Sorry. But isn’t saliva quite antibiotic? Or is that just my own on my own glans? I’ve never felt any drawbacks in kissing mouthes for instance…
(Not that it seems wise sucking babies’ penii in the current political climate…and they call those people fundamentalists…)
Yeah, and boy scout leaders, and Catholic priests. The list goes on and on.
I can think of at least one less clean part of the body. And thank god they don’t stick it in there to clean it off.
IIRC - sorry, no cite - saliva is generally beneficial when applied to small wounds. It promotes coagulation. That is why small children who cut their fingers, say, will instinctively put their fingers in their mouths.
AFAIK circumcision is not required of adult converts to Judaism. If an adult were to be circumcised, I think it’s safe to say that someone sucking some blood out would be the least of his concerns.
It is indeed, at least for converts to Orthodox and Conservative Judaism. I’ll let more knowledgeable members fill us all in on the gory details.
[SHUDDERS]
So glad I’m an atheist…
It doesn’t sound very debateable to me. How can you suck a baby’s penis and not be charged with molestation?
alterego:
Because it’s one little “suck” to draw blood, not a freaking blowjob. I think it’s safe to say that neither party is involved for sexual gratification’s sake.
As I see it, there are two main reasons why molestation is a bad thing. (I’m sure we all agree child molestation is morally wrong, I just think breaking it down will help make it clear whether using ones lips to remove blood after circumcision is also morally wrong.) The reasons I thought of are:
(1) It’s seriously traumatic for the child.
(2) You’re exploiting an “innocent” child for your own sexual gratification. (I put innocent in quotes because I’m not sure how I’d define the term, not because I’m suggesting that a child isn’t really innocent.) This boils down to (A) it’s a act selfish, (B) you’re not respecting them as an individual © you’re exposing them to something they (or there parents) may not want them exposed to.
I think it obvious that 2(A) isn’t the case. With regard to 2©, an infant will have no opinion on whether your lips should touch their penis, and their parents obviously approve. With regard to 1, it’s clearly not traumatic (you can argue whether circumcision itself is, but in any case they won’t remember it.) So all that leaves is 2(B). Are you saying that performing a religious ritual in which a person’s lips come in contact with the infant’s penis, even with the full approval of the parents, is somehow disrespectful of the child?
It’s clear (to me, anyway) that metzizah isn’t remotely equivalent to molestation from an ethical standpoint.
I have a feeling the law, one way or the other, is very sided and clear on this point. Which is another reason I don’t think its very debateable.
Anyway, I am thinking of it this way: The baby is now a grown man, does not identify with his faith, finds out what happened to him when he was a baby and is a) disgusted and b) traumatized and c) wants to go to court.
Hmm . . . in light of this post, I think perhaps I misinterpreted your previous one. If you’re saying it’s legally equivalent to molestation, I’m not qualified to argue one way or the other. I thought you were suggesting they’re morally equivalent, i.e. the mohel deserves to be charged.
On the other hand, there’s the Afghani custom of kissing a child’s penis…
Heh. While in law school, my husband joked that he and a friend were going to file a class-action lawsuit on behalf of multilated men everywhere.
Anyway, thanks for the factual answer Zev, beofre this thread degenerates into a debate over circumcision.
Wow.
The things you learn here.
However, considering the Jewish abhorrance of blood as “unclean,” this practice seems to be unique when compared to, say Koshering, or strictures placed on menstruating women.
A man goes to New York and realizes he’s some how broken his watch.
He’s walking down the street and finds a shop with a window full of watches and clocks. Inside, there’s an old Jewish rabbi bent over a book, lost in his studies. The man with the watch approaches the storekeeper, “I need to have my watch fixed.”
“I’m sorry,” the old man answers, “I can’t help you.” He goes back to studying.
“What do you mean you can’t help me?” the man with the watch is angry, “Are you saying you don’t want my business?”
The old man glances up and says with a tired sigh, “Look, I’m sorry, but there’s nothing I can do.”
“There’s nothing you can do?!” The guy with the watch is now livid. “This is a watch shop. My watch is broken. I want you to fix it, now!”
Without looking up, the old man says, “I’m not a watch repairman, I’m a mohel.”
“What in the world is a mohel?” The man exclaims.
So the old man explains the process to the out of towner.
“Ok,” says the man, “Then what are all those timepieces doing in the window?”
“Look, mister,” the old man answers, “If you performed circumcisions for a living, what would you put in the window?”
Anecdotal evidence:
I have been to two brit milot (Hebrew for the circumsion ritual/ceremony) in the last 13 months. At neither of these occasions, in which the circumcision is performed in full view of the attendees, did I see the mohel put the baby’s penis in his mouth.
YMMV.
;j
I don’t get it? Is there anything special about clocks? Or does he just not want to put up foreskins?
More anecdotal evidence to one of the tangents of this thread (adult conversion):
When my wife and I were married, she wanted us to be married by an Orthodox Rabbi. I was fine with it. The Rabbi interviewed me. As it turns out, I was circumcised, but not ritually. I was circumised at the hospital right after I was born. To the Rabbi, therefore, I had not entered into the covenant of Abraham and was therefore not completely Jewish according to Orthodox law. He urged me to have an adult version of the Brit Milah. He did mention that part of the ceremony involved making a small cut in my penis where my foreskin used to be attached. I politely declined. If he had mentioned that the mohel gets to put my penis in his mouth, I probably would still have declined.