Hurrah for the mom who had the guts not to let her child be cut.
http://www.thecriticalmom.blogspot.com
11
Anyone considering circumcision for their infant son should first google "David Reimer," then get back to me.
5
Is circumcision not a form of genital mutilation?
14
Involuntary circumcision is not only a cruel violation of a person’s human rights, and is not only a stupid procedure, but proved to be fatal to a huge number of Jews during the Holocaust as well. PaulN (a Jew born in Budapest after WWII)
8
Male circumcision - similar to female cutting- is a barbaric practice. It is child abuse in the name of religion. The so-called health benefits invoked to perpetuate this practice are bogus particularly in this day and age assuming they were ever anything other than a sophistic cover of a bizarre religious belief.
10
We are Jewish and we adopted our son from a part of the world where circumcisions at birth are rare. Our son was 8 months old by the time we could actually get him circumcised. When told it required a general anesthesia, we declined. Not a hard decision. No regrets.
13
You were misinformed. It can be easily and safely done with spinal anesthesia, an extraordinarily safe anesthetic in infants.
2
Good for you . You did the right thing (although maybe for an irrelevant reason). Circumcision is painful (even after teh anesthetic wears off) and deprives a boy of sensitive erogenous tissue. Foreskin is not a birth defect!
12
Was this true 25 years ago?
2
Interesting that the feminist position as described in this article is to replace circumcision for boys with washing a baby girl’s feet or wrapping her in a tallit or lighting a candle.
The rather obvious question is, why not just circumcise her? Just a removal of the clitoral hood, perhaps, a body part generally analogous to the male foreskin. Leave the clitois itself intact.
“No way! That’s barbaric!” you say.
So why would you do it to boys?
21
My husband and I are not religious and not of Jewish heritage. We chose not to circumcise our son. It was an easy decision for me: even though he is a baby, his body is his own. I could not rationalize any reason to cut off part of his penis. It would be an abominable violation of his rights. If he wanted to have have it done when he was an adult, that would be his choice. But even without the pressures of religious traditions, it was not an easy decision for my husband. He had vague concerns about his son looking different than him, being teased in locker rooms, and breaking with tradition, but when he really thought about what the factual bloody details of circumcision are, he agreed. Genital mutilation of infants needs to be seen as exactly that, mutilation.
21
I have two sons, a four year old and a five month old, both circumcised. My Italian husband had a medically-necessary and extremely traumatic circumcision when he was 12. Doctors said it could be from a genetically tight foreskin, so although I abhorred the idea of inflicting pain on my children, we did. It seemed to outweigh the risk of a later-in-life, medically necessary circumcision. After living in the Italian community, I was startled by the number of adult males who I met who had to have a medically necessary circumcision as a young child or a teen, all the way up into their 30s. Each one said he was absolutely traumatized by the long-lasting pain and slow-healing of highly sensitized parts of his person. Though I do not believe every newborn ought be circumcised, I think it’s important not to brand my actions for the two most precious people in my life as genital mutilations. It is not black and white.
8
Most of these "medically necessary" circumcisions are due to the general ignorance of how to treat foreskin problems with medication, gentle stretching and other non-surgical methods. Surgery is easy for the doctor - and easy money. Not so for the patient.
If you have a problem with a tooth, a good dentist tries to save it with a filing, crown or root canal - not eliminating it by extraction.
7
A circumcized male partner is preferable for the female, not only as a protection against cervical cancer, but as an enhancer of sex itself. Circumcized men last longer. Apparently the foreskin is highly sensitive, leading to the male's more rapid excitation. Who needs more rapid?
9
More friction with an uncircumcised partner. It’s actually more pleasurable.
10
Not so! The foreskin cuts down on friction, helping to keep everything lubricated and pleasurable for both partners, but especially for the woman. Yes, this statement is coming to you from someone with experience with both. I would be truly disappointed if I had a partner in the future who was circumcised, for both of our sakes. I would never subject a male child of mine to the barbaric practice.
14
Sorry, but the scientific evidence does not support this notion. Intact men have the advantage of millenia of evolution, which provides their partners with a gentle linear bearing and a lubrication-preserving design. Men who have had amputation have more sexual dysfunction themselves, and substantially more dissatisfied partners.
Mother Nature knew what she was doing.
11
Chiming in as a progressive Jew who absolutely believes that it's time for our people to make the morally and ethically right decision to stop circumcising Jewish infants. We have long since dispensed with rituals and practices far less consequential than circumcision and have replaced them with appropriate, non-harmful symbols, and it's frankly absurd that this practice continues to enjoy such widespread support in the Jewish community despite our knowing better. What we need is a groundswell of positively-framed support from within.
In the meantime, consider supporting research efforts to develop regenerative medicine that would help remediate this injury inflicted upon so many of us.
In the meantime, consider supporting research efforts to develop regenerative medicine that would help remediate this injury inflicted upon so many of us.
22
It's barbaric genital mutilation. It's roughly equivalent to the removal of the labia minora from around the clitoris, which no one would allow, let alone encourage.
As to the medical benefits, it should be noted that HIV infects genitally mutilated women at a smaller rate than un-mutilated women, studies show.
I don't think anyone would argue that there is any "medical benefit" to such attacks on little girls. Why should we tolerate them for little boys?
As to the medical benefits, it should be noted that HIV infects genitally mutilated women at a smaller rate than un-mutilated women, studies show.
I don't think anyone would argue that there is any "medical benefit" to such attacks on little girls. Why should we tolerate them for little boys?
22
Please cite the study, because the article "Female Genital Mutilation and the Risks of HIV Transmission" by Margaret Brady suggests that FGM is associated with an increased risk of HIV transmission. Furthermore there are documented medical benefits to male circumcision; the issue is whether those benefits outweigh the risks that have been documented to exist.
Source???
There might be benefits to removal of toe nails in very few people. That doesn't say to cut toes also from everyone
4
so the times found 2 people who wont circumcise a single mother and a father of a non Jewish child
7
There are lots more though, and there are several groups and websites run by Jewish people opposed to infant circumcision. Many of the earliest intactivists, including George Wald, Suzanne Arms, Edward Wallerstein and Paul Fleiss, were Jewish.
"It is with the greatest hesitation, since I have no right and know so little, that I should like to suggest to my fellow Jews that perhaps the time has come to redeem the foreskin itself, rather than sacrifice it. Surely some substitute might be found for this rite, perhaps even involving a token drawing of blood from an older child, that would be preferable to this assault upon and mutilation of a newborn infant."
"For it is a barbarous thing to meet a newly born infant with the knife, with a deliberate mutilation. And the part that is removed is not negligible; it has clear and valuable functions to perform. Not circumcising a boy will not only spare him a brutal violence as he enters life; it will promise him a richer existence."
George Wald (1906-1997), Jewish American scientist and 1962 Nobel Laureate (physiology/medicine)
"It is with the greatest hesitation, since I have no right and know so little, that I should like to suggest to my fellow Jews that perhaps the time has come to redeem the foreskin itself, rather than sacrifice it. Surely some substitute might be found for this rite, perhaps even involving a token drawing of blood from an older child, that would be preferable to this assault upon and mutilation of a newborn infant."
"For it is a barbarous thing to meet a newly born infant with the knife, with a deliberate mutilation. And the part that is removed is not negligible; it has clear and valuable functions to perform. Not circumcising a boy will not only spare him a brutal violence as he enters life; it will promise him a richer existence."
George Wald (1906-1997), Jewish American scientist and 1962 Nobel Laureate (physiology/medicine)
15
I'm Jewish and I'm against circumcision.
We don't need to mutilate the reproductive organs of infants to prove who and what we are.
We're better than this.
10
Interesting timing. I left the decision about whether to circumcise my now 14 year old son to my husband. He chose to circumcise, and I questioned this decision later. This week, totally out of the blue, my son said, "Why is there all this controversy about circumcision? Who really cares?" This eased my mind that my fretting was much ado about nothing.
4
If your son is happy to be circumcised, that's great. It's not like he ever had the choice though. I do, and I'd pay a year's salary rather than be circumcised or have my son circumcised. Why would I want the most sensitive and pleasurable parts cut off? That little bit of skin makes a big difference (it's not just there to protect the glans).
Has your son ever seen a video of a circumcision? Maybe he'd understand why it's controversial?
Why don't we just let everyone decide for themselves whether or not they want irreversible genital surgery? It's their body after all.
It's not like it can't wait. I think it's only the USA (at around 60% and dropping) and Israel where more than half of baby boys are circumcised. Other countries circumcise, but not till anywhere from the age of seven to adolescence. Only about 12% of the world's circumcised men were circumcised as babies. Around two thirds of the world's men (including 88% of the world's non-Muslim men) never get circumcised.
If I'd been circumcised at birth and your son hadn't though, I can easily see how we might be on opposite sides of this argument. I'd be the one who didn't know what they were missing.
Has your son ever seen a video of a circumcision? Maybe he'd understand why it's controversial?
Why don't we just let everyone decide for themselves whether or not they want irreversible genital surgery? It's their body after all.
It's not like it can't wait. I think it's only the USA (at around 60% and dropping) and Israel where more than half of baby boys are circumcised. Other countries circumcise, but not till anywhere from the age of seven to adolescence. Only about 12% of the world's circumcised men were circumcised as babies. Around two thirds of the world's men (including 88% of the world's non-Muslim men) never get circumcised.
If I'd been circumcised at birth and your son hadn't though, I can easily see how we might be on opposite sides of this argument. I'd be the one who didn't know what they were missing.
14
Would you allow any such barbarous act on your daughter?
19
The World Health Organization has determined that male circumcision reduces the risk of heterosexually acquired HIV infection in men by approximately 60%.
6
Whether it's HIV or any other STD, condoms have a much higher risk-reducing percentage.
16
Male circumcision is a dangerous distraction in the fight against AIDS.
From a USAID report:
"There appears no clear pattern of association between male circumcision and HIV prevalence—in 8 of 18 countries with data, HIV prevalence is lower among circumcised men, while in the remaining 10 countries it is higher."
There are at least two studies which seem to show a lower risk for HIV in circumcised women btw, but we'd never consider that as a justification for female genital cutting.
From a USAID report:
"There appears no clear pattern of association between male circumcision and HIV prevalence—in 8 of 18 countries with data, HIV prevalence is lower among circumcised men, while in the remaining 10 countries it is higher."
There are at least two studies which seem to show a lower risk for HIV in circumcised women btw, but we'd never consider that as a justification for female genital cutting.
16
As I said to my rabbi when I told him we weren't circumcising our son, as his mother, am I any less Jewish because I was not circumcised? Then why should he be.
24
My father was a Polish Jew. He was a concentration camp survivor & the only survivor of his family. I was born in 1947 in post war Germany in a Displaced Person Camp in Stuttgart.There, he had met & married my Ukrainian mother, who I found out as an adult, had been raised as a Eastern Orthodox Catholic. I wasn't circumcised as an infant to obscure my Jewish heritage. I choose to be circumcised when i was 13 before my reform Jewish bar mitzvah in LA. I looked forward to it for esthetic reasons & never regretted it. It had no negative physical impact Of Any Kind! (To those who believe it reduces pleasure sensitivity.) My son, whose mother is Jewish, refused to circumcise our son after her 1st son's (who drowned when 6 yo) circumcision was botched. Our son remains uncut, his choice.
16
Circumcision alters sex dramatically. The only person with the moral standing to OK cosmetic genital reduction surgery is the owner of the genitals. Informed adults can decide for themselves, unless we fail to protect them as children.
23
how? do you speak from personal experience?
4
These men do: www.circumstitions.com/regret.html#men
8
This was my son's exact question when I told him that one reason people are against it is that it reduces sexual pleasure. He said his peers all seem to enjoy it whether or not they have a foreskin.
3
We didn't circumcise our son at birth - I am reform and my husband is not Jewish. It was important to my husband and our rabbi didn't object. My family was less than pleased.
However, he is now 15 and has recently gotten circumcised. After his bar mitzvah, a trip to Israel and active participation in our temple, he felt compelled and made a solid case for it. It was probably more painful at 15, but he was able to choose it for himself.
However, he is now 15 and has recently gotten circumcised. After his bar mitzvah, a trip to Israel and active participation in our temple, he felt compelled and made a solid case for it. It was probably more painful at 15, but he was able to choose it for himself.
17
I think there is something very wrong when the central tenet of a religion is about inflicting pain and deformation on an infant
28
Consider this: Prior to the advent of monotheistic Judaism it was common for people to practice ritual infanticide. The Akeda--the story of the sacrifice of Isaac by Abraham which was aborted as God realized the extent of Abraham's faith concludes with the substitution of circumcision instead of the sacrifice of the life of the son. In this light, Christianity, in which God sacrifices his son is seen as a societal regression back to ritual infanticide. To your criticism "there is something very wrong when the central tenet of a religion..." consider the implications for Christianity. What is it's central tenet?
2
This is far from the central tenet of Judaism.
6
as compared to the central tenets of other religions which involve human sacrifice. everybody else's religion always looks weird.
As a nonpracticing Jew, when I gave birth to my 3 sons, I could not imagine not having them circumcised. All were circumcised in the hospital and none have borne the scars of remembering.
7
We could cut parts off baby girls without them remembering, but that wouldn't make it right.
13
to cut or not to cut. depends on the cutter and how much should be left on, right? too much self-righteousness over what is essentially a very private manner. so, STAY OUT! I'll respect your decision.
4
How about letting the people whose body it is decide? His body, his decision.
12
How about let an innocent baby's genitals alone, and let him decide at adulthood?
10
are you kidding? Do not vaccinate your kid because its a violation, but wait till he,s an adult?
NO painful dental exams or braces till he is 18?
And putting on your shoes to get ready for school? Such crying and wailing. Better no shoes till 18
1
Without getting into religious reasons for newborn circumcision, I can state, as a retired Pediatric Urologist, that there are overwhelming medical indications for neonatal circumcision. Most of the boys I saw in the office with penile problems (other than congenital abnormalities) were uncircumcised. They suffered posthitis (inflammation of the foreskin), phimosis (tight opening of the end of the foreskin) and paraphimosis (swelling of the glans penis after inadvertent retraction of a tight foreskin). The occasional circumcised boy was seen because the parents were unhappy with the amount of residual skin. The pain inflicted at age 8 days when circumcision is a procedure is miniscule compared to that performed later in life when circumcision is an operation performed under general anesthesia.
Note that cancer of the penis is unknown in males circumcised in the newborn period.
Note that cancer of the penis is unknown in males circumcised in the newborn period.
29
Doctor, thank you for educating us.
3
Thank-you for the thank-you.
A nurse at the hospital returned to work after delivering a boy. Her husband who was present for the event approached her and said "Sweetheart, we have a beautiful baby boy, but something is wrong with his penis".
