Male Circumcision in The USA, What could Feed Something this Bizarre?

AAP again evaluates at pro-circumcision insistence the medical advisablity for American boys to be circumcised. The dead horse of Pediatrics

The American Love Affair with the Circumcised

Penis

I was born in 1945, just after the Trinity Atomic Bomb tests and soon the first application of the power of the atom in mankinds' systematic murdering of its own species. The circumcision rate for American males at that time stood at about where it does today, 70 percent.

This gives a bit of flavor to a strange characteristic Americans have, the cosmetic narcissistic adoration of the penis. In this great love of the penis, we could perhaps say, many cultures have done the same. We could almost believe this as some dark side of Carl Jung's great cultural unconscious, were it not for its perverted and misdirected nature. From a small radical group of pro-circumcision pseudo scientific doctors, male newborn circumcision became as American as baseball and Mom's Apple Pies.

We can be quite sure, at least I think, that George Washington, Alexandar Hamilton and a host of the patrician elites, Americans celebrate, had their private parts as Darwinism in its wisdom, over millennia directed. The penis was complete with its foreskin covering a sensitive inner part, called anatomically, the glans penis.

However , as medical science began to find pathology in the most natural of things, so it eventually would conclude, God had made a mistake.

The penis was ugly, untidy and certainly needed the attention of the medical community to make it right.

Around the turn of the century, before medical science was much more than a black art plundering about in the darkness, came a great light.

If boys, were circumcised as God had demanded of the Hebrews, certainly here was the kernal of undiscovered knowledge potentailly giving both men and women greater good health.

Soon doctors with no real scientific training were demanding American male babies experience this wonderous good news. They should be routinely circumcised at a time where they could not give their dissent, except perhaps by howling. Circumcision was said safe, easily done at a good cost effective price. Mother's of the fifties were told, "be sure that your boy gets his shots and his protective circumcision."

Women were propagandized doctors had skills well beyond their training. Indeed, how did Doctor Spock ever learn so much child psychology and development? It certainly was not a part of any medical school curriculum..

Child birth was said, inherently dangerous and better left not the midwife or the home, rather allow medical science to direct and over see this potentailly life threating existential sink hole.

Women began giving over the birth process to their hospitals and their doctors.

The white coats knew best and knowing best, met, your boy's penis needs fixing.

The results were amazing. Fewer women died in child birth and many more children came into the world just bursting with apprecaition that science, rather than witchcraft directed their birthing.

With this opportunism came the desire to do all possible to assure children were healthy . As a component of that healthcare routine male infant circumcision began to take hold.

By the nineteen fifties it was unthinkable any caring parent would leave a foreskin blighting and blocking their son's penis. Some doctors lied and said before circumcision the baby would be unable to urinate properly.

The foreskin had been demonized. Research was done to make it perfectly clear the foreskin was the devil himself. With circumcision the whole American population was a mere generation or two away from as circumcised as the ancient Hebrews.

There was little opposition and in fact boys were circumcised often without the consent of or even discussion with their parents.

In the early 1960's there appeared a bit of dissent to the circumcision machines, grinding off foreskins, but hardly anyone by then cared. After all the circumcsion

machine had relegated the old look, to a funny ant eater and the new circumsied penis as that of the American standard,. What self respecting male would dare present to his lover a normal penis? Why he'd be laughed out of the

bedroom. And, in fact, I have intact friends who say the prejudice of women caused them harms and a rush to either be circumcised or abstinent.

( This essay will now, end, and be taken back up again in the next blog)

The Politics of Male Circumcision

How many lies can be told about a procedure or its benefits.

If you have a circumcised population truth no longer matters, its only the clamouring of propagandas.

Views: 106

Comment

You need to be a member of Atheist Nexus to add comments!

