Project Reason is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit foundation devoted to spreading scientific knowledge and secular values in society. The foundation draws on the talents of prominent and creative thinkers in a wide range of disciplines to encourage critical thinking and erode the influence of dogmatism, superstition, and bigotry in our world.
Here’s a new project. Help put an end to male genital mutilation, aka circumcision.
All forms of female genital cutting, even a pin prick are currently illegal according to federal law in the US. Yet it’s perfectly legal to hold down a male child and start cutting at their genitals, with no anesthesia, and literally amputate a sensitive and protective part of normal healthy male genitalia. This violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution which forbids the denial of equal protection under the law to any group of people. Men are denied equal protection from forced genital cutting. Circumcision is unconstitutional, and a blatant violation of basic human rights.
Here’s a new project. Help put an end to male genital mutilation, aka circumcision.
All forms of female genital cutting, even a pin prick are currently illegal according to federal law in the US. Yet it’s perfectly legal to hold down a male child and start cutting at their genitals, with no anesthesia, and literally amputate a sensitive and protective part of normal healthy male genitalia. This violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution which forbids the denial of equal protection under the law to any group of people. Men are denied equal protection from forced genital cutting. Circumcision is unconstitutional, and a blatant violation of basic human rights.
Here’s a new project. Help put an end to male genital mutilation, aka circumcision.
All forms of female genital cutting, even a pin prick are currently illegal according to federal law in the US. Yet it’s perfectly legal to hold down a male child and start cutting at their genitals, with no anesthesia, and literally amputate a sensitive and protective part of normal healthy male genitalia. This violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution which forbids the denial of equal protection under the law to any group of people. Men are denied equal protection from forced genital cutting. Circumcision is unconstitutional, and a blatant violation of basic human rights.
Nonsense.
If you could demonstrate a flaw in my statements you already would have.
Most men are simply too insecure to acknowledge the possibility that as a result of their circumcision they are missing out on something, and the responses to arguments against circumcision routinely demonstrate the likelihood of that.
Here’s a new project. Help put an end to male genital mutilation, aka circumcision.
All forms of female genital cutting, even a pin prick are currently illegal according to federal law in the US. Yet it’s perfectly legal to hold down a male child and start cutting at their genitals, with no anesthesia, and literally amputate a sensitive and protective part of normal healthy male genitalia. This violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution which forbids the denial of equal protection under the law to any group of people. Men are denied equal protection from forced genital cutting. Circumcision is unconstitutional, and a blatant violation of basic human rights.
Nonsense.
If you could demonstrate a flaw in my statements you already would have.
Most men are simply too insecure to acknowledge the possibility that as a result of their circumcision they are missing out on something, and the responses to arguments against circumcision routinely demonstrate the likelihood of that.
My statements simply demonstrate that I’m tired of arguing with circumcision fanatics like you who believe that as a result of their circumcision they are missing out on something.
Here’s a new project. Help put an end to male genital mutilation, aka circumcision.
All forms of female genital cutting, even a pin prick are currently illegal according to federal law in the US. Yet it’s perfectly legal to hold down a male child and start cutting at their genitals, with no anesthesia, and literally amputate a sensitive and protective part of normal healthy male genitalia. This violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution which forbids the denial of equal protection under the law to any group of people. Men are denied equal protection from forced genital cutting. Circumcision is unconstitutional, and a blatant violation of basic human rights.
Nonsense.
If you could demonstrate a flaw in my statements you already would have.
Most men are simply too insecure to acknowledge the possibility that as a result of their circumcision they are missing out on something, and the responses to arguments against circumcision routinely demonstrate the likelihood of that.
My statements simply demonstrate that I’m tired of arguing with circumcision fanatics like you who believe that as a result of their circumcision they are missing out on something.
They also demonstrate that you know nothing about both female circumcision and normal male anatomy.
Studies and anecdotal evidence prove circumcision destroys the most sensitive parts of the male sexual organs.
Here’s a new project. Help put an end to male genital mutilation, aka circumcision.
