Menstuff® has compiled information, books, and resources on the issue of circumcision. For clarity, circumcision is the surgical removal of foreskin. Clidoridectomy, the surgical removal of clitoris. Infibulation, the surgical removal of the labia, then suturing. Baby foreskin is some of the purest skin available, so medical labs pay hospitals big bucks for tiny penis-hoods, as much as $20,000. Photo upper left is by Jean-Claude Bouvier, on the right "How Could You" to such a beautiful expression of God's love? by Wayne Miller.
Note. A press release
regarding information on research that was done in India
reports that "They had severe methodological flaws. In
India, Muslim men are circumcised, but Hindu men are not
circumcised. The two groups studied came from different
religions and cultures." And, "the incidence of HIV
infection in the United States, where most men are
circumcised, is four times higher than the incidence of HIV
infection in Europe where most men are not circumcised." For
. Also, check circumcision Books,
Newsbytes - collection of articles on the subject.
American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)
Lied About Circumcision's saying it does not reduce sexual
sensation in the penis
How Do Girls Get Circumcised?
What they don't tell you...........
Something to think about:
We have a large list of Links/Resources,
tapes. Here are some of the first sites you should check
Over a million boys are sexually mutilated each year - and this is just in the U.S.
US Circumcision Incidence see www.cirp.org/library/statistics/USA/
Normal versus Circumcised: U.S. Neonatal Male Genital
Ratio By Dan Bollinger, Revised: April, 22, 2003
Normal versus Circumcised: U.S. Neonatal Male Genital
Ratio By Dan Bollinger, Revised: February, 2004
cir-cum-ci'sion: to cut off all or part of the foreskin of the penis.
It usually refers to the surgical removal of the loose fold of skin, the foreskin, that covers and protects the glans of the penis (glan means acorn in Greek). Sometimes done as a religious ceremony, as with Jews and Moslems, or, when the penis is slit the whole length of the urethra, as an attempt to make male genitals more like females, as in Australia and Africa as a puberty rite. The United States is the only remaining country to continue the practice of routine circumcision for non-religious and non-medical reasons on the majority of its new born boys. In fact, 80% of the world's male population is not circumcised. Circumcision began in the English-speaking countries during the mid-1800's supposedly to prevent masturbation which was believed to cause many diseases. For women, the last recorded clitoridectomy was performed in the U.S. as late as 1955 on a 12-year-old girl. (The clitoridectomy of the 12-year-old girl was performed at Baltimore Women's Hospital in 1950. I have a copy of the doctor's diagnosis, "Hypertrophic clitoris from excessive masturbation." Of course, if genitals became enlarged from masturbating, we'd all be walking around with our genitals in a wheel barrel. That same year, a 3-year-old North Dakota girl was also clitoridectomized for touching herself "down there.")
It is still practiced, often as a religious act, in other cultures. A US federal law and a number of state laws have outlawed female genital cutting, which sets the standard, while at the same time driving the practice underground among immigrants, especially from Africa, who continue the practice in the US. Following the law, an aggressive educational program must be initiated.
Yet, there are no such laws for male children and 60% of all male children in the U.S. are still circumcised compared to .4% in England. To remove the foreskin for hygiene is no more logical than pulling teeth instead of cleaning them. The foreskin is a normal, healthy and necessary body part.
The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American College
of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the American
Pediatric Urologic Society state the following:
"Circumcision of the male neonate cannot be considered an
essential component of adequate total health care."
Furthermore, the American Academy of Pediatrics states "A
program of education leading to continuing good personal
hygiene would offer all the advantages of routine
circumcision without the attendant surgical risk."
Audio from ARC's Charleston, South Carolina Debate Victory Released Today Showing AAP Lied About Circumcision's Effects
Filmmaker Brendon Marotta, director of the upcoming movie "American Circumcision," has very generously worked with ARC to prepare a release by Gotnews.com of a surreptitiously recorded audio clip from October 19, 2013, the second day of the Charleston, South Carolina debate between J. Steven Svoboda and Dr. Michael Brady of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP). The audio clip demonstrates that the AAP has lied in the past when claiming that circumcision does not reduce sexual sensation in the penis.
