done.

Utterly irrelevant. I’d be surprised if they didn’t express contentment with the only body that they’d ever known, how can they offer an opinion any other way?

But if you just want to argue that parents shouldn’t make irreversible decisions for their children, then I think you haven’t thought very hard about what parenting entails, and about just how many irreversible decisions parents routinely make for their children. Most of the big ones don’t involve the child’s body,

Is it that astonishing to state that parents should avoid making irreversible decisions when it is not necessary?

but even there – whether to vaccinate, what foods you expose your children to what sort of nutrition you provide, what physical skills you teach them when they are young (skiing? swimming?, piano?) – those all have permanent impacts on the child’s life, and can limit their choices as adults. And the ones that aren’t about the body – what language you teach them, what religious tradition (or lack thereof) you bring them up in, whether they grow up comfortable with dogs, or with strangers, … In general, I think those have more far-reaching consequences than the physical ones. At least, the physical ones that are currently allowed in US society.

Sure, raising kids is equal parts joy, terror and guilt. I try to navigate it by maximising their life chances and skills wherever possible. Giving them choices and the ability to think for themselves.
One thing that never enters into my head is whether they’d be better off with parts of their genitals removed. Your reasoning seems like a classic case of “whataboutery”

Again, I state it as clearly as I can. Religions or cultures that demands cosmetic medical procedures on babies and punish those that don’t have it done are on shaky moral and ethical grounds. I’d invoke the Groucho Marx maxim here.

[Blalron]

@puzzlegal

Do you want to talk about imposing cultural norms on infants that will brand them for life? Okay, let’s talk about language. You only get one milk tongue. What language you speak (and with what accent) not only brands you for life it determines who you can interact with. It is FAR harder to learn a language as an adult, and most people don’t have the capacity to do so really well, even with a lot of effort.

It’s difficult, but it’s not impossible. It is literally impossible, with current medical knowledge, to bring back the foreskin. The unique anatomical features, such as the Frenulum and the Ridged Band, are gone. The gliding mechanism is gone, which alters the mechanics of sex and masturbation.

[puzzlegal]

@Novelty_Bobble

I’m happy if any cultural norm that I “impose” on my child is reversible. Languages can learned or not learned at any stage in life. Used or not used. Accents can be changed. I’m for giving people the freedom to choose what they want to do with their body and not causing them irreversible changes that they didn’t request. They’ll get exposure to their mother tongue to get them started, what they choose to do after that is up to them.

Very few people can successfully master new phonemes after puberty. Yes, some can, but most can’t. And your first language helps organize your brain. It really is an irreversible choice, and an important one.

Some people can surgically reconstruct a foreskin, too. I bet that’s at least as common as being able to learn a new language like a native.

And did you teach your infant two languages? People who grow up bilingual have different brain architecture than those who don’t. Just because you can’t see that body part doesn’t mean it’s not important.

@Novelty_Bobble

A language is not a body part.

No, but I think it is more important than many body parts, including earlobes and foreskins.

@Novelty_Bobble

…
Is it that astonishing to state that parents should avoid making irreversible decisions when it is not necessary?

Sure, raising kids is equal parts joy, terror and guilt. I try to navigate it by maximising their life chances and skills wherever possible. Giving them choices and the ability to think for themselves.
One thing that never enters into my head is whether they’d be better off with parts of their genitals removed. Your reasoning seems like a classic case of “whataboutery”

Again, I state it as clearly as I can. Religions or cultures that demands cosmetic medical procedures on babies and punish those that don’t have it done are on shaky moral and ethical grounds. I’d invoke the Groucho Marx maxim here.

Adult circumcisions are different from infant circumcisions. They are more traumatic (physically, and probably psychologically.) No one can choose of his own will to get a missed infant circumcision. You are making that choice for your child either way. It’s an irreversible choice either way. We all try to maximize our children’s choices. For the children of Jews, “being a suitable husband for another Jew” is an important choice. Even “being a suitable husband for another Jew without having to undergo a painful and (temporarily) crippling procedure”. (As I mentioned above, infants don’t have sex, don’t do heavy physical activity, and are “crippled” by their age. They don’t actually miss out on anything while they recover from being circumcised.)

Yes, being a parent includes a lot of terror and guilt, as well as the joy. There are things I did as a parent that I deeply regret. I was doing my best, and trying to do what was right for my kid and my family, and I failed. Yes, there’s some guilt over some of my choices. But circumcising my infant son isn’t one I regret or feel guilty about.