He had never seen an uncircumcised penis.
True story.
A nurse at the hospital returned to work after delivering a boy. Her husband who was present for the event approached her and said "Sweetheart, we have a beautiful baby boy, but something is wrong with his penis".
He had never seen an uncircumcised penis.
True story.
3
Doctor, you make it sound dangerous to not circumcise. But you are an Urologist and you only get to see boys with problems. But to really get an idea you would need to give us the statistics of all the uncircumcised boys and how many of them get inflammations and other problems. I am from a culture where circumcision is an exception and the problems you write about are extremely rare. What boys need to learn is to clean themselves carefully.
10
It's personal choice and forget about the religious claptrap from those with personal agendas. To circumcise or not doesn't determine your faith...what nonsense.
9
Why is it that
"Modern People"
assume they know better than anyone who came before.
If you are Jewish, are you not Jewish because Abraham put his
faith in the Creator who then blessed Abraham and Sarah and their
children and their children's children unto this present generation ?
Good enough for Abraham, his sons and male servants
good enough for Modern Day Jews.
"Modern People"
assume they know better than anyone who came before.
If you are Jewish, are you not Jewish because Abraham put his
faith in the Creator who then blessed Abraham and Sarah and their
children and their children's children unto this present generation ?
Good enough for Abraham, his sons and male servants
good enough for Modern Day Jews.
4
Marx was correct. "Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people".
2
To LJD:
My comments were incomplete, the NYT limits replies. You did not have your son circumcised at birth, but he ended up with the procedure for medical reasons at age 4.
I do not know the particulars of your son's diagnosis, but I am suspicious that it may have been incorrect. There is no need to kick yourself. It will not erase the memory of his pain, and children endure other painful procedures. Your attitude to the pain and procedure will be noted by your child, even at age 4. And your emotional attachment to his pain can affect his response. You made the best decisions you could at the time. You invested your time and energy trying to decide what was best for your son. I think that makes you a good parent.
My comments were incomplete, the NYT limits replies. You did not have your son circumcised at birth, but he ended up with the procedure for medical reasons at age 4.
I do not know the particulars of your son's diagnosis, but I am suspicious that it may have been incorrect. There is no need to kick yourself. It will not erase the memory of his pain, and children endure other painful procedures. Your attitude to the pain and procedure will be noted by your child, even at age 4. And your emotional attachment to his pain can affect his response. You made the best decisions you could at the time. You invested your time and energy trying to decide what was best for your son. I think that makes you a good parent.
4
Hey - you can cut off a finger and your hand will still work!
1
Circumcision is also applied by many other religions as stated in this article but not a single mention of the other religions. This article does not address any of the issues related to the other religions and it's main focus is on the Jews. Why is that?
6
3 of the top ten days of my life were when both of my sons and later my grandson had their Bris. It connected me to my religion better than any self-styled new form of whatever goes.
5
There must be a way to modify the bris a bit, as in a ritualized nick...
1
But it disconnected your sons from some important erogenous tissue. Of course, they won't know what they're missing.
4
When I was pregnant with my three children, I imagined them growing but perfect. Perfect toes and fingers and ears...you get the idea. So the suggestion that, as soon as they were born, I would start making corrections...a nip here, a tuck there...was repugnant to me.
If you hold a newborn, if you smell that otherwordly fragrance of sweet, clean baby, you know that no revisions are necessary.
I respect Jewish faith tradition, but I am very glad that some Jewish parents are thinking twice about circumcision.
If you hold a newborn, if you smell that otherwordly fragrance of sweet, clean baby, you know that no revisions are necessary.
I respect Jewish faith tradition, but I am very glad that some Jewish parents are thinking twice about circumcision.
23
I had my sons at home with a midwife in attendance. As we discussed whether to circumcise or not, she related the discussion she had with her Italian husband. Her husband had to ask what circumcision was. As she described the process, he curled deeper and deeper into a tight fetal position. She discovered the answer to her question about her partner's feelings about circumcising their baby without him uttering a word. It is a very foreign and barbaric tradition if one has not grown up with it, and maybe would be described the same way even if one had grown up with the tradition.
20
Next, let's talk about tattoos, their origins, meanings, the pain in getting one or more, their location and number, and undoing.
8
Tattoos are decisions taken by the owner of the body.And if the owner changes his mind, it is reversible, even if painful
"the bris also raises a feminist question: why should the most sacred act of Judaism, the linking of a child to the covenant, apply only to boys?"
Who says it's the most sacred act? It's the first, perhaps, though it could be argued that the mother's visit to the mikveh before conception precedes it. Maybe that equalises matters. In any case, girls,with all their sterling qualities, don't have the requisite parts. Surely feminists know that.
Who says it's the most sacred act? It's the first, perhaps, though it could be argued that the mother's visit to the mikveh before conception precedes it. Maybe that equalises matters. In any case, girls,with all their sterling qualities, don't have the requisite parts. Surely feminists know that.
9
I see no difference between male genital mutilation and female genital mutilation - except that the female version seems more gruesome and painful, but equally primitive and barbaric.
This "religious" procedure should ONLY be done at the age of legal consent (18 years old).
The health argument does not hold up - HIV, STDs, etc. through sex generally happens when one reaches adulthood. If that is the real concern, then it should be done at an age of sexual consent; though if given a choice, I can't imagine a 13 year old child consenting to mutilation without parental coercion.
This "religious" procedure should ONLY be done at the age of legal consent (18 years old).
The health argument does not hold up - HIV, STDs, etc. through sex generally happens when one reaches adulthood. If that is the real concern, then it should be done at an age of sexual consent; though if given a choice, I can't imagine a 13 year old child consenting to mutilation without parental coercion.
21
There is a big difference. Female genital mutilation makes it impossible for a woman to experience orgasm. The clitoris is removed. Male circumcision does not interfere with the man's ability to experience orgasm.
5
No Diana, not all female circumcision involves the removal of the clitoris.
2
Not all FGM entirely removes it. Also the skin removed in MGM is profoundly erogenous--and absolutely suggests a significant loss.
1
In 1989 my husband and I decided not to circumcise. However, his foreskin did not retract and we had to circumcise when he was four yrs. old. I wish we had done it when he was a newborn instead of an age that required out patient surgery and recovery and pain at home. He will always remember it and I will always kick myself for not doing it sooner.
1
FYI: Non-retraction of the foreskin at age 4 is NORMAL. Adhesions may prevent retraction, but the main cause of adhesions (tight skin bands connecting the foreskin to the glans) is parents trying to retract the foreskin.
There is a lot of misinformation, and some will undoubtedly accuse me of being misinformed. We live in a society where most men and most doctors have little opportunity to learn about non-circumcised penises, and the appropriate care.
I find it best to not consult American urologists or pediatricians. If you are trained to read medical literature, and know how to decode it and detect poorly done studies, or studies with built in bias, that is a reasonable option. But in most European countries, less than 20% of men are circumcised. In the UK, for example, one study reported that the proportion of English boys circumcised for medical reasons had fallen from 35% in the early 1930s to 6.5% by the mid-1980s. An estimated 3.8% of male children in the UK in 2000 were being circumcised by the age of 15. The researchers stated that too many boys, especially under the age of 5, were still being circumcised because of a misdiagnosis of phimosis. They called for a target to reduce the percentage to 2%.
There is a lot of misinformation, and some will undoubtedly accuse me of being misinformed. We live in a society where most men and most doctors have little opportunity to learn about non-circumcised penises, and the appropriate care.
I find it best to not consult American urologists or pediatricians. If you are trained to read medical literature, and know how to decode it and detect poorly done studies, or studies with built in bias, that is a reasonable option. But in most European countries, less than 20% of men are circumcised. In the UK, for example, one study reported that the proportion of English boys circumcised for medical reasons had fallen from 35% in the early 1930s to 6.5% by the mid-1980s. An estimated 3.8% of male children in the UK in 2000 were being circumcised by the age of 15. The researchers stated that too many boys, especially under the age of 5, were still being circumcised because of a misdiagnosis of phimosis. They called for a target to reduce the percentage to 2%.
13
it's been a long time but I do NOT remember fiddling around with my son's foreskin when bathing him, or thinking it was something I should do. nor did I stick qtips far into his ear canals, etc. parents, a light touch is the best.
1
What does modern day medicine say about the health benefits of circumcision? If it's better in the long run for an infant to have one, it seems to me, it's the way to go...but I don't have children and I'm an atheist...so what do I know?!
4
I imagine many of those who object to circumcision because it is a violation of the baby's body integrity have no disagreement with abortion. Seems like death is the most cruel and barbaric act of all.
1
Plenty of people are against both eg Catholics against Circumcision.
I see them as two separate issues, but I find it strange that people will try to protect a non-sentient embryo that doesn't even have a brain yet, but they don't think a new born baby has a right not to have parts cut off its genitals (unless it's a girl that is).
I see them as two separate issues, but I find it strange that people will try to protect a non-sentient embryo that doesn't even have a brain yet, but they don't think a new born baby has a right not to have parts cut off its genitals (unless it's a girl that is).
14
Excellent article. However, after all is said and done, the best reason to get a circumcision is to prevent your sexual partners from getting more vaginal infections and worse yet, STD's and HIV. Read the studies. Every woman in the world should be Pro-circumcision if for no other reason than to protect their current and future daughters
14
That's the best reason; the next best reasons is sex is more pleasurable for both partners.
3
In response to JFA's post: STD studies were performed on sub Saharan African men in the non-developed world. Please read through the studies. They include a relatively small number of men who frequented prostitutes. They are not representative of the general population in America. In fact, the great majority of men in the world are intact and have no problems whatsoever. It is preposterous to suggest that foreskin should routinely be removed. To me, it sounds like justification to perform plastic surgery on a newborn child.
Thank you so much Zoe Greenberg and NY Times for highlighting this issue! I hope that you will continue to cover this topic. Thank you to those Jewish parents who posted here.
Thank you so much Zoe Greenberg and NY Times for highlighting this issue! I hope that you will continue to cover this topic. Thank you to those Jewish parents who posted here.
8
JFA, since sex (and subsequent STDs) usually occurs closer to the age of consent, shouldn't the procedure wait until then too - when the teenager or adult can also provide their consent?
If they are less likely to agree and give consent because they are no longer a helpless infant, doesn't that say or mean something to you? If their "faith" is strong enough to be branded for life in such a way, they will do it.
As for the billions of uncut men throughout history, do they really have a problem Jewish men don't? If it really made sex any better, all men would be doing it! If your concern is for the health of infants from diseases, then vaccinate them.
If they are less likely to agree and give consent because they are no longer a helpless infant, doesn't that say or mean something to you? If their "faith" is strong enough to be branded for life in such a way, they will do it.
As for the billions of uncut men throughout history, do they really have a problem Jewish men don't? If it really made sex any better, all men would be doing it! If your concern is for the health of infants from diseases, then vaccinate them.
8
Studies show that circumcision reduces the sensitivity of the penis and increases a man's chances of getting ED. This is why a lot of men don't like using condoms - it provides another layer of sensitivity reduction, when their penis has already had its sensitivity reduced by the circumcision.
As for health issues, plenty of body parts get diseases. We don't preemptively remove anyone's tonsils, appendix, breasts, etc, so it's not logical to preemptively remove the foreskin just because of the LOW chance that it MIGHT get some disease in the future.
As for cleanliness, we aren't cavemen anymore. Soap was invented a long time ago. Take a shower and use soap. The vagina has so many more folds of skin than the foreskin, and women do fine without needing to trim the skin off their vulva or labia.
And as for religion, don't presume to know what your child will grow up to believe in. He may develop religious beliefs different from yours.
As for health issues, plenty of body parts get diseases. We don't preemptively remove anyone's tonsils, appendix, breasts, etc, so it's not logical to preemptively remove the foreskin just because of the LOW chance that it MIGHT get some disease in the future.
As for cleanliness, we aren't cavemen anymore. Soap was invented a long time ago. Take a shower and use soap. The vagina has so many more folds of skin than the foreskin, and women do fine without needing to trim the skin off their vulva or labia.
And as for religion, don't presume to know what your child will grow up to believe in. He may develop religious beliefs different from yours.
39
"VMan" is a handle that speaks volumes.
Medically, the argument that decreased sensitivity is the result of circumcision is without scientific proof. Additionaly, the argument that circumcision causes ED is also without scientific proof.
What has been proven is that women (and men) get less
infections when their male partners have been circumcised.
The above statements are evidence based facts that have nothing to do with the agendas of any religious or political group.
Medically, the argument that decreased sensitivity is the result of circumcision is without scientific proof. Additionaly, the argument that circumcision causes ED is also without scientific proof.
What has been proven is that women (and men) get less
infections when their male partners have been circumcised.
The above statements are evidence based facts that have nothing to do with the agendas of any religious or political group.
3
"It is a cruel bronze age practice to inflict upon an unwitting child", "it is a form of child abuse", "it is a form of male genital mutilation", and on and on go the comments about this "barbaric practice." of male circumcision.
I was subjected to this rite over 85 years ago, at 8 days of age, obviously without my consent.Until now I believed that my non- observant Jewish parents had done the right thing. But I am beginning to have my doubts.
Perhaps I could have had a happier more purposeful life if I had not been so afflicted. I will never know. I will try to live my remaining days at peace with the idea that things could have been different.
I was subjected to this rite over 85 years ago, at 8 days of age, obviously without my consent.Until now I believed that my non- observant Jewish parents had done the right thing. But I am beginning to have my doubts.
Perhaps I could have had a happier more purposeful life if I had not been so afflicted. I will never know. I will try to live my remaining days at peace with the idea that things could have been different.
16
This is awesome. Dana Edell for President!!!!
Her son will thank her most, though.
Her son will thank her most, though.
6
My two Jewish sons, who are now adults, are not circumcised. One of them has thanked me and I have no reason to believe the other one isn't okay with things. I made the choice for several reasons. Why have natural child birth with a gentle welcoming to the world and then inflict pain 8 days later? Why do only males have a covenant with God? If my sons wanted to be circumcised that should be their choice. Both my sons have Hebrew names. They were named in synagogue. They are Jews.
26
They can't be called to Torah. Being uncircumcised, they are not part of the covenant. They are Jews, but they are cut off from a lot of what is considered part of "Jewishness," should they ever decide to become observant (at which time they will want a circumcision). And not only males have a covenant with God. The nature of men's covenant is visible and physical. If Jewishness is conveyed through the mother, think about the difference in pain levels between childbirth (which women are not required or commanded to do; only men are) and circumcision (which is a commandment). But people have always cherry-picked what they would and would not do in terms of their Jewishness; think of all the Jews (Hebrews) who did not even leave Egypt.