All forms of female genital cutting, even a pin prick are currently illegal according to federal law in the US. Yet it’s perfectly legal to hold down a male child and start cutting at their genitals, with no anesthesia, and literally amputate a sensitive and protective part of normal healthy male genitalia. This violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution which forbids the denial of equal protection under the law to any group of people. Men are denied equal protection from forced genital cutting. Circumcision is unconstitutional, and a blatant violation of basic human rights.
Nonsense.
If you could demonstrate a flaw in my statements you already would have.
Most men are simply too insecure to acknowledge the possibility that as a result of their circumcision they are missing out on something, and the responses to arguments against circumcision routinely demonstrate the likelihood of that.
My statements simply demonstrate that I’m tired of arguing with circumcision fanatics like you who believe that as a result of their circumcision they are missing out on something.
They also demonstrate that you know nothing about both female circumcision and normal male anatomy.
Studies and anecdotal evidence prove circumcision destroys the most sensitive parts of the male sexual organs.
Do only women deserve protection from unnecessary genital cutting?
Have seen the studies and read all this before as someone like you comes around here every year with the same rantings. For every study/link you post there are two more that counter them that you have ignored because they don’t have the answer you want. I’ve already spent far to many hours on this in the last 10 years that I could of spent masturbating.
Here’s a new project. Help put an end to male genital mutilation, aka circumcision.
All forms of female genital cutting, even a pin prick are currently illegal according to federal law in the US. Yet it’s perfectly legal to hold down a male child and start cutting at their genitals, with no anesthesia, and literally amputate a sensitive and protective part of normal healthy male genitalia. This violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution which forbids the denial of equal protection under the law to any group of people. Men are denied equal protection from forced genital cutting. Circumcision is unconstitutional, and a blatant violation of basic human rights.
Nonsense.
If you could demonstrate a flaw in my statements you already would have.
Most men are simply too insecure to acknowledge the possibility that as a result of their circumcision they are missing out on something, and the responses to arguments against circumcision routinely demonstrate the likelihood of that.
My statements simply demonstrate that I’m tired of arguing with circumcision fanatics like you who believe that as a result of their circumcision they are missing out on something.
They also demonstrate that you know nothing about both female circumcision and normal male anatomy.
Studies and anecdotal evidence prove circumcision destroys the most sensitive parts of the male sexual organs.
Do only women deserve protection from unnecessary genital cutting?
Have seen the studies and read all this before as someone like you comes around here every year with the same rantings. For every study/link you post there are two more that counter them that you have ignored because they don’t have the answer you want. I’ve already spent far to many hours on this in the last 10 years that I could of spent masturbating.
So the anecdotal claims are all wrong? Shouldn’t the benefit of the doubt be given, such that people are allowed to decide for themselves whether or not part of their genitalia is removed?
Or is genital integrity only a FEMALE right?
So you don’t care about human rights. Then leave this post alone.
Whether it’s harmless or harmful, I would like to have had a say in the matter. In the vast majority of boys in my generation the proceedure was done virtually automatically even though in most cases it was unnecessary. I’m not going to rehash the arguments pro and con about foreskin removal except to say that the cons seem to outweigh the pros. Perhaps I shoulsd also add that It’s a silly religio/cultural thing like footbinding that we really ought to get over. Absent a phimosis, no kid of mine (if I had any) would have the cut.
Die fröhliche Wissenschaft (Rob) - 07 August 2011 11:06 PM
Whether it’s harmless or harmful, I would like to have had a say in the matter. In the vast majority of boys in my generation the proceedure was done virtually automatically even though in most cases it was unnecessary. I’m not going to rehash the arguments pro and con about foreskin removal except to say that the cons seem to outweigh the pros. Perhaps I shoulsd also add that It’s a silly religio/cultural thing like footbinding that we really ought to get over. Absent a phimosis, no kid of mine (if I had any) would have the cut.
Phimosis is usually a bogus diagnosis. The foreskin takes varying amounts of time to retract, and remains fused to the glans for some time - a fact that renders circumcision all the more barbaric.