[puzzlegal]

@Blalron

It’s difficult, but it’s not impossible. It is literally impossible, with current medical knowledge, to bring back the foreskin. The unique anatomical features, such as the Frenulum and the Ridged Band, are gone. The gliding mechanism is gone, which alters the mechanics of sex and masturbation.

For most people, it is literally impossible to develop native fluency in a new language. It is literally impossible for me. There are phonemes I can’t hear, and others that I can hear if I think about it hard enough, but can’t reproduce. I am typical in that way. Our brains prune out “unnecessary” information to make the important information easier to process. Our brains are literally shaped by our language. Just because you can’t see that (without a functional MRI) doesn’t make it not real.

[puzzlegal]

@Blalron

…I’ve been hearing some rumblings in the Intactivist community of a radical new protest strategy: Target events where parents and children interact in public, like outside of schools and at Little League games. Hold up signs or grab a megaphone “HEY KIDS, ASK YOUR PARENTS ABOUT CIRCUMCISION! WAS PART OF YOUR PENIS CUT OFF AS A BABY?”

I don’t have the balls to do something like that, but I’m curious to see how that would play out. It forces parents to justify their decision to their children, something they seldom have to do. Perhaps it will shame them into changing their behavior if they have more children.

I’m sorry that you were hurt by being circumcised. As I hinted at above, my kids were hurt by some of the choices I made. No parent will make all the right choices – in large part because each child is different, and what’s good for one child may be bad or useless for another, and what’s harmless for one child might be crippling for another.

But surely you can see that shaming children whose parents have ALREADY MADE THE DECISION and probably are past the age of having infants just hurts people. How many little boys do you want to emotionally scar to prevent a handful of circumcisions?

[Blalron]

Virtually anything you can say about cutting boys, you can also say about cutting girls. The Shafi school of Sunni Islam considers FGM (removal of the clitoris) to be obligatory, not optional. But it’s still against the law in the United States. Those poor Shafis. We’re impinging on their religious freedom. If you outlaw genital cutting, only outlaws will cut genitals!

[Blalron]

Let’s look at another government intrusion on religious freedom: polygamy. In the 19th century, the Mormon church maintained the position that polygamy was an essential part of their doctrine, and should be practiced whenever possible. The United States government aggressively intervened, and forced them to abandon the practice. They imprisoned prominent polygamous leaders, and confiscated church assets. Finally, in 1890, the LDS church finally caved in. Church President Wilford Woodruff supposedly received a revelation from God that they should abandon the practice.

Yes, there absolutely were some Mormon splinter groups that continued to practice plural marriage and continue to the present day. But they are a very tiny minority. There are presently 16 million Mormons in the world, and only about 37,000 practice polygamy. Rounding down to the nearest number, that’s basically zero.

I have absolute confidence that under sufficient pressure, the Jewish community would cave. Rabbis would start receiving “revelations from God” that tell them to abandon circumcision. 50 years later, the only people who would still care would be a handful of elderly Rabbis in nursing homes. 100 years from now the number who care would be approximately 0%.

[senoy]

@Blalron

Let’s look at another government intrusion on religious freedom: polygamy. In the 19th century, the Mormon church maintained the position that polygamy was an essential part of their doctrine, and should be practiced whenever possible. The United States government aggressively intervened, and forced them to abandon the practice. They imprisoned prominent polygamous leaders, and confiscated church assets. Finally, in 1890, the LDS church finally caved in. Church President Wilford Woodruff supposedly received a revelation from God that they should abandon the practice.

Yes, there absolutely were some Mormon splinter groups that continued to practice plural marriage and continue to the present day. But they are a very tiny minority. There are presently 16 million Mormons in the world, and only about 37,000 practice polygamy. Rounding down to the nearest number, that’s basically zero.

I have absolute confidence that under sufficient pressure, the Jewish community would cave. Rabbis would start receiving “revelations from God” that tell them to abandon circumcision. 50 years later, the only people who would still care would be a handful of elderly Rabbis in nursing homes. 100 years from now the number who care would be approximately 0%.

The Mormons though are unique in that they have a still living prophet who directly relays the will of ‘God’ to the people. Technically, Russ Nelson could wake up tomorrow with a bug up his butt that polygamy was still on and black people still aren’t able to hold the priesthood and it would be so. Shoot, he could decide that the only color Mormons are allowed to wear is cyan and voting Democrat is a crime against God and so mote it be. Most religions and certainly no major ones other than Mormonism work that way. Judaism certainly doesn’t.