After attending a bris shortly before my son was born, I decided against circumcision (we are not Jewish), and my husband and pediatrician (whose own sons were not circumcised) were very supportive. When my son was in middle school, he insisted on being circumcised. Oh well. I tried.
3
What other part of the human body do we proactively cut off because it might someday cause a health problem?
20
For some women who have a family history of breast cancer, a few choose mastectomies before they themselves are diagnosed.
3
What an absurd analogy. Leaving foreskin intact will not kill you ! There are over 3 billion men on the planet right now who are intact and perfectly healthy !
5
Even carriers of the BRCA genes get to decide for themselves though.
6
There has also been a long-standing debate in the Muslim community about circumcision. Shia Muslim authorities say it's obligatory, while Sunnis say it is only recommended. The fact that both Jews and Muslims practice circumcision deflates the argument that circumcision is an expression of belonging to a tribe. Both Islam and the Jewish faith are Abrahamic religions, so the origin of the practice would seem to go back 14 centuries or so. The main historical argument for circumcision, as far as I can see, is that there are health benefits in areas of the world where, temperatures are often above 40 degrees Celsius, water was scarce and bodily cleanliness was difficult. And no one knew about STDs. In some Muslim traditions, circumcision, shaving public hair and armpits, trimming the mustache and trimming nails are considered "fitra," acts befitting a refined person, but also simple common sense for the above reasons.
11
Except you don't need to amputate a body part to keep your arm pits and nails clean, do you? How does one make the leap from washing one's body parts to chopping them off so they don't get dirty?
3
what are you talking about?
Abraham had the first circumcision over 37 centuries ago
Abraham had the first circumcision over 37 centuries ago
I am a Jew, and I chose not to circumcise my sons. I am proud to be a Jew, but disappointed that so many of my fellow Jews see fit to pass judgement on others for their choices.
Judaism to me has always been a place where we come together through our differences. Passionate debate is the bedrock of Jewish tradition. I am discouraged that so many would exclude me and my sons from the Jewish community -- would in fact declare that they are not Jewish at all -- because of this choice.
Judaism to me has always been a place where we come together through our differences. Passionate debate is the bedrock of Jewish tradition. I am discouraged that so many would exclude me and my sons from the Jewish community -- would in fact declare that they are not Jewish at all -- because of this choice.
29
Though I cannot speak as a religious Jew, the issue is that this is a non-negotiable requirement for Jewish males insofar as the Orthodoxy is concerned. You are asking people who have built their lives around religion to go against the core tenents in order to integrate you and your sons into their community. This is a major choice, a vital one, and one that does draw a dividing line between you and your traditionally religious bretheren.
3
The question is not whether you are Jewish, it is whether your children's mother is Jewish. If the mother is not Jewish, all the circumcisions in the world will not make them Jewish, unless they go through a conversion ceremony and are circumcised. If their mother is Jewish, they are Jewish, but if uncircumcised they are not part of the covenant (can't be called to Torah, can't be counted as part of a minyan for prayer). Those are the rules; whether you choose to follow them is up to you.
1
Ms. Edell, 41, who lives in Brooklyn and works as the executive director of a young feminists’ group called Spark Movement, is CLUELESS! Don't deprive your son of health!
2
"Don't deprive your son of health!"
I'm 66 years old and my foreskin is as healthy as can be. What health does it affect?
I'm 66 years old and my foreskin is as healthy as can be. What health does it affect?
19
Several national medical organizations are against infant male circumcision. National medical organizations in Germany and Sweden have called for a ban on elective infant male circumcision, the South Africans support a ban with religious exemptions, and the Danish and Dutch said they'd support a total ban if they didn't think it would drive the practice underground.
In Australia, "routine" infant male circumcision is banned in public hospitals (almost all the men responsible for this will be circumcised themselves, as the male circumcision rate in Australia in 1950 was about 90%. It's now 11%.)
In Australia, "routine" infant male circumcision is banned in public hospitals (almost all the men responsible for this will be circumcised themselves, as the male circumcision rate in Australia in 1950 was about 90%. It's now 11%.)
3
All I know is that as a Jewish woman (who only has relationships with Jewish men), if some man claimed he was Jewish and he wasn't circumcised, well, that would mean he may have had Jewish parentage, but that he wasn't a Jew.
Do it when they're less than a month old (having a doctor do it, if that makes you happier, but trained mohels specialize in that surgery and may do more of them than doctors do).
Plus Conservative and Orthodox Jews would not consider Aaron's son Jewish (his mother wasn't; father's faith is irrelevant) so in that case it doesn't matter.
Do it when they're less than a month old (having a doctor do it, if that makes you happier, but trained mohels specialize in that surgery and may do more of them than doctors do).
Plus Conservative and Orthodox Jews would not consider Aaron's son Jewish (his mother wasn't; father's faith is irrelevant) so in that case it doesn't matter.
4
Before I had kids, I had attended a number of brits and they seemed like happy occasions. That's not because of the circumcision but because family and friends are getting together to celebrate the birth of a new child.
When my first child was born, we did not know the gender in advance and when it was a boy, as a Jewish father, I didn't think about the question of having a brit -- it's just what you did. I was circumcised. The ceremony/operation went completely smoothly and my son did not appear to experience a particular trauma but I was still disquieted by the idea.
Between my first and second children's births, I attended a brit of the son of a friend who was Jewish but married to a Chinese woman. Because the mother was not Jewish, he had trouble finding a mohel who would perform the rite. There were no complications but the procedure was not as smooth or quick and the baby was clearly in distress. I felt very awkward thinking of how non-Jews would see this ceremony and the father subjecting his newborn son to this pain.
This left me in a quandary when my wife became pregnant again. She would definitely have felt it was an important part of the Jewish religion. Thankfully, my second child was a girl so we didn't have to decide. But I am glad people are finding alternatives.
As to the health arguments, if the procedure is being done for health reasons, it should be done by doctors, not mohels.
When my first child was born, we did not know the gender in advance and when it was a boy, as a Jewish father, I didn't think about the question of having a brit -- it's just what you did. I was circumcised. The ceremony/operation went completely smoothly and my son did not appear to experience a particular trauma but I was still disquieted by the idea.
Between my first and second children's births, I attended a brit of the son of a friend who was Jewish but married to a Chinese woman. Because the mother was not Jewish, he had trouble finding a mohel who would perform the rite. There were no complications but the procedure was not as smooth or quick and the baby was clearly in distress. I felt very awkward thinking of how non-Jews would see this ceremony and the father subjecting his newborn son to this pain.
This left me in a quandary when my wife became pregnant again. She would definitely have felt it was an important part of the Jewish religion. Thankfully, my second child was a girl so we didn't have to decide. But I am glad people are finding alternatives.
As to the health arguments, if the procedure is being done for health reasons, it should be done by doctors, not mohels.
7
I have heard on an anectodally that since mohels have more experience over the course of time, they actually do a better job than MD's
4
Especially if the mohel is board certified to perform circumcisions.
That is absolutely true. Circumcision in hospital may be performed by a junior intern with minimal experience. No doctor has anywhere near the experience with newborn circumcision as does a mohel.
1
I am the Jewish mother of two sons and also grandmother to three young men. All were circumcised. Though we are not greatly observant and the circumcisions were done in a hospital, it is unthinkable in our family not to circumcise a boy. We choose this not only because of our faith, but also because we believe there are health benefits as outlined in this article.
Parents make all sorts of decisions for their young children who cannot make them for themselves. I see this as little different. The foreskin is numbed so that there is little if any pain for the child.
That said, I still believe in freedom of choice, so the decision should be up to the parents, not the government (some places have seen movements to ban circumcision).
Parents make all sorts of decisions for their young children who cannot make them for themselves. I see this as little different. The foreskin is numbed so that there is little if any pain for the child.
That said, I still believe in freedom of choice, so the decision should be up to the parents, not the government (some places have seen movements to ban circumcision).
7
The decision should be up to teh child when he reached adulthood. Just like it shluld be his decision to cut a fintger off his hand! Why not? The hand will still work. Foreskin is not a birth defect!
2
This article would have been much better if: 1. It included CDC's clear take on benefits and risks (and no, unlike the author states, evidence re: benefits is not "inconclusive"). 2. The religious meaning, rationale, and importance of circumcision in Judaism.
Frankly, there's reasonable points for/against circumcision, but if you combine personal and public health benefits along with a religious dictate, I don't know how any practicing Jew could opt against it.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/docs/factsheets/mc-factsheet-508.pd...
Frankly, there's reasonable points for/against circumcision, but if you combine personal and public health benefits along with a religious dictate, I don't know how any practicing Jew could opt against it.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchhstp/newsroom/docs/factsheets/mc-factsheet-508.pd...
5
The CDC (and AAP) are waaay out of line with other countries though. National medical organizations in Germany and Sweden have called for a ban on elective infant male circumcision, the South Africans support a ban with religious exemptions, and the Danish and Dutch said they'd support a total ban if they didn't think it would drive the practice underground. In Australia, "routine" infant male circumcision is banned in public hospitals.
In response to the draft CDC guidelines, 31 senior physicians (around half of them chairs or presidents of national urological or pediatric organizations) wrote:
"However, the way from the background paper to the recommendations is marked by exclusion, omission and minimization of scientific peer evidence that does not support the recommendation. This is very similar to the development of the AAP circumcision policy statement in 2012 in which critical evidence was omitted or downplayed. A group of 38 distinguished physicians from Europe and Canada, comprising several heads and representatives of national medical associations, societies for pediatricians and pediatric surgeons, and medical ethics boards, published a comprehensive and evidence-based reply to the AAP recommendations, which has not been considered by the CDC (Frisch et al 2013)."
"Health providers, male patients and parents will miss important information for decision making if they follow the CDC proposal."
In response to the draft CDC guidelines, 31 senior physicians (around half of them chairs or presidents of national urological or pediatric organizations) wrote:
"However, the way from the background paper to the recommendations is marked by exclusion, omission and minimization of scientific peer evidence that does not support the recommendation. This is very similar to the development of the AAP circumcision policy statement in 2012 in which critical evidence was omitted or downplayed. A group of 38 distinguished physicians from Europe and Canada, comprising several heads and representatives of national medical associations, societies for pediatricians and pediatric surgeons, and medical ethics boards, published a comprehensive and evidence-based reply to the AAP recommendations, which has not been considered by the CDC (Frisch et al 2013)."
"Health providers, male patients and parents will miss important information for decision making if they follow the CDC proposal."
3
Uh, Zoe, then they are NOT Jewish. Also, Americans were typically circumsised after the end of WWII. The guys coming home who were circumsised had fewer complications in their genital area. It has worked well for several thousand years.
3
The irony you are missing is astounding: circumcision is desirable because men sent to war come home with less complications?
How about the men who DIDN'T come home? Seems to me that not having wars is healthier yet for men. Problem solved.
How about the men who DIDN'T come home? Seems to me that not having wars is healthier yet for men. Problem solved.
6
Uh, yes, they ARE Jewish. Also, Europeans were involved in WWII a lot longer than Americans, and almost none of them circumcise unless they're Jewish or Muslim. European men seem to be doing juuust fine though, better than American men in fact.
Female genital cutting may be even older than male circumcision btw, and its supporters say it's working well, but we still banned it on children.
Female genital cutting may be even older than male circumcision btw, and its supporters say it's working well, but we still banned it on children.
3
I'm not Jewish, and I'm circumcised. I think those in the comments who are claiming that it is some unethical act of mutilation are being self-righteous.
My brother is not circumcised and we always have talked about how much easier it is for me to keep my genitals clean being circumcised. I don't feel like my human rights have been violated. At it has done to my life is make hygiene easier.
My brother is not circumcised and we always have talked about how much easier it is for me to keep my genitals clean being circumcised. I don't feel like my human rights have been violated. At it has done to my life is make hygiene easier.
11
Hygiene is about washing not surgery.
If you're happy to be circumcised, that's great. It's not like you ever had the choice though. I do, and I'd pay a year's salary rather than be circumcised or have my son circumcised. Why would I want the most sensitive and pleasurable parts cut off? That little bit of skin makes a big difference (it's not just there to protect the glans).
Why don't we just let everyone decide for themselves whether or not they want irreversible genital surgery? It's their body after all.
It's not like it can't wait. I think it's only the USA (at around 60% and dropping) and Israel where more than half of baby boys are circumcised. Other countries circumcise, but not till anywhere from the age of seven to adolescence. Only about 12% of the world's circumcised men were circumcised as babies. Around two thirds of the world's men (including 88% of the world's non-Muslim men) never get circumcised.
If I'd been circumcised at birth and you hadn't though, I can easily see how we might be on opposite sides of this argument. I'd be the one who didn't know what they were missing.
If you're happy to be circumcised, that's great. It's not like you ever had the choice though. I do, and I'd pay a year's salary rather than be circumcised or have my son circumcised. Why would I want the most sensitive and pleasurable parts cut off? That little bit of skin makes a big difference (it's not just there to protect the glans).
Why don't we just let everyone decide for themselves whether or not they want irreversible genital surgery? It's their body after all.
It's not like it can't wait. I think it's only the USA (at around 60% and dropping) and Israel where more than half of baby boys are circumcised. Other countries circumcise, but not till anywhere from the age of seven to adolescence. Only about 12% of the world's circumcised men were circumcised as babies. Around two thirds of the world's men (including 88% of the world's non-Muslim men) never get circumcised.
If I'd been circumcised at birth and you hadn't though, I can easily see how we might be on opposite sides of this argument. I'd be the one who didn't know what they were missing.
7
Circumcision has been validated to lower the risk of spreading sexually transmitted disease among sexual partners. The current questioning of its value is in my opinion based on avoiding stigma should the offspring eventually marry outside of Judaism and is also an expression of anti-Jewishness. It rejects G-d's instruction that identifies a male as a Jew.
14
Thank you for your opinion on the choices other people make. I chose not to circumcise my children because the research I did, and the advice I received from medical professionals I trust, indicated that there is limited or no health benefit; and because I did not wish to inflict needless pain on my sons, who had already suffered greatly in their first 3 months of life.
8
I love you. thank you.
2
1) It's nothing to do with anti_Jewishness. It's about children's rights. If it weren't a religious thing, it would have been banned around the same time as female genital cutting.
2) Almost no-one in Europe is circumcised unless they're Jewish or Muslim, but they have lower rates of almost all STIs including HIV.
Babies aren't going to be getting any STIs before they're old enough to decide for themselves whether or not they want part of their genitals cutting off. It's their body; it should be their decision.