The moderator referred to below and in the Gotnews.com release is Dr. Robert Sade, who organized the Twentieth Pitts Lectureship in Medical Ethics, held on October 18-19, 2013 at the Medical University of South Carolina in Charleston, in which Dr. Brady effectively conceded defeat on the second day, stating that he was unable to respond to any of our arguments.
Dr. Sade also guest edited the issue of the Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics in which the proceedings of the event were published including the article by Svoboda, Peter W. Adler, and Robert S. Van Howe, titled, "Circumcision is Unethical and Unlawful" (http://arclaw.org/resources/articles/circumcision-unethical-and-unlawful).Two other physicians on the Charleston panel told Svoboda that they changed their positions to pro-intact based on the evidence we presented.
The GotNews release is available at http://gotnews.com/breaking-leaked-audio-shows-doctors-association-lying-effects-circumcision-penis/.
To support the work of Attorneys for the Rights of the Child, please visit arclaw.org/donate
BREAKING: Leaked Audio Shows Doctors? Association LYING About Effects Of Circumcision On The Penis
Nov 12, 2016 by Charles C. Johnson
Why are doctors lying about the effects of circumcision on the penis?
Written by Brendan Marotta, director of the upcoming documentary film 'American Circumcision.'
Leaked audio from a panel at the 2013 Pitts Lectureship in Medical Ethics at the Medical University of South Carolina reveals that the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) knows circumcision reduces sexual feeling in the penis, contradicting their public position.
The physicians? group has previously said that circumcision does not affect sexual sensation. Now, at a private meeting featuring members of the American Academy of Pediatrics task force on circumcision, a moderator states circumcision does reduce sensitivity, and that ?reduction of sensation is very valuable to many men? because it might allow them to last longer in bed. Take a listen yourself:
Angel Alonso, an uncircumsized man in the audience, replies that lasting longer in bed is something men can work on, and points out the contradiction: how can the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) say publicly that circumcision does not reduce sensation, and privately that reduction of sensation is one of the benefits?
This audio comes from the open comment period of the conference, where Dr. Michael Brady and Douglas Diekema of the AAP task force on circumcision spoke with Steven Svoboda from Attorney?s for the Rights of the Child, and several other human rights activists. One of the human rights activists was asked to film the conference, but their camera was shut off after the first day. Thankfully, audio was still running, and this recording was obtained by the documentary film American Circumcision.
This audio reveals that the AAP has a private and public position. Publicly they tell parents that circumcision has no effect on sensation, but privately, they acknowledge it does:
The reduction of sensation is very valuable to many men and I?m not saying to all men but to many men, it is. The issue is not the degree of sensitivity, it?s not the presence or absence of? of sensitive tissue. It?s degree of satisfaction in people who are able to make the decision for themselves. So? so, you know, I think? I think it?s beside the point to talk about loss of sensitive tissue.?
Are men okay with a ?loss of sensitive tissue,? or are they just not aware their sensation has been reduced, because physicians groups like the AAP publicly tell them the opposite?
Unfortunately for the AAP, many men are not okay with it. There were large protests at the American Academy of Pediatrics conference less then a month ago, where the AAP received significant pressure from human rights groups for continuing to remove ?sensitive tissue? from non-consenting minors.
Doctor are required to give patients informed consent, which includes telling the patient any information a reasonable person might want to know about a procedure. If a procedure made you or your child lose sensitive tissue, wouldn?t you want to know?
Would parents want their children circumcised if they knew that doctors said it reduced sexual sensation?
Do men actually want their penis to feel less?
Written by Brendan Marotta, director of the upcoming film
Male Circumcision and
Contemprary Religious Persecution
While implicit government support for cutting the genitals of children is not a positive development, the actual impact of this event on work to protect children's genital autonomy is expected to be minimal to non-existent.
It is also good news that this event appears to have been largely ignored or downplayed by major media sources.
An article about this development can be found below and at www.snopes.com/2016/12/21/obama-signs-law-protecting-atheists/
The text of the bill can be found at www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1150
Obama Signs Bill into Law Protecting Advocates of Male
Circumcision from Religious Persecution
H.R. 1150 amends the Frank Wolf International Religious Freedom Act to include protections for non-theistic beliefs, as well as the right not to profess or practice any religion at all.