[Novelty_Bobble]

@puzzlegal

Very few people can successfully master new phonemes after puberty. Yes, some can, but most can’t. And your first language helps organize your brain. It really is an irreversible choice, and an important one.

nonsense, can adults learn another languages? yes. And millions do.

Some people can surgically reconstruct a foreskin, too. I bet that’s at least as common as being able to learn a new language like a native.

What leads you to think that?

And did you teach your infant two languages? People who grow up bilingual have different brain architecture than those who don’t. Just because you can’t see that body part doesn’t mean it’s not important.

By that logic you can equate the parental choice (or not) to provide any of billions of potential environmental influences with that of a cosmetic procedure. I can see why you are so eager to do so. I don’t buy it for a single second and don’t accept that equivalence.

No, but I think it is more important than many body parts, including earlobes and foreskins

and why stop there? Any other bits suitable for removal? You are on a slippery slope from the start and I believe I recognise the fluid that is making it so slippery.

No one can choose of his own will to get a missed infant circumcision.

And with that tortured logic I’m out. I can’t compete with that.

But circumcising my infant son isn’t one I regret or feel guilty about.

I understand why you refuse to consider that you did the wrong thing because who would want to admit to themselves that they caused harm to their child for no good reason?

Your attitude depresses me but doesn’t surprise me. Your language example is going nowhere and smacks of desperation so I’m going to leave it there.

[cmkeller]

Blalron:

I have absolute confidence that under sufficient pressure, the Jewish community would cave. Rabbis would start receiving “revelations from God” that tell them to abandon circumcision. 50 years later, the only people who would still care would be a handful of elderly Rabbis in nursing homes. 100 years from now the number who care would be approximately 0%.

Given that Jews have been persecuted across the globe for millennia with various aspects of Jewish practice banned by temporal authorities and the practice of Judaism still remains strong, I’d bet the over on your prediction.

[puzzlegal]

@Blalron

Virtually anything you can say about cutting boys, you can also say about cutting girls. The Shafi school of Sunni Islam considers FGM (removal of the clitoris) to be obligatory, not optional. But it’s still against the law in the United States. Those poor Shafis. We’re impinging on their religious freedom. If you outlaw genital cutting, only outlaws will cut genitals!

I’ve already said in this thread that I’ve learned that there are some forms of FGM that are mild enough that I think they should be allowed. Cutting off the clitoris crosses that line. So would cutting off the penis. Yes, I think severity matters.

@Blalron

…Rabbis would start receiving “revelations from God” that tell them to abandon circumcision…

That’s not how Judaism works. Perhaps you are confusing Jews with Mormons? Would individual parents decide it wasn’t worth the legal risk to circumcise? Yes, no doubt many would. But no, there would be no “revelations from God delivered through rabbis”. That you suggest that makes me think you have no clue what you are talking about.

@Novelty_Bobble

nonsense, can adults learn another languages? yes. And millions do.

With a native accent? Almost none can.

@Novelty_Bobble

By that logic you can equate the parental choice (or not) to provide any of billions of potential environmental influences with that of a cosmetic procedure. I can see why you are so eager to do so. I don’t buy it for a single second and don’t accept that equivalence.

BINGO! Yes, that is exactly my point. You may not buy it, but as a parent, I think it is manifestly obvious.

@Novelty_Bobble

and why stop there? Any other bits suitable for removal? You are on a slippery slope from the start and I believe I recognise the fluid that is making it so slippery.

For any choice, you should do a cost-benefit analysis. How will this help my child? How will it hurt my child? Is that a slippery slope? Okay. In the real world we navigate slippery slopes all the time, and few choices are completely black and white.

@Novelty_Bobble

I understand why you refuse to consider that you did the wrong thing because who would want to admit to themselves that they caused harm to their child for no good reason?

Your attitude depresses me but doesn’t surprise me. Your language example is going nowhere and smacks of desperation so I’m going to leave it there.

I’ve said outright that I made child-rearing choices that turned out to be wrong. Why wouldn’t I admit it in this case?

Here, I’ll even give an example. We spanked our kids. It was less controversial then than now. I was spanked, my husband was spanked, we turned out okay. We tried the “time out” thing that that was clearly an abject failure, and not going to do anyone any good.