A 29 year study of males in New Zealand showed a very slightly *higher* rate of STIs among circumcised men:
http://www.jpeds.com/article/S0022-3476(07)00707-X/abstract
From a USAID report:
"There appears no clear pattern of association between male circumcision and HIV prevalence—in 8 of 18 countries with data, HIV prevalence is lower among circumcised men, while in the remaining 10 countries it is higher."
http://www.measuredhs.com/pubs/pdf/CR22/CR22.pdf
2) Almost no-one in Europe is circumcised unless they're Jewish or Muslim, but they have lower rates of almost all STIs including HIV.
Babies aren't going to be getting any STIs before they're old enough to decide for themselves whether or not they want part of their genitals cutting off. It's their body; it should be their decision.
A 29 year study of males in New Zealand showed a very slightly *higher* rate of STIs among circumcised men:
http://www.jpeds.com/article/S0022-3476(07)00707-X/abstract
From a USAID report:
"There appears no clear pattern of association between male circumcision and HIV prevalence—in 8 of 18 countries with data, HIV prevalence is lower among circumcised men, while in the remaining 10 countries it is higher."
http://www.measuredhs.com/pubs/pdf/CR22/CR22.pdf
8
The foreskin is there for several reasons. One is that a couple has more pleasure together. One should let the males make their own decision after their sexual 'awakening'.
28
Is anti-circumcision sentiment another euphemism like anti-Zion or BDS for Jew hatred (anti-semitism for the squeamish)?
Is anti-circumcision sentiment another way for Jewish self-haters to self-hate, or to justify their self-hatred?
And, finally, why should gentiles believe they have any skin in the game?
Is anti-circumcision sentiment another way for Jewish self-haters to self-hate, or to justify their self-hatred?
And, finally, why should gentiles believe they have any skin in the game?
10
Was that pun intended?
1
"...skin in the game"
No pun intended.
No pun intended.
Short answer, no. Long answer, noooo,
It's about children's rights. If it weren't a religious thing, it would have been banned in several countries around the same time as female genital cutting.
It's illegal to cut off a girl's prepuce, or to make any incision on a girl's genitals, even if no tissue is removed. Even a pinprick is banned. Why don't boys get the same protection? Except in surprisingly rare medical circumstances, everyone should be able to decide for themselves whether or not they want parts of their genitals cut off. It's *their* body.
It's about children's rights. If it weren't a religious thing, it would have been banned in several countries around the same time as female genital cutting.
It's illegal to cut off a girl's prepuce, or to make any incision on a girl's genitals, even if no tissue is removed. Even a pinprick is banned. Why don't boys get the same protection? Except in surprisingly rare medical circumstances, everyone should be able to decide for themselves whether or not they want parts of their genitals cut off. It's *their* body.
6
I can't help but think that there are antisemitic overtones in this article.
Why promote this--the option to avoid the procedure? Science bears out the overwhelming benefits of circumcision; and those eho opt out do so quietly, for the most part.
As a Jew, I've attended many brit milah ceremonies, and most of the crying is of the mother, overwhelmed with joy having delivered to the world another Jewish child. The infants rarely cry.
Calling it "mutilation" is insanity. Mutilation is destructive. This is surgical enhancement. There's nothing attractive about that extra little flap.
My own father, an Episcopalian born in 1918, was circumcised at birth. Why? my enlightened and well educated grandmother, a school teacher, said, "the Jews are smart--this is cleaner, and a lot prettier. "
Why promote this--the option to avoid the procedure? Science bears out the overwhelming benefits of circumcision; and those eho opt out do so quietly, for the most part.
As a Jew, I've attended many brit milah ceremonies, and most of the crying is of the mother, overwhelmed with joy having delivered to the world another Jewish child. The infants rarely cry.
Calling it "mutilation" is insanity. Mutilation is destructive. This is surgical enhancement. There's nothing attractive about that extra little flap.
My own father, an Episcopalian born in 1918, was circumcised at birth. Why? my enlightened and well educated grandmother, a school teacher, said, "the Jews are smart--this is cleaner, and a lot prettier. "
19
The overwhelming benefits? That is an enormous stretch. And to say that a circumcised penis is prettier -- that's an opinion, and nothing more. Any nook/cranny in the body is prone to grow some "funk" -- kids aren't the best at hygiene, so you teach them to take care of cracks & crevices. Do you know how much MRSA likes to live under the ends of fingernails? We don't rip people's fingernails off to prevent the spread of MRSA, which is a widespread health problem that can actually be deadly, just as penile cancer can be...
As a healthcare worker, I've seen a lot of circumcisions too. Don't kid yourself, the babies scream bloody murder. What a thing to experience, when a new life is just beginning to navigate the "outside" world and learn to trust in others... The saddest part of a circumcision, to me, is seeing the baby's tissue after the procedure -- an internal organ (the glans) has become an external organ, the end of the penis becomes dried out, the sensory nerves are blunted... Yuck.
As a healthcare worker, I've seen a lot of circumcisions too. Don't kid yourself, the babies scream bloody murder. What a thing to experience, when a new life is just beginning to navigate the "outside" world and learn to trust in others... The saddest part of a circumcision, to me, is seeing the baby's tissue after the procedure -- an internal organ (the glans) has become an external organ, the end of the penis becomes dried out, the sensory nerves are blunted... Yuck.
25
it is no more an internal organ than your nose is.
3
I have to laugh every time someone argues that boys simply need to be taught how to properly clean themselves. Ha! These are people who would seem to know, or remember, nothing of young boys. If someone can tell me how you get a boy to wash his hands with soap every time before he eats or when coming home after school, I might be willing to listen. As a teacher, a mother of four boys, and someone who knows all those boys' friends very well, I can safely say that most boys wash well only under duress. And after a certain age, you can't inspect all areas for cleanliness the way you inspect hands ... And then send them back to wash again ... And again ... And again.
6
With ritual circumcision on baby girls, we don't even have this argument. It's outlawed. (And, no, don't go off about how female circumcision is more involved than "simply snipping a piece of skin off"--male circumcision is still genital mutilation.)
So, here's a thought: Don't circumcise a newborn boy. When the child is 18, he can decide for himself what is done to his body, whether he wants himself circumcised because of faith, because of overblown health concerns, whatever. If fewer men decide to be circumcised as a result, then there's your answer.
So, here's a thought: Don't circumcise a newborn boy. When the child is 18, he can decide for himself what is done to his body, whether he wants himself circumcised because of faith, because of overblown health concerns, whatever. If fewer men decide to be circumcised as a result, then there's your answer.
37
Eight. days. That's the commandment. It's not discretionary. Like it or not, keep it or don't, but performing it 'when they grow up' is. not. an. option.
4
I'm circumcised, and I don't feel mutilated, traumatized, or anything negative. I'm happy about it.
9
It is an option in countries (Russia, Ukraine) where circumcision was outlawed and to be circumcised could cause death or serious injury by non-Jews. In that case, young men who were not circumcised may choose to have the procedure done in hospital if they move to another country. But it is extremely painful and recovery is a lot longer than for a child of eight days.
I haven't seen anyone mention yet that Jewish circumcision used to be much less radical - a removal of the tip of the foreskin that extends past the glans. But around 140CE the practice was changed to one that made it impossible to "pass" as an uncircumcised, and thus gentile, man. Given this connection to the oppression of Jews I can't see it ever going back to what it was in ancient times, but I wish people would realize that the original Jewish practice was a more of a marking ritual, not the removal of so much functional tissue.
42
That's a very astute comment.
2
Wow, I didn't know that. I agree, that it's too bad that the practice was changed so as to be more "drastic," and then never changed back.
9
That is interesting. Can you share your sources for this historical information; it would be worth looking into.
4
I have seven brothers. The first two were NOT circumcised. My mother regretted that, and was certain that her five other sons were circumcised. The two older brothers had one infection after another . . . and both chose to be circumcised as adults. They were VERY relieved. All of their sons were circumcised when born. My son was circumcised when born and still in the hospital. None of my younger five brothers ever had an infection of any kind.
I vividly remember a sad story of my Mother's good friend, Margaret. She died one month after the birth of her 9th child. The cause was cervical cancer. Her widowed husband was distraught and lost. He gave up that last baby for adoption.
In due time, my Mother's best girlfriend married the sorrowful widow. They had three children for a grand total of 12 children. It took three years, but my Mother's best girlfriend also died from cervical cancer. My VERY vivid memory is that my Mother stated clearly to me after that sorrowful funeral: "the father is a carrier of that cervical disease!" My Mother wasted no time in figuring out (correctly, according to a family relative) that the twice widowed father was uncircumcised. My Mother warned me, and she was crystal clear about it, too. Consequently, I chose wisely. To this day, I am thankful for my Mother's observation. My son was vaccinated with Gardisil the day it was made available to males. I recently chose to be vaccinated with Gardisil 9.
HPV & HIV are deadly.
I vividly remember a sad story of my Mother's good friend, Margaret. She died one month after the birth of her 9th child. The cause was cervical cancer. Her widowed husband was distraught and lost. He gave up that last baby for adoption.
In due time, my Mother's best girlfriend married the sorrowful widow. They had three children for a grand total of 12 children. It took three years, but my Mother's best girlfriend also died from cervical cancer. My VERY vivid memory is that my Mother stated clearly to me after that sorrowful funeral: "the father is a carrier of that cervical disease!" My Mother wasted no time in figuring out (correctly, according to a family relative) that the twice widowed father was uncircumcised. My Mother warned me, and she was crystal clear about it, too. Consequently, I chose wisely. To this day, I am thankful for my Mother's observation. My son was vaccinated with Gardisil the day it was made available to males. I recently chose to be vaccinated with Gardisil 9.
HPV & HIV are deadly.
12
Wear condoms.
5
My family is Catholic, and has been for centuries. Several daughters have married men of the Jewish faith. All of their sons are circumcised. All of my brothers sons, (as I wrote above) except for the two older brothers were circumcised. I asked my Mother why she had decided against it. Her answer was loaded with remorse. My Mother had been convinced by the medical staff during her two maternity stays that is was NOT a smart idea, and that circumcision was a "Jewish thing." My Mother said: "the fear was that my sons would be identified as "jews" if Hitler and his like took over the world.
World War II was raging at the time, and fear was a weapon in Europe, and apparently in American maternity wards. My Mother always seemed sad, and somewhat confused that she had been talked out of it. She had had no brothers, all older sisters, and her Father passed away when she was six years of age. My Dad was away at war when she gave birth to their first two sons.
My Mother could not help to think, as she admitted years later, that she was too young to grasp the full meaning behind the strong suggestion to not circumcise her newborn sons. My Mother came to believe that an anti- Jewish sentiment was at the root of it.
Circumcision takes two minutes. It takes years & years to die from deadly diseases and/or STDs. Some survive. Michael Douglas is a lucky& prime example. Then again, Mr. Douglas has the resources for the best of medical care. Most do not, and will not.
World War II was raging at the time, and fear was a weapon in Europe, and apparently in American maternity wards. My Mother always seemed sad, and somewhat confused that she had been talked out of it. She had had no brothers, all older sisters, and her Father passed away when she was six years of age. My Dad was away at war when she gave birth to their first two sons.
My Mother could not help to think, as she admitted years later, that she was too young to grasp the full meaning behind the strong suggestion to not circumcise her newborn sons. My Mother came to believe that an anti- Jewish sentiment was at the root of it.
Circumcision takes two minutes. It takes years & years to die from deadly diseases and/or STDs. Some survive. Michael Douglas is a lucky& prime example. Then again, Mr. Douglas has the resources for the best of medical care. Most do not, and will not.
4
Conception would fail. In addition, an infected male remains a carrier of STDs & HPV. His health is at risk as well.
It is intelligent to prevent disease, not to increase the risks. Circumcision prevents infections and some deadly diseases such as HPV and HIV.
It is intelligent to prevent disease, not to increase the risks. Circumcision prevents infections and some deadly diseases such as HPV and HIV.
1
1 I will reveal my bias openly. i feel violated that my parents removed a good healthy part when i was healthy. 2 when i complain people criticize me and that is why we barely hear men complaining but we do... mostly for the future children regardless of gender and ethnicity.
3 even if it would be "beneficial" [see below that that is not justification] let the son have a future choice which doctor to believe. circumcision of a healthy baby is not needed and certainly not "medically urgent" with no delay the way by-passs heart surgery is needed. so we may delay, not cut now, allowing the future choice.
4 i emphasize the idea of health benefits:
british medical association warned that doctors who are hired to circumcise "in the belief of health benefit" [section 4.4] then the doctor must inform that this is not justification, because of the "lack of concensus" of "benefits" which according to bma "is in insufficient" to be a justification, while the procedure is dangerous and risky.
3 even if it would be "beneficial" [see below that that is not justification] let the son have a future choice which doctor to believe. circumcision of a healthy baby is not needed and certainly not "medically urgent" with no delay the way by-passs heart surgery is needed. so we may delay, not cut now, allowing the future choice.
4 i emphasize the idea of health benefits:
british medical association warned that doctors who are hired to circumcise "in the belief of health benefit" [section 4.4] then the doctor must inform that this is not justification, because of the "lack of concensus" of "benefits" which according to bma "is in insufficient" to be a justification, while the procedure is dangerous and risky.
19
You're quite sure this isn't just part of a--ahem--larger issue with your parents? Most men don't know the difference, don't care, and in any case, have better things to worry about.
4
Comp: If a woman was unhappy about being genitally cut, would you suggest that they had ahem - larger issues with their parents?
7
Thank you for this article. My husband and I were both raised Jewish (he conservative, I attended conservative and Orthodox Hebrew schools). We identify strongly as Jews -- we host Jewish holidays at our home, we had a Jewish wedding, we both traveled to or lived in Israel, we have Orthodox family in Israel, and we gave our child an identifiably Jewish name. When I was pregnant with my child (now age 5), we agreed that if we had a son, we wouldn't circumcise. We informed our families of this decision. (We opted to not learn the sex of our child before birth, and I eventually gave birth to a delightful daughter. We had a Jewish naming ceremony for her.)
We are in a community of progressive, unassimilated Jews, many of whom don't circumcise, so we certainly didn't feel like trailblazers in our decision. After I saw my first medical circumcision as a nursing student, I was horrified and outraged. In my view, circumcisions are an extreme form of child abuse. I was shocked that the pediatrician performing the circumcision was so indifferent to the baby's terrified scream, even telling the resident in the room that the baby couldn't feel any pain. Physical pain may be somewhat masked by sugar (in the hospital), wine (in the home ceremony), and local anesthetic, but the recovery process will likely include physical pain and undoubtedly emotional trauma, as well.
It's interesting to me that non-Orthodox Jews have more welcomed Bat Mitzvahs for girls than Brit Shaloms for boys.