In a historical first, President Barack Obama signed legislation on 16 December 2016 extending protections against religious persecution to people with non-theistic beliefs, including those who subscribe to no religion at all. Passed with the overwhelming support of both parties in Congress, H.R. 1150 amends the Frank Wolf International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (IRFA ), which established a watchdog commission to monitor and report on abuses of religious freedom around the world. The amended law includes this provision defining "freedom of thought, conscience, and religion":
The freedom of thought, conscience, and religion is understood to protect theistic and non-theistic beliefs and the right not to profess or practice any religion.
The bill further defines "the specific targeting of non-theists, humanists, and atheists because of their beliefs" as a form of religious persecution, a change lauded by believers and non-believers alike, according to a report by Religion News Service.
Russell Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Convention's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, called the legislation "a vital step toward protecting conscience freedom for millions of the world's most vulnerable, most oppressed people," while Roy Speckhardt, executive director of the American Humanist Association, called it "a significant step toward full acceptance and inclusion for non-religious individuals."
The American Humanist Association, which spent four years lobbying for the change, noted in a press release that the persecution of non-theistic minorities has become a serious, even lethal problem in some parts of the world:
The persecution of openly humanist and atheist writers has become an area of increasing concern especially after the string of murders of secular bloggers and publishers by religious extremists in Bangladesh. The American Humanist Association, along with other international advocates for religious freedom, have also been critical of the flogging of secular writers in Saudi Arabia, as well as a Saudi law that equates atheism with terrorism.
The bill was named for former GOP Congressman from
Virginia Frank R. Wolf, a champion of human rights who
introduced the original legislation in 1997.
The practice of medically unnecessary surgical circumcisions, excisions and incisions on male and female genitalia (under the age of eighteen), whether for religious or non-medical reasons, constitutes sexual mutilation and should be prosecuted under the law.
Defending a one-year-old against a father's wish to have his son circumcised, California Superior Court Judge A. Girolami said, "...Circumcision would not be allowed since the declarations are all clear, it's not really medically necessary...so it's something that is not required and I can't see it being in the best interest of the child...When the child is older, the child can make his own decision in that regard. And, obviously, it's painful - memories are painful when it's done older, I'm sure pain is still there even at the young age..." Circumcising the boy,k the judge warned, would make the father "subject to being prosecuted for battery or assault".
Independent. "Circumcision is really a most barbaric ritual and shows that religious practices of this sort should be confined to the history books. This man's family is of Jewish origin, but he's glad to say that none of his sons have been subjected to such brutal treatment. Some might say that his sons are not part of the Jewish faith. He says, well then, maybe they're just not cut out for it!" The faith called for the slaughter of animals in religious ritual. The traditional compassion of the Jewish people removed these rituals long before any courts demanded it. But, it seems, that the protection of animals, for some, is more important than the protection from abuse of boy children. Some see this as ritual abuse since it is done to someone without their consent and they are not allowed to decide whether it is their path. Without social pressure, why not include it as part of the Bar Mitzva as a conscious decision each boy makes on his own. Otherwise, get rid of the moils and go back to the original ritual where the father circumcised his own son. Then see how long the practice continues.
Pediatrics. Researchers at the University of Rochester School of Medicine found that acetaminophen (the active ingredient in Tylenol) does not reduce the pain during and immediately following circumcision. "The pain of circumcision is too severe to be controlled by a mild analgesic," they concluded, even though most circumcisions in the U.S. are done without any pain killers. Babies do experience great and persistent pain during and after the surgery, based on crying, increased heart and breathing rates and other measurements, which also seems to interfere with breastfeeding in some babies.
Alice Miller, author of many books including Banished Knowledge and Breaking Down the Wall of Silence, regarding circumcision. She said "The earlier in life a harm was done and the more its effects are denied by parents and society, the more a person will be damaged. Not only physically, but also psychically. If parents know of the child's suffering, they can help as enlightened witnesses, by giving support and compassion. If they deny the reality of suffering, the children will deny it as well and will later inflict the same unnecessary pain onto their own children.
"I believe the time has come to acknowledge that the practice of routine circumcision rests on the absurd premise that the only mammal in creation born in the condition that requires immediate surgical correction is the human male." Thomas Szasz, M.D.