I have been in a position to observe a good number of penises both cut and uncut. I can tell you that there have been a few I’ve come across that would have benefited from at least a loosening of the prepuce. I do grant, though, that an overly tight and restrictive foreskin is uncommon.
Die fröhliche Wissenschaft (Rob) - 07 August 2011 11:33 PM
I have been in a position to observe a good number of penises both cut and uncut. I can tell you that there have been a few I’ve come across that would have benefited from at least a loosening of the prepuce. I do grant, though, that an overly tight and restrictive foreskin is uncommon.
Surgery is a last resort. At least it is when any other part of the body has a problem. There are less invasive treatments, such as stretching and topical creams that can help. But in this country with such a fetish for cutting male genitalia, those are either unknown or overlooked.
So the anecdotal claims are all wrong? Shouldn’t the benefit of the doubt be given, such that people are allowed to decide for themselves whether or not part of their genitalia is removed?
If you want to use anecdotal evidence then the 100’s of millions of men who haven’t had any issues trumps a few highly selected extreme stories.
Or is genital integrity only a FEMALE right?
Unlike males females are done only for religious purposes of subordination.
So you don’t care about human rights. Then leave this post alone.
Die fröhliche Wissenschaft (Rob) - 07 August 2011 11:06 PM
Whether it’s harmless or harmful, I would like to have had a say in the matter. In the vast majority of boys in my generation the proceedure was done virtually automatically even though in most cases it was unnecessary. I’m not going to rehash the arguments pro and con about foreskin removal except to say that the cons seem to outweigh the pros. Perhaps I shoulsd also add that It’s a silly religio/cultural thing like footbinding that we really ought to get over. Absent a phimosis, no kid of mine (if I had any) would have the cut.
Actually I believe the data comes out a little more positive but for the sake of argument lets call it a flip-of-a-coin. That pretty much reduces this to a parents choice to do what they think is best and only leaves the “it’s wrong for parents to makes choices for their children” argument. Now what if being circumcised could protect you from a deadly disease and maybe save millions of lives? Well, that is the latest data, circumcision can reduce the change of HIV/AIDS by more then 50%. If that data is good (and it appears to be), now what?
Well, this should be an argument that would take reasonable people about 3 minutes to put to rest.
For those who are a bit slow on the uptake, here it goes.
If you want to cut off parts of your penis, or any other part of your anatomy, you should be free to do so.
However, mutilating infants should be illegal under all circumstances.
If said infant reaches the age of 21 and decides that he wants to cut off his foreskin, he has the right to do so.
He’d be an imbecile to follow the blatantly religious edicts dreamed up by flea-bitten, ignorant goatherds who didn’t know their asshole from a hole in the ground, but, hey, it’s a free country.
Besides that, you should keep your paws off of people who didn’t give you their consent.
I find it astonishing that this is even considered a matter of serious debate.
Well, this should be an argument that would take reasonable people about 3 minutes to put to rest.
For those who are a bit slow on the uptake, here it goes.
If you want to cut off parts of your penis, or any other part of your anatomy, you should be free to do so.
However, mutilating infants should be illegal under all circumstances.
If said infant reaches the age of 21 and decides that he wants to cut off his foreskin, he has the right to do so.
He’d be an imbecile to follow the blatantly religious edicts dreamed up by flea-bitten, ignorant goatherds who didn’t know their asshole from a hole in the ground, but, hey, it’s a free country.
Besides that, you should keep your paws off of people who didn’t give you their consent.
I find it astonishing that this is even considered a matter of serious debate.
That was all half truths and why it is a debate. For example there are no Christian requirements to have it done. And by your logic immunizing my child without their consent is wrong.
That was all half truths and why it is a debate. For example there are no Christian requirements to have it done. And by your logic immunizing my child without their consent is wrong.
The benefit/risk assessment of immunization is not identical to that of circumcision. I’d bet that the risks are pretty comparable, but the benefits certainly aren’t.
Immunization - Goes a tremendously long way towards preserving the human race’s herd immunity to a whole host of debilitating diseases