We are in a community of progressive, unassimilated Jews, many of whom don't circumcise, so we certainly didn't feel like trailblazers in our decision. After I saw my first medical circumcision as a nursing student, I was horrified and outraged. In my view, circumcisions are an extreme form of child abuse. I was shocked that the pediatrician performing the circumcision was so indifferent to the baby's terrified scream, even telling the resident in the room that the baby couldn't feel any pain. Physical pain may be somewhat masked by sugar (in the hospital), wine (in the home ceremony), and local anesthetic, but the recovery process will likely include physical pain and undoubtedly emotional trauma, as well.
It's interesting to me that non-Orthodox Jews have more welcomed Bat Mitzvahs for girls than Brit Shaloms for boys.
26
Yay, way to use your brain &egoism sense!
In the community where I practice nursing, circumcision is not all that common anymore. The parents who do insist on it (often times broaching the subject when their baby is freshly tucked in in the NICU, after being resuscitated!!!) are often the ones with the least amount of education.
In the community where I practice nursing, circumcision is not all that common anymore. The parents who do insist on it (often times broaching the subject when their baby is freshly tucked in in the NICU, after being resuscitated!!!) are often the ones with the least amount of education.
9
I am a Gentile, medically circumcised as an infant in 1955. In my age cohort in the USA, uncircumcised boys were ostracized in the locker room. I recall one such kid growing up, being taunted by the others.
I have had romantic/sexual relationships with several wonderful Jewish women in the USA over the years. Regardless of their level of religious observance, all these women strongly preferred a circumcised man, and at least one asked me about it in advance.
The only women in my life who objected were Gentile women in Germany. Some complained about my ‘Schnitt’ (cut). I told them they’d better get used to it. I’ve read that Germany has since outlawed circumcision, except for cases of a ‘medical necessity.’
I have had romantic/sexual relationships with several wonderful Jewish women in the USA over the years. Regardless of their level of religious observance, all these women strongly preferred a circumcised man, and at least one asked me about it in advance.
The only women in my life who objected were Gentile women in Germany. Some complained about my ‘Schnitt’ (cut). I told them they’d better get used to it. I’ve read that Germany has since outlawed circumcision, except for cases of a ‘medical necessity.’
4
This is great! It's important to be progressive! It's time to abandon rituals that can be harmful and cruelt! In the 21st century there shouldn't be any room for cruelty and harmful rituals! In the Jewish law, if the mother is Jewish the child is automatically Jewish regardless of anything. A person can also be Jewish by faith!
12
Your claim is factually incorrect. An uncircumcised Jewish male is considered to be "cut off" spiritually. The language of the Torah is unfortunately very clear on this.
My son was circumcised by an Orthodox mohel and was given a penile block beforehand: he slept through the entire thing. Neither he nor any other Jewish man I know, knows the difference, or cares. (Of course, he didn't walk for a year afterwards.)
The majority of American men in my generation were circumcised in infancy--the overwhelming majority don't know or care, either.
Throughout history circumcision has been the first thing that genocidal tyrants outlaw when they seek to destroy the Jewish people. Throughout history Jews have risked their lives to fulfill the commandment. We still remember a civil war fought over (arguably) the issue of circumcision: Chanukah.
The majority of American men in my generation were circumcised in infancy--the overwhelming majority don't know or care, either.
Throughout history circumcision has been the first thing that genocidal tyrants outlaw when they seek to destroy the Jewish people. Throughout history Jews have risked their lives to fulfill the commandment. We still remember a civil war fought over (arguably) the issue of circumcision: Chanukah.
8
There had been no sacrifices in the temple for nearly four years. Antiochus ordered a pig to be slaughtered in the temple and that started the rebellion by Judah the high priest and his sons.
2
Female Non jew here. This pertains to the circumcision leads to better hygiene argument:
I just don't understand why men cannot be taught to clean themselves enough to take care of any infections that can arise? Women have folds too and we learn.
I just don't understand why men cannot be taught to clean themselves enough to take care of any infections that can arise? Women have folds too and we learn.
26
Allow me to point out that boys are different from girls in regard to cleanliness. Even as adults: women routinely wash their hands after using the bathroom; men, not so much.
2
I was circumcised as an infant, by a Japanese doctor, at the request of my Irish catholic parents. There were no Jews involved. All these years later I am still resentful that my parents had me circumcised/mutilated without my consent. I think my both my parents are idiots for making this decision for me. Why is it that female circumcision is such a red hot issue and must be stopped by all means. When it comes to boys it's bring out the knives and chop it off?
18
I would actually love to compare parental IQ as it relates to the choice to circumcise or not circumcise their newborn boy babies. Maybe among only Gentiles (?). Your comment about your parents being "idiots" -- I see this at work, time and again...
2
FMG is not circumcision. In FMG, a girl's clitoris and labia are removed--generally with a pair of rusty scissors--and the wound is sewn shut leaving only a small opening for the egress of urine and menstrual fluids. The wound is reopened every time she is raped by her husband and with each childbirth, and the woman is left in pain and vulnerable to infection the rest of her life.
A boy who is circumcised as an infant never knows the difference, and keeps perfectly functioning genitals. They are not even remotely comparable.
A boy who is circumcised as an infant never knows the difference, and keeps perfectly functioning genitals. They are not even remotely comparable.
8
Not all FGM is infibulation (removal of clitoris and labia and sewing up the girl). The WHO classifies FGM into 4 types. One of them (which is the most common in places like Indonesia and Egypt) involves removing the female foreskin known as the clitoral hood. It used to be known as female circumcision and, in the countries that practice it, that is what it is called. Other forms of FGM include a ritual nick of the clitoris or clitoral hood or scraping. This is all FGM. In 2010 the American Academy of Pediatrics suggested that the "minor" forms of FGM be legalized. They withdrew their policy statement after worldwide condemnation but American doctors still continue to advocate that some forms of FGM be allowed. FGM (depending on what "type" is being performed) is directly comparable to MGM (known by the euphemism "circumcision"). ALL forms of genital cutting of children are wrong, no matter what the sex.
5
I'd be interested to know how many of the many "human rights activists" on this board that state circumcision is wrong partly due to the lack of agency you're giving the baby on their own body are Pro-Abortion. In the case of Abortion, mothers decide to murder their own child. In circumcision or Brit, you remove a completely unnecessary piece of skin from an organ, and the baby gets to live and grow up.
3
I've never heard of being pro-abortion. Did you mean pro-choice? Pro-choice involves promoting women's agency over their own bodies. An embryo isn't a person yet. A baby about to be circumcised is a person and cannot sign consent paperwork.
It isn't unreasonable to be against circumcision (in the absence of informed consent, of course) while simultaneously pro-choice. It actually makes more sense in regards to agency, if you wish to use that frame of reference.
It isn't unreasonable to be against circumcision (in the absence of informed consent, of course) while simultaneously pro-choice. It actually makes more sense in regards to agency, if you wish to use that frame of reference.
12
Why would there be a "completely unnecessary piece of skin" anywhere on a human body? It's nothing but amputation of healthy tissue from an human being in their most vulnerable state. Between 80% and 85% of all men on the planet are intact. Circumcised men are outnumbered !
3
I'm not Jewish and I'm a woman. My circumcised husband and I chose not to have our son circumcised because it seemed strange to cut something off for no apparent reason. My father thought my son's penis was "disgusting" because it was different from his. OK, not my problem.
After divorcing my husband, my next boyfriend was uncircumcised. Night and day difference. That little bit of skin is there for a reason. It provides cushioning and lubrication and makes sex immeasurably more comfortable. No lube needed, no soreness ever. Please leave the penis alone. It has a job to do.
After divorcing my husband, my next boyfriend was uncircumcised. Night and day difference. That little bit of skin is there for a reason. It provides cushioning and lubrication and makes sex immeasurably more comfortable. No lube needed, no soreness ever. Please leave the penis alone. It has a job to do.
40
Yep!!! Best not to mess with Mother Nature!
10
I am a woman, not Jewish, so I'm not in a position to tell Jewish people how to practice their faith, but people do really need to stop pretending that circumcision is harmless. By definition, it causes harm by removing a perfectly normal, functional part of male anatomy. Fine, many men won't know what they're missing, boys will have no memory of the experience, but that doesn't make the procedure harmless. We don't remove spleens or appendices for non-medical reasons, and I fail to understand why foreskins are different, except that their removal is a culturally ingrained practice. If it isn't medically justified (and it generally isn't, unless there are complications), then I can't understand how it's morally justified. Bodily autonomy is important.
24
I'll reveal my bias up front. I'm a Jew by choice. I was medically circumcised as a baby, and when I converted as an adult I underwent a hatafat dam brit at a mikvah (google it).
First, the idea that male circumcision is genital mutilation is ludicrous. No one circumcised as a baby has any memory of the event, and any pain is very brief. You're not even aware anything is "missing". So no one is harmed by circumcision.
Second, if non-Jews don't want to be circumcised, that's fine, but it is true that generally it is medically beneficial (especially regarding STDs), and again, there's no medical downside. So the idea that your doing your son a favor (medically) by not having a circumcision is incorrect. And as for avoiding pain, uncircumcised babies can get nasty infections from "dirt" trapped under the foreskin. I knew one (non-Jewish) family where this happened repeatedly, and the poor kid was in agony when it occurred.
But most importantly, if you're Jewish and you don't have your son circumcised, you are making it much more difficult for him to live as a normal, everyday Jew (think dating and marriage, or summer camp). A circumcised Jew can still always elect to reject his faith, but an un-circumcised Jewish boy is going to have a much harder time living a fully Jewish life. Even if Jewish parents utterly reject their faith, why deprive their son of at least having the option of living as a Jew?
First, the idea that male circumcision is genital mutilation is ludicrous. No one circumcised as a baby has any memory of the event, and any pain is very brief. You're not even aware anything is "missing". So no one is harmed by circumcision.
Second, if non-Jews don't want to be circumcised, that's fine, but it is true that generally it is medically beneficial (especially regarding STDs), and again, there's no medical downside. So the idea that your doing your son a favor (medically) by not having a circumcision is incorrect. And as for avoiding pain, uncircumcised babies can get nasty infections from "dirt" trapped under the foreskin. I knew one (non-Jewish) family where this happened repeatedly, and the poor kid was in agony when it occurred.
But most importantly, if you're Jewish and you don't have your son circumcised, you are making it much more difficult for him to live as a normal, everyday Jew (think dating and marriage, or summer camp). A circumcised Jew can still always elect to reject his faith, but an un-circumcised Jewish boy is going to have a much harder time living a fully Jewish life. Even if Jewish parents utterly reject their faith, why deprive their son of at least having the option of living as a Jew?
38
andy it is a crime to even pinch a baby with no "excuse that he will not remember". how can you say no harm when a healthy peice is missing?
9
First, "mutilation" as defined by a good medical dictionary is perfectly applicable to neonatal circumcision. Second, there is no proven benefit of circumcision except in exceedingly rare medical cases; research suggests that circumcision actually promotes STI transmission; as for medical "downsides," consider that circumcised men are the world's leading consumers of erectile dysfunction medications. Third, social conformism - the need to look "normal" in the hypothetical locker room - merely adds insult to injury. A little social embarrassment is as nothing compared with healthy human development during infancy, and sexual intercourse as nature intended in adulthood. Brit shalom!
2
1) We could cut parts off the genitals of baby girls without them remembering it, but that wouldn't mean they weren't harmed. I'd certainly regard it as "mutilation" if I was circumcised against my will.
2) "generally medically beneficial"? Several national medical organizations are against infant male circumcision. National medical organizations in Germany and Sweden have called for a ban on elective infant male circumcision, the South Africans support a ban with religious exemptions, and the Danish and Dutch said they'd support a total ban if they didn't think it would drive the practice underground.
In Australia, "routine" infant male circumcision is banned in public hospitals (almost all the men responsible for this will be circumcised themselves, as the male circumcision rate in Australia in 1950 was about 90%. It's now 11%.)
3) Some intact males need to be circumcised, but it's quite rare. A baby circumcised at birth is far more likely to need an operation to fix the circumcision than a baby left intact is ever to need a circumcision.
4) An intact male can can always get circumcised (and if his mother's Jewish, then he's Jewish), but a circumcised male can never be intact.
2) "generally medically beneficial"? Several national medical organizations are against infant male circumcision. National medical organizations in Germany and Sweden have called for a ban on elective infant male circumcision, the South Africans support a ban with religious exemptions, and the Danish and Dutch said they'd support a total ban if they didn't think it would drive the practice underground.
In Australia, "routine" infant male circumcision is banned in public hospitals (almost all the men responsible for this will be circumcised themselves, as the male circumcision rate in Australia in 1950 was about 90%. It's now 11%.)
3) Some intact males need to be circumcised, but it's quite rare. A baby circumcised at birth is far more likely to need an operation to fix the circumcision than a baby left intact is ever to need a circumcision.
4) An intact male can can always get circumcised (and if his mother's Jewish, then he's Jewish), but a circumcised male can never be intact.
21
I know many gentiles who are not circumcising their sons. I am surprised that families of the Jewish faith would forgo the practice.
I'll miss the catering at the bris.
There's the hygiene factor to consider, and the potentially of infection and not only STDs. Without circumcision, there will be more smegma and less bagels going forward.
As Dean Martin used to sing, "Never treat me........like a gentile."
I'll miss the catering at the bris.
There's the hygiene factor to consider, and the potentially of infection and not only STDs. Without circumcision, there will be more smegma and less bagels going forward.
As Dean Martin used to sing, "Never treat me........like a gentile."
7
First of all, curse you for putting the words "smegma" and "bagels" in proximity. Second, that's we have soap and showers, sir.
9
Female genitals are harder to clean than male genitals, they produce more smegma, and they get way more infections down there, but we wouldn't cut parts off baby girls. Hygiene is about washing, not surgery.
14
I'm thankful to live in the United States of America, the first and maybe only country in the history of the world where the right to execute Jewish cultural and ritual practices is protected, no matter how much progressiveJews and Gentiles are grossed out by it.
This sort of thing has been going on since Apian. Philo and Josephus wrote about it. #Checkyoursecularorliberalprivilege
This sort of thing has been going on since Apian. Philo and Josephus wrote about it. #Checkyoursecularorliberalprivilege
13
Some people think it's their religious right or obligation to have their daughters cut, but even a pinprick is now banned. Boys should get the same protection.
17
The percentage of circumcised men winning Nobel Prizes is greater than that of the general population.
14
correlation is not causation.
1
I am Jewish, my husband is not. We raised our son, now an adult, as a Jew—and the only question we had about circumcision was where, how, and by whom. Originally, we’d planned it to be done in-hospital before we were discharged, but when the pediatric resident (who looked to be about 12 years old) told us she was thinking about letting her chief resident do it because our son was “so tiny” (6lb 3 oz), we immediately called the hospital’s Jewish chaplain for a list of mohels. My parents flew in for the bris, and the mohel explained the ceremony to our guests (most of them Gentile). He was skilled and swift, and our son recovered uneventfully (contentedly sucking on his pacifier and watching the Bears game while cradled in his dad’s arms, as the guests celebrated).