Playboy. "It's not circumcision that needs to be studied;
it's circumcisers." John A Erickson. To this I would include
doctor's Aaron Funk, Edgar Schoen, Gerald Weiss, Terry
Russell and Thomas Wiswell (who thinks that the foreskin is
a mistake of nature) and many others. 95% of the world's
male babies are not circumcised. Medical organizations
worldwide do not recommend routine circumcision. In deeper
analysis, I wonder how much comes into play that the
"routine neonatal circumcision" in the U.S. is a
quarter-billion-dollar-a-year industry and some supporters
of routine circumcision want to insure their cut.
A German court has ruled that circumcising young boys on religious grounds amounts to bodily harm even if parents consent to the procedure.
Cologne state court said the child's right to physical integrity trumps freedom of religion and parents' rights, German news agency dapd reported Tuesday.
The case involved a doctor accused of carrying out a circumcision on a 4-year-old that led to medical complications. The doctor was acquitted, however, and prosecutors said they won't appeal.
The president of Germany's Central Council of Jews, Dieter Graumann, called the ruling "unprecedented and insensitive," urging the country's parliament to clarify the legal situation "to protect religious freedom against attacks."
Graumann said the circumcision of newborn Jews has been practiced for thousands of years and "every country in the world respects this religious right."
Muslims also circumcise young boys, while many parents request it on health grounds.
The state court's ruling creates a tricky legal situation for doctors who perform the procedure on parents' orders.
Unlike female circumcision, there is no law prohibiting
it and the ruling isn't binding for other courts. However,
it sets a precedent that would be taken into account by
other German courts when ruling on similar cases.
"Olympic Medical, the company which manufactures Circumstraint, boasts in its product literature: 'In less than 30 seconds a nurse can immobilize the struggling infant securely in the correct position with Circumstraint. Soft, wide Velcro straps encircle the infant's elbows and knees, depriving him of leverage. He's held securely without danger of escape. ...(E)levates the infant's hips, perfectly presenting the genitalia. Call 1.800.426.0353 to voice your discontent, keeping in mind that each time you call they have to pay the toll.
Learning about the anatomy and functions of the normal foreskin. This is the only healthy tissue that is routinely sliced off of either gender and it is obviously aimed at diminishing male sexuality. Few men know anything about this vital portion of their anatomy -- of if they have been circumcised, what they are missing. Without knowing some basic knowledge about the normal foreskin [what it is, what it does, and how it works], it is virtually impossible to understand the ramifications of circumcision.
Once a man understands the anatomy and functions of the unaltered foreskin, plus what circumcision is and what it does to the male sex organ, I feel it is imperative that information be provided to the reader on how he can restore some of what was taken from him. On a 1 to 10 scale, with 10 being the level of sexual sensations felt by an intact foreskin, circumcised men have been described as only knowing the sensations felt at the 1 to 2 level. They have never been able to experience anything else because most were circumcised in infancy. They believe what they feel at the 1 to 2 level is "normal" and have no idea what they are missing, or that they can achieve "higher" levels of sensation through foreskin restoration.
Two major books have been published recently on the subject of circumcision, both over 500 pages.
1. Male and Female Circumcision: Medical, Legal and Ethical Considerations in Pediatric Practice which is the proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium on Sexual Mutilation held August 5-7, 1998 in Oxford, England. ISBN 0-306-46131-5 www.nocirc.org
2. Male and Female Circumcision in the Jewish,
Christian and Muslim communities, religious debate.
ISBN 1-85513-406-3 with a forward by Nawal El-Saadawi,
a famous Egyptian writer and physician. members.xoom.com/nonviolence/
Dear Concerned Friends of Jim and Matthew Price,
Please help fund the legal battle to keep 3-year-old Matthew Price intact. In August, a New Jersey court authorized Matthew's mother to have him circumcised against the wishes of his father, Jim. The surgery was scheduled for October 12, 2000 and was cancelled at the last minute by the urologist because of the public outcry. Fortunately, this bought the father time to hire new lawyers and go to the appeals court. He was granted a temporary stay on the circumcision on Friday October 13, for 10 days. On October 23, Mr. Price's attorneys must submit their full appeal to the court. Jim and his attorneys are willing to take this case as far legally as the courts will allow in order to save this boy from an unnecessary circumcision. Jim would also like to pursue a malpractice case against his son's pediatrician, who advised premature retraction of the foreskin. Unfortunately, this legal battle will require a significant amount of money. We need to raise $10,000 to fund this suit.
