Circumcision In The News - Nov 2008
Circumcision In The News - Nov 2008 Of all the choices that parents can make surrounding birthing options, none is more permanent or devastating than routine infant circumcision which is usually done for cultural, cosmetic or religious reasons. It is permanent, mutilates your helpless little boy, is a human rights violation, is not the parent's choice (unless you think it is a batterer's choice to beat his wife as well) and yes, there is a thriving market for infant foreskins. Let your son make his own choice about changing his body at 18 or at least wait and see if he is REALLY being made fun of in the locker room. In recent news: From Denmark: http://politiken.dk/newsinenglish/article598875.ece The focus of this article is on the human rights violation side of the issue. Wait until your little boy can make up his own mind about this permanently disfiguring practice. "While there are laws preventing female genital mutilation in Denmark, there are none preventing male genital mutilation. Demands for action." "There is a deep problem here. Society is in no doubt that the genital mutilation of girls is unacceptable - but we accept it with boys and have tolerated it for many years because it is linked to religion. It is gender discrimination from birth that we make a distinction between boys and girls," says Gulberg, who adds that circumcision should be banned for boys under 15 years of age. According to tradition, young Jewish boys are circumcised at the age of eight days." From the land of sick and disgusting: http://www.babble.com/mom/3-strange-uses-for-infant-foreskins/ Most anti-circumcision advocates are aware that foreskins are sold to cosmetics companies, a fact that most of those who circumcise their sons without any research would rather not know. Ignorance is bliss, right? Let's just ignore the fact that doctors and hospitals have an ulterior motive for performing this cruel and unjust procedure on our most helpless and innocent arrivals. Sick - sick - sick. From Gloria Lemay:Are we getting anywhere with ending circumcision?: Gloria is discussing her battle to end circumcision in B.C., Canada where the circumcision rate is only 10% but is no less an outrage as she notes. (US rates vary by region but are well over 50% in many parts of the country). On the decline yes, but every single baby who is mutilated unnecessarily is an absolute and utter tragedy. and my favorite, and older post from one smarmy mama: Click over to read the whole post which is just hysterical (in a tragic sort of way) and includes comebacks to all the traditional arguments for circumcision. It really makes you wonder if ANYONE thinks before doing this to their innocent boy. From on circing which takes from a Livejournal article: "Why? Because of the slight possibility an infection might occur with the foreskin? Might as well start hacking out tonsils and appendixes at birth too, since the rate of infection with those later in life is much higher. Might as well chop off every prepubescent girl's breasts to avoid the chance of breast cancer later. Why? Because it's easier to "do it now than later"? How do you know it'll be needed later? Or he'll want to remove it later? Don't parents realize an adult will get much better anesthetic than an infant? Why? Because it's just easier now? Yeah, performing an amputation without a patient's permission is pretty damn easy. Why? Because you think it's ugly? Best excuse ever. Way to call your baby's gentitalia "ugly". Stop placing your sexual preferences on your newborn baby, douchebag. Why? Because he may get made fun of? Considering that only 11% of newborn boys were circumcised in Canada in 2003, I doubt that. And if a kid was staring at one of my son's penises in the locker room I'd have better questions. Why? Because you have to clean it? A foreskin is wash and wear until it retracts. Jayden's hasn't even yet. And when it does it will probably take me 10 minutes to show him how to pull it back and wipe in the bath. OHHHHHH THE WORK."