All my Gentile friends opted not to circumcise—yet despite proper hygiene ALL of their sons developed infections and other problems requiring surgically-performed circumcisions at a much later age (five through twelve), which turned out to be far more physically and emotionally traumatic, with longer recovery periods.
All my Gentile friends opted not to circumcise—yet despite proper hygiene ALL of their sons developed infections and other problems requiring surgically-performed circumcisions at a much later age (five through twelve), which turned out to be far more physically and emotionally traumatic, with longer recovery periods.
21
You must be doing something very wrong there. Here in Europe medical conditions that require circumcision are very rare, less than 1% according to danish studies. If all your friends sons developed such a condition, they either did something terrible wrong, probably didn't follow the number 1 rule "leave it alone" or the doctors who diagnosed that there was a medical contidition that require circumcision did not do their job right. Inflammations or balantitis do not require circumcision, natural phimoses widens itself as the boy ages and pathological phimosis can me treated with cream most times.
23
I am also from Europe (UK), and I can assure you that none of my friends with boys have needed circumcisions, my father and brother are happily intact with no problems and there is no epidemic of foreskin issues in Europe. Why is only American foreskin so defective? Unfortunately, American doctors uneducated in foreskin are to blame. They diagnose "phimosis" when there is none, give incorrect care instructions about forcibly retracting the foreskin to "clean under" - thereby causing skin tearing, bleeding and infections. This leads to the doctor then "blaming" the foreskin as the source of problems and ordering a circumcision when in fact it is the doctor's own ignorant "care" advice that caused the problem. That's why your non-gentile friends ended up circumcising their sons. I live in NY and have two intact sons. No problems whatsoever with their foreskins but I have to be ever vigilant about uneducated doctors.
9
I have never forgiven my parents nor the doctor for removing my foreskin. It is a normal, necessary part of the penis for it to work right. It has protective, erogenous, and has other important functions. The practice should be outlawed as mutilation unless it is needed for real medical reasons. If an adult chooses to remove his foreskin, he need to have his heads examined. Preventing penile cancer is a cruel canard offered by those who are grasping at straws to justify the terrible practice of circumcision.
53
You, my friend, sound very beta. Also, there's no conclusive scientific evidence that the foreskin increases sexual sensations.
4
More power to the parents refusing to have their children circumcised.
It's a barbaric ritual.
It's a barbaric ritual.
41
True, there are now "progressive" persons of Jewish origins who do not wish to celebrate the brith mila, Jewish circumcision. But many if not most of these people feel generally uncomfortable about being Jewish. The two rabbis that I know of -- one in Chicago, the other in Vancouver -- who promote alternatives to the brith mila also just happen to be leaders in the destroy-Israel movement. OK, if you don't like to identify fully as a Jew, if you wish to assimilate into the non-Jewish environment, be my guest. But please, spare us the rationalizations about preserving the purity of the infant's body.
12
werner how can yu ignore a child's pain?
2
We chose not to have our son circumcised (my husband was not). As a pre-adolescent his foreskin was too tight to pull back...uncomfortable...and eventually we and he opted for a circumcission. It was painful for him during the healing, but he healed and no problems with sex afterwards.
To tight or was someone forcing the connected foreskin over the glans. It won't go back unless it has naturally separated or been forced.
2
Oh my God, did you have to show the scissors?
They don't use that kind of scissors.
3
Why does it seem so hard to comprehend that Jews are a family? They are people who think, with some reason, that they are genetic descendants of the Abraham of the Bible. Judaism is the family religion, but you are born into, and so part of, the family whatever you do. Definitions of who is born into the family range from the stringent restrictions of the ultra-Orthodox to the Nazi any great-grand-parent. You can choose to ignore the family and its traditions or not, but, as in the Eagles' Hotel California, 'you can never leave'.
3
The odds are very high that we are all genetic descendants of Abraham.
3
well, if you believe the bible, then you believe this is required by some god. Chuck this nonsense and chuck the rest of it which makes little more sense.
7
Judaism is not a dinner menu from which you can pick and choose what you would like.
What does it mean to be a Jew?
This article makes me cry.
What does it mean to be a Jew?
This article makes me cry.
10
All religions are dinner menus. Find me a religion in which the followers all uniformly follow the dogma to the letter.
9
I think Dan's point is that Judaism, or any religion for that matter, is not meant for picking and choosing. We all do it, to be sure, but the idea is to strive to do more and better, at least if you are intent on following the faith. Doing less and assuming that the alternatives you find are just as legitimate as thousands of years of tradition are what I assume is upsetting to Dan.
1
I think the resistance to circumcision is a tempest in a teapot. I'm not Jewish, but every male relative
that I have has been circumcised with absolutely no physical problems. Yes, I checked a few years
ago. More than that, I was in the Army in the '80s, serving in an overseas hospital (not in any war
zone). Every week there must have been a dozen men from the outfit we served who entered the
hospital, requesting a circumcision -- all 18 or older. I remember them walking through the halls
holding their white bathrobes away from their bodies until the surgery had healed ( a day or so).
It was a non-problem to be circumcised -- and many of the ex-patients even said sex was better after
the operation. (The hospital was ordered to do a six-month and a one-year follow-up exam to find out if there had been any post-surgical problems). Relax, folks, un-foreskinned is better.
that I have has been circumcised with absolutely no physical problems. Yes, I checked a few years
ago. More than that, I was in the Army in the '80s, serving in an overseas hospital (not in any war
zone). Every week there must have been a dozen men from the outfit we served who entered the
hospital, requesting a circumcision -- all 18 or older. I remember them walking through the halls
holding their white bathrobes away from their bodies until the surgery had healed ( a day or so).
It was a non-problem to be circumcised -- and many of the ex-patients even said sex was better after
the operation. (The hospital was ordered to do a six-month and a one-year follow-up exam to find out if there had been any post-surgical problems). Relax, folks, un-foreskinned is better.
17
Your opinion. Not mine.
4
I would like to know the percentages of American baby boys who are circumcised and who are not, regardless of religious affiliation. Outside of Judaism, I consider this a matter of aesthetics. The majority of uncircumcised men are surely met, more often than not, with surprised women when the clothes start coming off. Make your son's future sex-life less likely to involve last-minute physiological explanations and have him circumcised.
8
Drops in male circumcision since 1950:
USA: from 90% to around 60%
Canada: from 48% to 32%
UK: from 35% to about 5% (about 1-2% among non-Muslims)
Australia: 85% to 11% ("routine" circumcision is now *banned* in public hospitals in all states except one)
New Zealand: 95% to below 3% (mostly Samoans and Tongans)
South America and Europe: never above 5%
Why don't we just let everyone decide for themselves whether or not they want irreversible genital surgery? It's their body after all.
It's not like it can't wait. I think it's only the USA (at around 60% and dropping) and Israel where more than half of baby boys are circumcised. Other countries circumcise, but not till anywhere from the age of seven to adolescence. Only about 12% of the world's circumcised men were circumcised as babies. Around two thirds of the world's men (including 88% of the world's non-Muslim men) never get circumcised.
USA: from 90% to around 60%
Canada: from 48% to 32%
UK: from 35% to about 5% (about 1-2% among non-Muslims)
Australia: 85% to 11% ("routine" circumcision is now *banned* in public hospitals in all states except one)
New Zealand: 95% to below 3% (mostly Samoans and Tongans)
South America and Europe: never above 5%
Why don't we just let everyone decide for themselves whether or not they want irreversible genital surgery? It's their body after all.
It's not like it can't wait. I think it's only the USA (at around 60% and dropping) and Israel where more than half of baby boys are circumcised. Other countries circumcise, but not till anywhere from the age of seven to adolescence. Only about 12% of the world's circumcised men were circumcised as babies. Around two thirds of the world's men (including 88% of the world's non-Muslim men) never get circumcised.
18
Jan 5, 2015 - According to the CDC, roughly 80% of American men are circumcised.
3
"It had no face--no personality..."
3
It's unnerving to see these comments brigaded by posters whose only contribution seems to be ridiculing the practice of ritual circumcision. Let's take a more pragmatic approach - if you identify as Jewish and are intent on following the religious laws of Judaism, it's your responsibility to learn about why circumcision is important and why it must be performed.
The streak of righteous individualism that seems to run rampant among American Jews doesn't in any way invalidate how vital the act of circumcision is in the eyes of religious Judaism. If you opt for an alternative ceremony or don't do it at all, it is again on your shoulder's to educate yourself about the risks you run from a spiritual standpoint. We can call it outdated or outright barbaric, but that doesn't change the tradition. Likewise, we can choose to think we know better, but that calls to mind a lack of faith as opposed to a burdening of knowledge.
The streak of righteous individualism that seems to run rampant among American Jews doesn't in any way invalidate how vital the act of circumcision is in the eyes of religious Judaism. If you opt for an alternative ceremony or don't do it at all, it is again on your shoulder's to educate yourself about the risks you run from a spiritual standpoint. We can call it outdated or outright barbaric, but that doesn't change the tradition. Likewise, we can choose to think we know better, but that calls to mind a lack of faith as opposed to a burdening of knowledge.
14
Of course, if you really research it, you'll find that Maimonides argued against it, and then you'll have plenty of space to make your own decision. What makes you Jewish is your ACTIONS, not your embodiment.
7
Well put. However, Maimonides never actually argued against circumcision, but rather elaborated on the reasoning behind it.
In "The Guide of the Perplexed," he wrote:
"Did He not command and say: Be fruitful and multiply? Accordingly this organ is weakened by means of circumcision, but not extirpated through excision. What is natural is left according to nature, but measures are taken against excess. "
You can find a translation and further elaboration here:
http://www.cirp.org/library/cultural/maimonides/
In "The Guide of the Perplexed," he wrote:
"Did He not command and say: Be fruitful and multiply? Accordingly this organ is weakened by means of circumcision, but not extirpated through excision. What is natural is left according to nature, but measures are taken against excess. "
You can find a translation and further elaboration here:
http://www.cirp.org/library/cultural/maimonides/
2
Our medical establishment needs to catch up with the rest of the developed world, where non-religious circumcision (at any age) is very rare. The article mentions the AAP's confusing statement which asserts that circumcision's "benefits outweigh the risks" but leaves the decision to parents. The AAP's own journal published a scathing response by 38 doctors and representatives of European pediatric societies stating, "Cultural bias reflecting the normality of nontherapeutic male circumcision in the United States seems obvious. The conclusions of the AAP Technical Report and Policy Statement are far from those reached by physicians in most other Western countries."
Last year the AAP published a policy statement contradicting its neutral stance on circumcision: "Pain that newborns experience from routine medical procedures can be significant... Research suggests that repeated exposure to pain early in life can create changes in brain development and the body's stress response systems that can last into childhood... [E]very health facility caring for newborns should use strategies to minimize the number of painful procedures performed." Circumcision is a notoriously painful operation, yet our doctors perform it on infants 3,000 times a day - often with little or no pain management. Just last week, an American pediatrician on the podcast "Up For Debate" acknowledged using no anesthesia on the children she cuts, insisting it does "more harm than good."
Last year the AAP published a policy statement contradicting its neutral stance on circumcision: "Pain that newborns experience from routine medical procedures can be significant... Research suggests that repeated exposure to pain early in life can create changes in brain development and the body's stress response systems that can last into childhood... [E]very health facility caring for newborns should use strategies to minimize the number of painful procedures performed." Circumcision is a notoriously painful operation, yet our doctors perform it on infants 3,000 times a day - often with little or no pain management. Just last week, an American pediatrician on the podcast "Up For Debate" acknowledged using no anesthesia on the children she cuts, insisting it does "more harm than good."
17
Cantor Philip Sherman: Those who choose to opt out “don’t have a connection to their Jewish heritage. They don’t know how important and significant this is. If they did, they wouldn’t take the position they’re taking.”
Part of Jewish law are chukkim, which are commandments that we cannot justify rationally. Being circumcised is an essential part of male Jewish identity, and certain ritual acts are forbidden for an adult Jewish male if he is not circumcised. We circumcise at 8 days because this is how Isaac Abraham's son was, and this is the beginning of Jewish continuity. To argue that the baby has no choice, this is part of the justification for the Jews who argue that the tradition is received as an act of faith.
Part of Jewish law are chukkim, which are commandments that we cannot justify rationally. Being circumcised is an essential part of male Jewish identity, and certain ritual acts are forbidden for an adult Jewish male if he is not circumcised. We circumcise at 8 days because this is how Isaac Abraham's son was, and this is the beginning of Jewish continuity. To argue that the baby has no choice, this is part of the justification for the Jews who argue that the tradition is received as an act of faith.
8
Non-Jew here. As a nurse practitioner, working on a busy urology unit, I saw numerous men coming in for adult circumcisions. General anesthesia, pain,potential for infection, loss of time from work, recovery time, cost - please! I had both of my sons circumcised (the midwife performed the procedure - no crying), avoiding this potential future surgery - plus, avoiding penile cancer! My sons, both now adults, thanked me, and my grandson, born last year, was circumcised.
47
It's not like circumcision never goes wrong. Dr. M. David Gibbons :
In my practice, as a pediatric urologist, I manage the complications of neonatal circumcision. For example, in a two year period, I was referred >275 newborns and toddlers with complications of neonatal circumcision. None of these were 'revisions' because of appearance, which I do not do. 45% required corrective surgery (minor as well as major, especially for amputative injury), whereupon some could be treated locally without surgery.
Complications of this unnecessary procedure are often not reported, but of 300 pediatric urologists in this country who have practices similar to mine...well, one can do the math, to understand the scope of this problem...let alone, to understand the adverse cost-benefit aspect of complications (>$750,000) in this unfortunate group of infants and young children.
Lots of doctors are against non-therapeutic circumcision of children. National medical organizations in Germany and Sweden have called for a ban on elective infant male circumcision, the South Africans support a ban with religious exemptions, and the Danish and Dutch said they'd support a total ban if they didn't think it would drive the practice underground.
In Australia, "routine" infant male circumcision is banned in public hospitals (almost all the men responsible for this will be circumcised themselves, as the male circumcision rate in Australia in 1950 was about 90%. It's now 11%.)
In my practice, as a pediatric urologist, I manage the complications of neonatal circumcision. For example, in a two year period, I was referred >275 newborns and toddlers with complications of neonatal circumcision. None of these were 'revisions' because of appearance, which I do not do. 45% required corrective surgery (minor as well as major, especially for amputative injury), whereupon some could be treated locally without surgery.