This case is very important for two reasons: First, the protection of a 3-year-old boy from a harmful, traumatic, and unnecessary surgery. Second, this case has sparked significant publicity and helped raise awareness about proper care of the intact child, as well as medical ignorance. To date there have been 8 articles written, 3 radio show mentions, a television mention, and a taped appearance on a talk show (to be aired soon). No donation is too small. Your contribution is greatly appreciated! Your donation is tax-deductible, please make your check out to NOCIRC and mail to: Matthew Price Defense Fund, c/o NOCIRC of NC, PO Box 5081, Chapel Hill, NC 27514
Please forward this to all friends, family, circumcision
chats, attachment parenting groups, and anyone else you
think might be willing to help. Together I know we can win
this one! Thank you!
On November 6, 2014, an appeals court in Florida upheld a ruling ordering the circumcision of Chase, a healthy four-year-old boy. The boy's mother, Heather Hironimus, has been working to protect Chase from circumcision. The judge's original decision includes a remarkable, and probably unconstitutional, provision that his mother is not even allowed to inform Chase of her position on circumcision.
At four years old, Chase is a child who is fully aware of his body. He will experience and remember the pain of a circumcision, and he will be very aware that his body has been drastically changed.
Public figures such as Richard Dawkins, Russel Crowe, Alicia Silverstone and John Leguizamo have tweeted in favor of Chase.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Tuesday released its first-ever draft guidelines on circumcision that recommend that doctors counsel parents and uncircumcised males on the health benefits of the procedure.
The guidelines do not outright call for circumcision of all male newborns, since that is a personal decision that may involve religious or cultural preferences, Dr. Jonathan Mermin, director of the CDC's National Center for HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD and TB Prevention, told the Associated Press.
But "the scientific evidence is clear that the benefits outweigh the risks," Mermin said.
Circumcision involves the surgical removal of the foreskin covering the tip of the penis. Germs can collect and multiply under the foreskin, creating issues of hygiene.
Clinical trials, many done in sub-Saharan Africa, have demonstrated that circumcision reduces HIV infection risk by 50 percent to 60 percent, the CDC guidelines note. The procedure also reduces by 30 percent the risk of contracting herpes and human papilloma virus (HPV), two pathogens believed to cause cancer of the penis.
The guidelines do point out that circumcision has only been proven to prevent HIV and sexually transmitted diseases in men during vaginal sex. The procedure has not been proven to reduce the risk of infection through oral or anal sex, or to reduce the risk of HIV transmission to female partners.
The scientific evidence is mixed regarding homosexual sex, the guidelines say, with some studies having shown that circumcision provides partial protection while other studies have not.
Circumcision does reduce the risk of urinary tract infections in infants, according to the CDC guidelines.
The most common risks associated with the procedure include bleeding and infection.
Male circumcision rates in the United States declined between 1979 and 2010, dropping from almost 65 percent to slightly more than 58 percent, according to a CDC report issued last year.
The new draft guidelines mirror an updated policy on circumcision released by the American Academy of Pediatrics in 2012.
"The American public should take confidence that these are pretty much converging guidelines. There is no doubt that it [circumcision] does confer health benefits and there is no doubt it can be performed safely, with a less than 1 percent risk of complications," Dr. Susan Blank, chair of the task force that authored the AAP policy statement, said Tuesday. "This is one thing a parent can do to protect the future health of their children."
In its policy statement, the AAP declared that the health benefits are great enough that infant male circumcision should be covered by insurance, which would increase access to the procedure for families who choose it, said Blank, who is also assistant commissioner of STD Control and Prevention at the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene.
"The push from the academy's point of view is to really have providers lay out for parents what are the risks, what are the benefits, and give the parents the information they need to make a decision," Blank said. "And the academy feels strongly that since there are proven health benefits, the procedure should be covered by insurance."
The guidelines are expected to spur a response from anti-circumcision groups.
"There are certainly groups that are troubled by circumcision of an individual who is not in a position to provide their own consent," Blank said.
In California, circumcised boys are in the minority with fewer the 40% of other boys who look like him.
"I believe no man would allow his beloved son to be circumcised if he were in touch with the terror he experienced during his own." John Breeding
Menstuff® is a registered trademark of Gordon Clay
©1996-2017, Gordon Clay