In retrospect, it was a mistake to spank our daughter, and I really regret having done so. We didn’t spank her viciously, or in anger. We didn’t do anything that was considered inappropriate at the time. But I think it damaged her psyche. We also spanked our son, and he turned out okay. In fact, there’s a tiny change that spanking him saved his life. (I spanked his the last time he ran into traffic, and that DID succeed in teaching him not to do so, unlike earlier attempts.) But it was harmful for my daughter, and if I could undo that damage, I would.

[Ramira]

@Blalron

The Shafi school of Sunni Islam considers FGM (removal of the clitoris) to be obligatory, not optional. B

That is simply an incorrect repeating the falsehood via exageration by the biased texts.

The Shafi regard some form of the female circumcision as to be done, but it is not a Shafi position that the removal of the clitoris is obligatory - that is the interpretation in the East Africa and the Egypt. The Asian Shafi’ do not apply removal.

The same wikiIslam “scholarship” of the half-understood and the deliberately bigoted scholarship will claim the Maleki tradition approves when in fact the dominant scholarhsip (in the arabic without need for the western interpretation) in the Magheb does not approve at all - it is the sub-saharans who do.

[Broomstick]

@Blalron

I have absolute confidence that under sufficient pressure, the Jewish community would cave. Rabbis would start receiving “revelations from God” that tell them to abandon circumcision. 50 years later, the only people who would still care would be a handful of elderly Rabbis in nursing homes. 100 years from now the number who care would be approximately 0%.

Wow.

You are completely ignorant about how Judaism works.

Rabbis are NOT like Christian priests or prophets. Judaism doesn’t have a Pope or equivalent authority. There are no “revelations” and those that make that claim are rejected as false prophets.

And sufficient pressure? What pressure do plan to apply? Roman Emperor Hadrian applied the death penalty and it didn’t work. You planning on something worse than that?

[puzzlegal]

He wants to shame little boys and to make the boys feel guilty for their parents being thrown in prison, if I read his posts correctly. Not quite the death penalty, but pretty damn nasty.

[Blalron]

Danish study finds link between infant circumcision and autism risk. The paper speculates that the pain and trauma of circumcision could be having an adverse affect on neonates brains.

Ritual circumcision and risk of autism spectrum disorder in 0- to 9-year-old boys: national cohort study in Denmark.

Discussion
Ritual circumcision among Danish boys is linked to an overall 46–62% increase in ASD risk in the first 10 years of life, with the upper risk estimate obtained after restriction to the period with the most complete data. More strikingly, risk was 80–83% increased in the first 0–4 years of life, an increase that was restricted to infantile autism.

[Alessan]

OK, who chose “Linked to Autism” on their Pseudoscience Bingo card?

[clairobscur]

@puzzlegal

Some people can surgically reconstruct a foreskin, too. I bet that’s at least as common as being able to learn a new language like a native.

No, it’s not common at all, in fact. Foreskin surgical reconstruction isn’t a completely trivial surgery, and more importantly it doesn’t restore the functions lost by circumcision nor solve the sexual problems people might have as a result of circumcision. The dammages done cannot be repaired. So, it’s only useful for people who have a psychological problem with lacking a foreskin and/or want it back for cosmetic reasons. Otherwise, it’s useless and not recommanded.

[Blalron]

@Novelty_Bobble

I understand why you refuse to consider that you did the wrong thing because who would want to admit to themselves that they caused harm to their child for no good reason?

The circumcision debate shows, in a microcosm, a very depressing fact of human nature: facts don’t change people’s minds, at least when it comes to “core” beliefs that are a part of someone’s cultural or religious upbringing and instilled into people as children. There’s an absolutely brilliant cartoon that elucidates on this.

In fact, there’s even “the backfire effect” where people cling even more strongly to their beliefs when presented with opposing information. There’s an area of the brain called the Amygdala, the fear center, that responds when presented with threatening information. This is the same area that activates to physical threats. When the amygdala is activated, the logical reasoning parts of the brain go quiet.

The only person in this thread who appears to have changed their position is Coffeecat, who has now expanded his support of genital cutting to include girls. :eek:

I fear I’m simply tilting at windmills here. This thread could go to a thousand posts, dozens more citations posted and ignored. If there’s anyone lurking this thread who has changed their minds from being pro-circumcision to against circumcision, send me a PM. If I can save even one innocent baby from this cruel practice, my efforts will not have been in vain.