Join Atheist Nexus

Comment by Gary Huckleberry on February 27, 2010 at 6:22am
Good points, and to the judges we can say, numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 might also be true of rape. And if not rape, then why circumcision? At least in rape, the female or male does not lose a body part.
Comment by Gary Epstein on February 25, 2010 at 6:38pm
Gary, one thing that makes American infant circumcision so difficult to end is most consider it a
1. social norm
2. believe all pro-circumcision propagandas especially about psychological harms if a boy is made fun of by circumcised peers
3. that circumcision seems safe, quick and if insurance pays, cheap
4. that lidocaine injections ease the mind about pain
5. that the forekin is a redundant skin and not functional. (I wonder of they consider toe nails and eye lids functional)
6. that everyone to their knowledge has done it and will do it
Comment by Gary Huckleberry on February 24, 2010 at 3:06pm
The doctors are Pedophiliacs (penofeeliaks) and have the "God Complex"! Control and power! They take advantage of the emotional state of the father and mother.
Comment by Jared Lardo on February 22, 2010 at 1:55am
"It is illegal to steal skin from anyone [...]"

Gary, that's the most succinctly I've seen this issue put.
Comment by Gary Epstein on February 21, 2010 at 10:44am
Gary, the only problem here, is the ignorance and blessful acceptance of the New and Very Sexy, knob exposed all the time, penis. You begin to appreciate over time, if circumcision is done in infancy, the whole affair is not a living event of trauma, rather a darkly and abstractly acknowledged something that I don't recall. Men are sexual egotists and would never be able to accept the foreskin was of any sexual value. In fact, this is why at every dumb pro vs. anti circumcision debate someone jumps in to say, completely without proof, " My son should LOOK like me."

Now this is wierd right. Because unless your son is a male clone, he cannot look like you. Even his little circumcised penis will not look like yours.

Yet, these dumb remarks we hear on CBS, The Today Show and everywhere as a justification for multilating somebody else. In fact the foreskin is been demonized so much, its often said to be a " public health Measure."

Is it irrational.. you bet, but that's what any class action law suit would be up against.
Comment by Gary Huckleberry on February 21, 2010 at 10:12am
It is illegal to steal skin from anyone under the age of 18, no matter who gives advice or consent, except in medical emergency, which this is not. What needs to be done is a class action lawsuit, claiming theft, etc.... By law the courts would grant a large sum of money to individuals named in the suit, ... although it is likely that the courts would sidestep the law, much in the same way as they have done in priest molesting cases..... Still a class action suit would be beneficial... Theft is theft.... parents do not have the right to steal a child's body part. If, after the age of consent, consent is granted, then fine. All doctors engaging in baby circumcision should lose their licenses, by law, ... but the law is owned by the dollar....
Comment by Gary Epstein on February 21, 2010 at 7:43am
This is correct, the lie had been told, the foreskins cut, the reasons why lost in the past. This is true in the Jewish faith as well. Surely it could not escape the Rabbi, male circumcision is not a unique Jewish rite. The fact that, it is ancient and in time flows bewards beyond the Egyptinas.

The concept of cultural diffusion can be used successfully to explain many quaint social phenomenia, including the assumption Nature presdiposed women to child rearing and procreation roles. The more fundamentalist religious sects to include Chritianity and Islam enforce this as God's edict, as we speak.

What is odd about male circumcision, the half witted pseudo medical studies, supposedly tripping with cold reason as opposed to warm prejudice.

We see this as we speak.
Circumcision COULD
Prevent:

Cervical Cancer, HIV, Various sexually transmitted diseases, various rare conditions of the foreskin itself.

I love the last reason, because I could prevent cutting toe nails or ingrowns from excising my toes ! What flight and fantasy some pro-circumcision doctors have, or should I say fetished
rationalization?
Comment by Eric R. on February 20, 2010 at 8:09am
Yes I think you said it. Government and medical propaganda buttressed by an inherited concept of the foreskin from the Jewish tradition. And not to forgot the underlying desire to reduce sexual pleasure, to keep less people from committing the dirty act. And now Americans are stuck with these misconceptions because they have been so well propagated, they don't seriously consider the argument against circumcision. "It looks better cut", I've heard many of my friends say. It's sick and time to stop it.

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service