Complications of this unnecessary procedure are often not reported, but of 300 pediatric urologists in this country who have practices similar to mine...well, one can do the math, to understand the scope of this problem...let alone, to understand the adverse cost-benefit aspect of complications (>$750,000) in this unfortunate group of infants and young children.
Lots of doctors are against non-therapeutic circumcision of children. National medical organizations in Germany and Sweden have called for a ban on elective infant male circumcision, the South Africans support a ban with religious exemptions, and the Danish and Dutch said they'd support a total ban if they didn't think it would drive the practice underground.
In Australia, "routine" infant male circumcision is banned in public hospitals (almost all the men responsible for this will be circumcised themselves, as the male circumcision rate in Australia in 1950 was about 90%. It's now 11%.)
17
What other healthy body parts should we take it upon ourselves to amputate now without the person's consent to avoid "potential future surgery"? Appendix, tonsils, breast buds, thyroids, pancreas? How much body would we have left if we amputated parts that "just might" become infected or cancerous later on? Circumcision does not prevent penile cancer. Circumcised men DO get penile cancer (sometimes on their circumcision scar) and in Europe, which has a circumcision rate of below 10%, there are not higher rates of penile cancer. It is one of the rarest cancers and even the American Cancer Society has criticized US doctors for pushing circumcision as penile cancer prevention. People who promote the "potential health benefits" of circumcision always overlook the risks and harms that this elective, medically unnecessary surgery can cause. The bread and butter work of American urologists is dealing with the botches and complications of circumcision many of which do not become apparent until a boy hits puberty and which include meatal stenosis, painful erections, skin splitting during erections, severe curvature when erect, buried penis, hairy shaft, penile adhesions, skin bridges, peno-scrotal webbing, amputation or partial amputation of the glans, total de-gloving of shaft skin, bleeding and infection. The psychological damage of having a mutilated penis because of unnecessary surgery inflicted on a person as a child can be devastating.
44
je, until they discover what was taken from tehn and the true value of the foreskin. penile cancer is rare we should not cut millions to prevent something rare.
1
When will this madness stop? Clearly it's insanity to mutilate baby boys or girls. Is it not obvious now in 2017? Abraham lived a long time ago. In his time they did animal sacrifice to appease the "gods". They believed in all sorts of things we now know are utter nonsense. Have we not moved on? Please STOP this madness of circumcision.
44
Some facts:According to the European Association of Urology (EAU) 2017 Congress. Abstract 707. Presented March 27, 2017 there has been a dramatic increase in the incidence of penile carcinoma in situ (PCIS), a premalignant disease that can transform into penile cancer years later.
The incidence of PCIS in England rose from 19 new cases reported in 1979 to 193 new cases in 2011, the year for which the most recent data are available.
"This trend in the annual number of cases reported represents a 915% increase," say the researchers.
The main driver of this disease is human papillomavirus (HPV)."Human papillomavirus ,an infection can be considered a major pandemic, causing both benign and malignant disease around the world. It is the most frequently acquired sexually transmitted disease, with more than 6 million new cases transmitted annually in the US. HPV is implicated in the oncogenesis of at least 5% of all cancers.
Circumcision, protects against HPV infection and penile cancer.Neonatal circumcision rates in the United Kingdom have decreased substantially over recent decades. The decreasing rates of circumcision and increasing rates of HPV infection could together explain the increase in PCIS, the doctors suggested. An increase in penile cancer has also been reported in an 2013 paper reviewing the incidence of penile cancer in England which found 9690 men diagnosed between 1979 and 2009.
The incidence of PCIS in England rose from 19 new cases reported in 1979 to 193 new cases in 2011, the year for which the most recent data are available.
"This trend in the annual number of cases reported represents a 915% increase," say the researchers.
The main driver of this disease is human papillomavirus (HPV)."Human papillomavirus ,an infection can be considered a major pandemic, causing both benign and malignant disease around the world. It is the most frequently acquired sexually transmitted disease, with more than 6 million new cases transmitted annually in the US. HPV is implicated in the oncogenesis of at least 5% of all cancers.
Circumcision, protects against HPV infection and penile cancer.Neonatal circumcision rates in the United Kingdom have decreased substantially over recent decades. The decreasing rates of circumcision and increasing rates of HPV infection could together explain the increase in PCIS, the doctors suggested. An increase in penile cancer has also been reported in an 2013 paper reviewing the incidence of penile cancer in England which found 9690 men diagnosed between 1979 and 2009.
7
Penile cancer is:
1) rarer than vulval cancer
2) much much rarer than breast cancer in females
3) rarer than breast cancer in males(!)
4) rarer in several countries which don't circumcise than in the USA or Israel
5) usually only seen in men with phimosis or terrible personal hygiene
6) also seen in circumcised men (pubmed 9466082, 9374971, 9270540)
7) possibly sometimes caused by circumcision (pubmed 16406995, 12862118)
1) rarer than vulval cancer
2) much much rarer than breast cancer in females
3) rarer than breast cancer in males(!)
4) rarer in several countries which don't circumcise than in the USA or Israel
5) usually only seen in men with phimosis or terrible personal hygiene
6) also seen in circumcised men (pubmed 9466082, 9374971, 9270540)
7) possibly sometimes caused by circumcision (pubmed 16406995, 12862118)
24
Then start vaccinating all children for HPV. That solves the problem without cutting the foreskin off.
9
Celibate women do not get cancer of the cervix. Women who have intercourse only with circumcised men......do not get cancer of the cervix...a viral disease.
Circumcised men do not get cancer of the penis, admitted a relatively rare disease. The incidence of AIDS and other sexual;y transmitted diseases is significantly less in circumcised men. Uncircumcised men not uncommonly suffer from inflammation of the head of the penis...balanitis...due to an inability to expose and cleanse that portion of the penis. As a US Navy surgeon, requests by servicemen for circumcision were quite frequent. Ritual circumcision is accompanied by the administration of wine for its anesthetic effect. There seems to be little discomfort ... crying immediately after the procedure.
Although objected to ...seemingly on a religious basis, Jesus was certainly circumcised on the 8th day of his life, as were the disciples who were Israelites. Of interest is that the Victorian Royal Family practiced circumcision which was performed by a Jewish Rabbi/mohel.
Vaccination alters the immune system. Circumcision alters immunity by way of a simple procedure/operation if you will......that has been performed for perhaps 5000 years, by rigorously trained experts.
Circumcised men do not get cancer of the penis, admitted a relatively rare disease. The incidence of AIDS and other sexual;y transmitted diseases is significantly less in circumcised men. Uncircumcised men not uncommonly suffer from inflammation of the head of the penis...balanitis...due to an inability to expose and cleanse that portion of the penis. As a US Navy surgeon, requests by servicemen for circumcision were quite frequent. Ritual circumcision is accompanied by the administration of wine for its anesthetic effect. There seems to be little discomfort ... crying immediately after the procedure.
Although objected to ...seemingly on a religious basis, Jesus was certainly circumcised on the 8th day of his life, as were the disciples who were Israelites. Of interest is that the Victorian Royal Family practiced circumcision which was performed by a Jewish Rabbi/mohel.
Vaccination alters the immune system. Circumcision alters immunity by way of a simple procedure/operation if you will......that has been performed for perhaps 5000 years, by rigorously trained experts.
16
Circumcised men can transmit HPV (the virus that causes cervical cancer).
12
Dr. Canter, your medical "facts" are out of date, as even a brief review of medical research available on PubMed will show. Cervical cancer is caused by the human papillomavirus, which circumcised men can carry and transmit just as well as can intact (i.e. uncircumcised) men. Your statement that women who have intercourse only with circumcised men get cervical cancer is categorically and demonstrably false. Your statement that circumcised men have lower incidences of STDs than uncircumcised men is also categorically and demonstrably false. Condoms, safe sex, and limiting sexual partners are the key to preventing STD acquisition, not circumcisions. As for penile cancer, the American Cancer Society states that the risk of penile cancer is low among both circumcised and uncircumcised men, and that it would take more than 900 circumcisions to prevent one case of penile cancer.
17
None of what you said is true. But keep on believing.
13
It is a moot point, 80 % of non-Orthodox Jews will not have Jewish grandchildren.
11
true
3
Genital mutilation should be outlawed for either gender. It is cruel to make a penis smaller and less sensitive.
26
I wrestled with this decision for many months of my pregnancy. My husband wanted it, but I had serious reservations. In the end, we did it, but not with a mohel. We used a pediatric urologist who numbed the penis with "nerve-blocking" injection. My son seemed only minimally distressed. He is 21 now and says that he is glad that he is circumcised, both for hygiene and STD-resistance reasons on the one hand and Jewish-identity reasons on the other. Still, it was a tough call for me (even though I have literally never even seen an uncircumcised penis).
18
british medical association warned that doctors who are hired to circumcise "in the belief of health benefit" [section 4.4] then the doctor must inform that this is not justification, because of the "lack of concensus" of "benefits" which according to bma "is in insufficient" to be a justification, while the procedure is dangerous and risky.
i liked how the article accurately described the parental decision not to cut.
i liked how the article accurately described the parental decision not to cut.
4
"She decided not to circumcise, a choice she said her parents eventually accepted. Instead she had a “gentle bris” ceremony with alternative ritual objects: a pomegranate, a gold kiddush cup, and a large ceramic bowl filled with water to wash the baby’s feet, an ancient act of welcoming the stranger. Ms. Edell cut the pomegranate, a totem of fertility with its plentiful seeds, while her mother held her son."
Ms. Edell can do what she wants regarding having her son circumcised or not. But a "gentle bris"? A berit milah (ritual circumcision, and I relate only to Jewish ritual circumcision ) is a covenant with God. Accept it or not, not my business, but it is a ritual covenant with God, not an act of welcoming the stranger. The fertility is part of that covenant with God (Genesis 17). If she does not want her son to be circumcised or to undergo ritual circumcision, OK. But do not prostitute the ceremony. Make up your own, fine, nice. It is not a brit (bris), gentle or otherwise.
Ms. Edell can do what she wants regarding having her son circumcised or not. But a "gentle bris"? A berit milah (ritual circumcision, and I relate only to Jewish ritual circumcision ) is a covenant with God. Accept it or not, not my business, but it is a ritual covenant with God, not an act of welcoming the stranger. The fertility is part of that covenant with God (Genesis 17). If she does not want her son to be circumcised or to undergo ritual circumcision, OK. But do not prostitute the ceremony. Make up your own, fine, nice. It is not a brit (bris), gentle or otherwise.
17
An 8 day old infant cannot have a convenant with anything. If an adult man of sound mind and body wants to amputate his foreskin it is his own business. While parents do have a right to raise their children in their religious tradition that right isnt absolute and amputating a body part - even a comparatively minor one - crosses that line. Like it or not, and I myself am Jewish, it is genital mutilation.
23
agreed!
3
To Marion S
Define it as you want; that is not my point or my issue here. A Brit is a covenant with God between parents and God, acting as the agent for their child as they do in everything. The obligation is upon the father who makes the blessing and technically should do the cutting, but appoints the professional in his place. Two of my grandchildren were ritually circumcised by their father, who also happens to be a surgeon. If you have a Brit then do not make a mockery of it. As to whether it is barbaric or not, that is not the point here and there is no reason to argue. You have your view; I disagree. Rather if you are going to have a ceremony, do not make a mockery of it.
Define it as you want; that is not my point or my issue here. A Brit is a covenant with God between parents and God, acting as the agent for their child as they do in everything. The obligation is upon the father who makes the blessing and technically should do the cutting, but appoints the professional in his place. Two of my grandchildren were ritually circumcised by their father, who also happens to be a surgeon. If you have a Brit then do not make a mockery of it. As to whether it is barbaric or not, that is not the point here and there is no reason to argue. You have your view; I disagree. Rather if you are going to have a ceremony, do not make a mockery of it.
8
Thank Goodness we are making progress. When I went to my cousins bris (I was 11), I was horrified. I decided I could no longer be Jewish. This led to very tense teen years where I felt that I could no longer belong to a religion where that was the form. Thankfully since then I have learned about the Brit Shalom and have met other Jews who share my views. I can again consider myself Jewish knowing that I have the options of noninvasive Jewish rituals when I have a son.
44
i totaly relate to this dillema. how can we be connected to a book which includes such cruelty. yet we can adjust the interpretation of "blood-less circumcision ceremony" without cutting.
4
You may have had stopped considering yourself Jewish for a time, but you never stopped being Jewish. That's how the religion works. G-d willing you change your mind about imposing your politics onto your son, who will one day potentially reconnect with his Jewish identity, and be forced to undergo the Bris as an adult, when it's much more painful, and with a long recovery process.
1
I've never heard of a Jewish guy complaining he was circumcised! And they supposedly, in general, make good boyfriends and husbands, so the gals don't seem to complain! And it's a sign of the covenant! Get over it.
25
not hearing does not mean it "does not occur". jewish men do complain and regarding "covenant", only an adult can make a contract of covenant, not an infant who is coerced.
meet one jewish man who realized that a good healthy part was forcibly removed, like stealing, specifically by parents whose nature is to give and nurture, GIVE milk, food, clothes yet these jewish parents did the opposite taking a healthy part which was good. and when we complain people say "do not talk about genitals" and other ways to silence us "stop playing the victim". we do complain for the harm done and more importantly for the future babies to save them from the knife.
meet one jewish man who realized that a good healthy part was forcibly removed, like stealing, specifically by parents whose nature is to give and nurture, GIVE milk, food, clothes yet these jewish parents did the opposite taking a healthy part which was good. and when we complain people say "do not talk about genitals" and other ways to silence us "stop playing the victim". we do complain for the harm done and more importantly for the future babies to save them from the knife.
10
Actually, it's not a good idea to get over it. During slavery almost everyone was happy - the plantation owners, the general public, the government, the newspapers. The slaves suffered, slavery was wrong. Circumcision is a barbaric act of mutilation, and must no longer be tolerated.
12
Well, you've heard of it now: I'm complaining. It's a bad idea, and there are other ways to show the sign of the convenient. Get over it yourself.
9
Circumcision is healthier.
16
hi jack. did you know? british medical association warned that doctors who are hired to circumcise "in the belief of health benefit" [section 4.4] then the doctor must inform that this is not justification, because of the "lack of concensus" of "benefits" which according to bma "is in insufficient" to be a justification, while the procedure is dangerous and risky.
11
Several national medical organizations disagree. National medical organizations in Germany and Sweden have actually called for a ban on elective infant male circumcision, the South Africans support a ban with religious exemptions, and the Danish and Dutch said they'd support a total ban if they didn't think it would drive the practice underground.
