No one is born Catholic, Protestant, or Jewish. Religion is a personal choice made by the person based on his beliefs. Religion cannot be forced on another. Unfortunately, a Brit Milah is a forced male infant circumcision and is a religious rite for the benefit of the parents, not the child. It forces the parents’ religion upon the boy by cutting off part of the boy’s body, a part that most males value highly.
A young man writes an open letter to the Mohel who circumcised him as a baby. He is not happy being circumcised because he can tell that his penis is not all that it should be. He feels the irritation of the mucosal tissue rubbing against his underwear. He can feel the loss of sensitivity from the calloused layer building up on his sensitive bits.
I wish I hadn’t been circumcised.
Almost every single day, for as long as I can remember, I have at one point or another felt discomfort in the tip of my penis. It doesn’t matter what type of undergarments I wear, if I wear pants or shorts, or whether I’m sedentary at a desk all day or out playing a sport: eventually, my penis will brush against something in an unpleasant way. It’s not a major discomfort or pain, but it’s there and it’s noticeable, and it doesn’t feel natural. It makes me feel like something is wrong, like something is somewhere it doesn’t belong, and there’s nothing at all like it for any other parts of my body that are covered in clothing all day. I can’t verify this personally, but apparently this is a problem that only happens to some circumcised men, and not to any intact ones.
I’m fairly certain that I am done with arguing about circumcision for right now, but here is a link to an updated list of everything I’ve written about it the last couple days for anyone who is interested in perusing it.
I highly recommend checking out Uncutting here on Tumblr if anyone is interested in learning more about infant circumcision as well as foreskin restoration.
A few other resources on circumcision and other genital mutilation:
The second half of a legal analysis of the proposed San Francisco infant circumcision ban. This half of the analysis addresses the constitutionality of the proposed male infant circumcision ban in San Francisco, California, with respect to religious freedom. The author makes no conclusion regarding a circumcision ban. This is typical for lawyers. Nothing is black and white, particularly constitutional law. One failing of the article is it does not consider Prince v. Massachusetts, a Supreme Court case that addressed parental rights and limits on the parents’ right to practice religion with respect to their children.
A television interview of filmmaker Eliyahu Ungar-Sargon, Director of Cut: Slicing Through the Myths of Circumcision and Bernie Farber, president of Canadian Jewish Congress. Bernie asserts that infant circumcision is a traditional rite that must continue. Eliyahu closes by pointing out that the issue is a conflict of rights. The human right of the infant to a complete body and the right to practice religion, although on others.
I know what I think about this. What about all of you?
(I would also like to note that the San Francisco Chronicle is using an AP Press article on something IN San Francisco…I really think the publication should get rid of its NEWSpaper altogether and stick with features and magazine writing - that’s obviously what they have decided to favor anyway, so cut the crap and get on with it already.)
I think it’s great! Girls have been protected from FGM under law since 1997. It’s about time that boys are protected under law from MGM! I wish it was illegal everywhere.
The proposed ban is bringing awareness of the issue to many people. Cutting the sex organs of any child is wrong. The US culture abhors genital cutting of female children, but accepts genital cutting of male babies. It is about time that parents stopped messing with their son’s penis.
Another report of the circumcision ban effort in Santa Monica, California. This is a straight news article without any commentary for or against the recently filed petition to get the ban on the ballot.
Commentary on the announcement of the San Francisco MGM Bill making the November ballot and the media response. Too many parents and would-be parents will get their dander up, claiming such a law undermines their rights to parenting.
Sadly social movements — even when the injustice is so self-apparent — have to endure long waits to get traction. Conservatives wanting to preserve the status quo are slow in understanding rights and gaining enlightenment. We know about slavery, marginalization of women, child labor, seven-day workweeks, pollution, etc. Even when the injustices have been exposed and there can be no doubt of the wrongness, whole blocs of people didn’t yield without a fight.
A man who had an adult circumcision advocates against circumcising infant boys. “If you are religious and you believe you have to do this terrible thing to yourself, go ahead and do it. But let it be your choice!” A newborn boy has no clue what religion he is. He has no idea why all of a sudden he is experiencing pain and discomfort after being circumcised.
An intactivist files a petition to gather signatures in Santa Monica, California. The intactivist seeks a ballot measure to outlaw male infant circumcision in Santa Monica, CA. The news of the petition was quickly picked up by the media.
ScienceDaily (May 23, 2011) — A little bitter with a little sweet, in the form of a nano-complex dietary supplement taken before meals, can result in a substantial reduction of fat and sugar absorption in the body, Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Harvard University researchers have found.
The researchers previously showed that naringenin, the molecule responsible for the bitter taste in grapefruits, could potentially be used in the treatment of diabetes, arteriosclerosis and hyper-metabolism.