In Australia, "routine" infant male circumcision is banned in public hospitals (almost all the men responsible for this will be circumcised themselves, as the male circumcision rate in Australia in 1950 was about 90%. It's now 11%.)
In Australia, "routine" infant male circumcision is banned in public hospitals (almost all the men responsible for this will be circumcised themselves, as the male circumcision rate in Australia in 1950 was about 90%. It's now 11%.)
6
"Male circumcision" is a form of genital mutilation. That MUST be the starting point for any discussion.
And to pretend that a "ritual" changes that fact is to delude oneself.
So starting there, clearly it is a violation of the individual's right to body integrity. Further, medical professionals who perform this surgery are in violation of the oath they took.
If you want to make the bris meaningful, do let the individual choose it himself in adulthood. Then it is a pact willingly entered into. As it is, the bris is just a form of child abuse (as are all forms of genital cutting forced upon the young).
And to pretend that a "ritual" changes that fact is to delude oneself.
So starting there, clearly it is a violation of the individual's right to body integrity. Further, medical professionals who perform this surgery are in violation of the oath they took.
If you want to make the bris meaningful, do let the individual choose it himself in adulthood. Then it is a pact willingly entered into. As it is, the bris is just a form of child abuse (as are all forms of genital cutting forced upon the young).
100
So, by this logic, it is clearly unethical to administer vaccinations to children under the age of consent.
5
Vaccination saves lives – lots of lives, it doesn't remove erogenous tissue and is recommended by all national medical organizations, whereas several such organizations are against routine infant male circumcision.
Vaccines are the most effective way to reduce the risk of a disease that you're vaccinating for; diseases which are highly virulent, usually through inconsequential social contact. For example, one can get measles just by entering into the same room that an infected individual left hours ago. There are no other reasonable alternatives to protect yourself against measles and you're at immediate risk for it.
Vaccines are the most effective way to reduce the risk of a disease that you're vaccinating for; diseases which are highly virulent, usually through inconsequential social contact. For example, one can get measles just by entering into the same room that an infected individual left hours ago. There are no other reasonable alternatives to protect yourself against measles and you're at immediate risk for it.
8
"...Let the individual choose for himself in adulthood."
That is not the commandment. The commandment is to circumcise our sons on the eighth. day.
That is not the commandment. The commandment is to circumcise our sons on the eighth. day.
1
In the absence of disease, amputating a healthy, functional part of someone else's body without their consent is a human rights violation and, if performed by a doctor, a breach of the most basic standards of medical ethics. This is recognized by the majority of doctors in the developed world outside of the U.S. who refuse to perform routine infant circumcision on the grounds that it is medically unnecessary, harmful and unethical. Yet, somehow, an article about the conscientious objection of Jewish parents to continuing a custom beloved not only by Jews and Muslims but Americans in general fails to mention either human rights or medical ethics. Yet another failure by the NYT to provide unbiased reporting on this most controversial of subjects.
83
"Those who choose to opt out “don’t have a connection to their Jewish heritage.”" - That's what Jewish heritage comes down to? I am absolutely no fan of organized religion; not the one I was born into, not Judaism, not Islam ... in fact detest is more the word I would use to describe my feelings; but it is somehow disappointing when proponents of such religions unwittingly reinforce my thoughts.
Has this man even really thought about what he's implied? However learned a man might be, whether he is a good member of his community, whether he is a 'mensch' ... if his parents did not ritually damage his penis, he's not a real Jew.
Ridiculous.
Has this man even really thought about what he's implied? However learned a man might be, whether he is a good member of his community, whether he is a 'mensch' ... if his parents did not ritually damage his penis, he's not a real Jew.
Ridiculous.
38
I believe his statement was descriptive, not prescriptive. He meant that a person who does not choose to give his child a bris does not have a connection to his heritage, hence the choice. The child is innocent and can choose his own life path; however being raised by parents with a tenuous connection to Jewish law and heritage does not bode well.for the child being raised with a love and respect for Judaism.
4
I have found the conversation on circumcision to be misguided at best. Leave alone the health benefit of circumcision, This is an ancient ritual,a part of Judaism as well I believe for people of the Muslim faith.
Why do I question the earnestness of the conversation? Do I ever hear people discussing whether or not people should pierce their child's ears, often done when the child is very young before their own choosing? No. Both cause discomfort, both physically alter the body. So why this concern over what comes out of a religious directive as opposed to what is a cosmetic preference of a parent?
Why do I question the earnestness of the conversation? Do I ever hear people discussing whether or not people should pierce their child's ears, often done when the child is very young before their own choosing? No. Both cause discomfort, both physically alter the body. So why this concern over what comes out of a religious directive as opposed to what is a cosmetic preference of a parent?
12
a valid question. one important difference is circumcision is removing a healthy part of the genital that is unique, with future consequences so if we respect childrens rights to "bodily integrity" we will not only, keep the natural state and not cut off any healthy stuff but also speak up for babies who cannot speak yet, to save healthy babies from the knife.
2
If you're going to defend the rights of religious groups to continue to conduct their "ancient rituals" of circumcision, then you're going to have to stand up for the rights of parents to circumcise their daughters for religious reasons as well as their sons. What's sauce for the gander is sauce for the goose. The genitals of both boys and girls develop from the same fetal tissue structures, and differentiate only due to hormones. You cannot legitimately privilege the genitals of baby girls and reject the "ancient rituals" of female circumcision (which ranges in form from mild to extreme) based on the idea that such rituals are superstitious nonsense or not "really" legitimately religiously-based, while continuing to support male ritual religious circumcision.
7
Many people, including myself, feel it is wrong for a parent to pierce a young child's ears before they are old enough to consent. But infant ear-piercing doesn't generate as much discussion because there isn't as much ambivalence ... no one's agonizing about the decision and worrying about family conflict and traditions. If they don't want to pierce their kid's ears, they don't. Also, ear piercing isn't disguised as a medical procedure -- doctors don't recommend nor perform it.
7
Had it been left to me, I would not have circumcised our son. The thought of him strapped to that board! The pain!
My husband, however, put his foot down and insisted that our son be circumcised. It was extremely important to my husband that our son be given what my husband considered to be a gift of medicine.
22 years later, our son is fine. In fact, within 2 min of the procedure he was fast asleep. Recently when telling the story to him, my son looked at my husband and said with relief, "Thank you Dad!!"
I have no opinion on it, but I do know that my son seems really grateful he had his dad there looking out for him and insisting on the circumcision. It was the first time my husband insisted on something for our son over my objections, but it wasn't the last. And according to our son, his dad made the right call every time.
My husband, however, put his foot down and insisted that our son be circumcised. It was extremely important to my husband that our son be given what my husband considered to be a gift of medicine.
22 years later, our son is fine. In fact, within 2 min of the procedure he was fast asleep. Recently when telling the story to him, my son looked at my husband and said with relief, "Thank you Dad!!"
I have no opinion on it, but I do know that my son seems really grateful he had his dad there looking out for him and insisting on the circumcision. It was the first time my husband insisted on something for our son over my objections, but it wasn't the last. And according to our son, his dad made the right call every time.
14
How on earth could he possibly know the difference? Seriously, how?
12
Ask the male who was circumcised as an adult. According to my husband, circumcised at age 21, it made absolutely no difference.
4
Honeybee: If your son's happy to be circumcised, that's great. It's not like he ever had the choice though. I do, and I'd pay a year's salary rather than be circumcised or have my son circumcised. Why would I want the most sensitive and pleasurable parts cut off? That little bit of skin makes a big difference (it's not just there to protect the glans).
Why don't we just let everyone decide for themselves whether or not they want irreversible genital surgery? It's their body after all.
It's not like it can't wait. I think it's only the USA (at around 60% and dropping) and Israel where more than half of baby boys are circumcised. Other countries circumcise, but not till anywhere from the age of seven to adolescence. Only about 12% of the world's circumcised men were circumcised as babies. Around two thirds of the world's men (including 88% of the world's non-Muslim men) never get circumcised.
If I'd been circumcised at birth and you hadn't though, I can easily see how we might be on opposite sides of this argument. I'd be the one who didn't know what they were missing.
Why don't we just let everyone decide for themselves whether or not they want irreversible genital surgery? It's their body after all.
It's not like it can't wait. I think it's only the USA (at around 60% and dropping) and Israel where more than half of baby boys are circumcised. Other countries circumcise, but not till anywhere from the age of seven to adolescence. Only about 12% of the world's circumcised men were circumcised as babies. Around two thirds of the world's men (including 88% of the world's non-Muslim men) never get circumcised.
If I'd been circumcised at birth and you hadn't though, I can easily see how we might be on opposite sides of this argument. I'd be the one who didn't know what they were missing.
6
If you don't believe God has commanded it and you will somehow answer to the Almighty in the afterlife if you do not do it, I'm not sure why you would do such a thing to your son. Traditions can evolve, after all. Granted, I'm a woman and a cafeteria Catholic, so I may not understand the point. But as a reporter, I did do several stories back in the 90s on circumcision and people who passionately opposed it. There was a story about a lawsuit against a hospital that circumcised a child against his mother's wishes. There was discussion over the amount of pain and emotional damage done (probably more than you think.) There was discussion with Jewish activists about the brit shalom. There were parents in custody battles over the issue. My male editors unconsciously crossed their legs whenever we discussed my story. I came to the conclusion that circumcision probably is not medically necessary. Is it a religious requirement? Maybe if you're a religious Jew, of the sort who believes in God and the commandments, If it's just cultural and so the baby looks like his dad, no way in hell would I allow it to be done to any child I loved.
13
bookworm well said. also i should not "do" my religion on somebody else's body.
3
My memory was foggy after so many years. I think the lawsuit I referred to was over damage done to a child during circumcision. At least one of the parents had consented. But it made for a passionate argument.
We circumcised both of our boys when they were born 17 and 14 years ago, without giving it too much thought. My wife and I are both Jewish, and I'm circumcised as is my entire family. It's just tradition.
Having been through this primitive and bloody procedure twice (three times if you include my own, but I don't remember that!), I can't say for sure I'd subject my sons to the Jewish circumcision ritual again. It seems barbaric and unnecessary.
I disagree completely with the orthodox cantor quoted in the article, who offers no real argument except to say you won't be in touch with your Jewish heritage if you're not circumcised. Really? I'd like to see some proof, please. I've always felt Jewish, and never considered my sense of Judaism to be contingent on an operation performed on me without my consent at the age of eight days.
Having been through this primitive and bloody procedure twice (three times if you include my own, but I don't remember that!), I can't say for sure I'd subject my sons to the Jewish circumcision ritual again. It seems barbaric and unnecessary.
I disagree completely with the orthodox cantor quoted in the article, who offers no real argument except to say you won't be in touch with your Jewish heritage if you're not circumcised. Really? I'd like to see some proof, please. I've always felt Jewish, and never considered my sense of Judaism to be contingent on an operation performed on me without my consent at the age of eight days.
71
If any religion required parents to cut the tip off their child's nose, everyone would be horrified. No, circumcision in a boy is not in the same league as female circumcision, but both are unnecessary medical procedures that could be postponed until the individual reached an age that they can make the decision.
62
The disadvantage of postponing the decision is that the circumcision of an adult is a more serious and complicated medical procedure than that of a newborn.
4
It is preposterous that, in this day and age, it is even an open question - for Jews or anyone else - whether it is appropriate for a parent to lop off part of her or his son's body as an expression of the parent's belief system. If "circumcision" - or, to drop the absurd euphemism - male genital mutilation is valid and permissible, so must female genital mutilation be. Morally, there is no difference. As far as that goes, if one accepts the premise that children are mere property whose bodies their parents are perfectly free to disfigure, maim, mark or alter in any manner they choose, then not only FGM should be legal but every conceivable act including tattooing, piercing, foot-binding, incest and ritual sacrifice. Why not? The only difference is that we live in a culture in which MGM has been medicalized (as FGM is now being medicalized in Egypt) and normalized. But once you remove your cultural blinders, you will inevitably recognize that "circumcision" is fundamentally no different from FGM. Every child has an inalienable right to own and to control her or his own body. That includes Jewish boys. There is absolutely nothing to prevent a Jewish man (or any man, for that matter) from choosing for himself to undergo "circumcision" once he has turned 18 and can make the decision for himself. But to make that decision for him in his infancy is to deprive him of the most fundamental human right there is: ownership and control of his own body.
111
My Malaysian Chinese husband had a parasitic infection at 12, and had to be circumcised at that age. There was no question that our sons would be circumcised. That, cancer risk... I had zippo pushback. Same from his parents on the medical side. And... Turned out that one of our sons had a mild abnormality that otherwise would not have been found. Conflating male and female circumcision is wrong. BTW, the mohelet we hired was also a plastic surgeon.
18
Aren't your children lucky your husband didn't need a hand or foot amputated!
Cancer risk? One in 1000, and that only when the foreskin is abnormal. In fact cut men are at twice the (tiny) cancer risk.
Your son's "mild abnormality" sounds like hypospadias, which needs to be treated a lot less than used to be thought. Ethically, what difference does the child's sex make?
Cancer risk? One in 1000, and that only when the foreskin is abnormal. In fact cut men are at twice the (tiny) cancer risk.
Your son's "mild abnormality" sounds like hypospadias, which needs to be treated a lot less than used to be thought. Ethically, what difference does the child's sex make?
5
mom of 4: Your argument seems to be that because there was a medical indication for your son's circumcision, everyone should therefore be circumcised. A relative of mine underwent knee replacement surgery. Does that mean that everyone should undergo that procedure?
As for the cancer risk, penile cancer is so rare that a man is more likely to be struck by lightening. In any case, circumcision has no significant benefit as a prophylaxis against it. According to the American Cancer Society, over 900 circumcisions would have to be performed to prevent a single case of penile cancer. That's 899 painful, unnecessary, permanent amputations of erogenous tissue for no reason and without the consent of the "patient." And among those 899 unnecessary and useless surgeries are botched circumcisions, infections, and even death from sepsis or hemorrhaging.
While we're on the topic of prophylactic amputations, we could end breast cancer today if every infant girl had her breast buds removed. Can I assume you are in favor of this, too?
Finally, the only reason that people in cultures that practice MGM refuse to recognize that it is fundamentally the same as FGM is because of their own cultural prejudices: "When they do it, it's mutilation but it's beneficial when we do it." Cutting off part of a child's genitals for cultural or religious reasons in the absence of medical necessity of last resort is genital mutilation, period. The sex of the victim is irrelevant.
As for the cancer risk, penile cancer is so rare that a man is more likely to be struck by lightening. In any case, circumcision has no significant benefit as a prophylaxis against it. According to the American Cancer Society, over 900 circumcisions would have to be performed to prevent a single case of penile cancer. That's 899 painful, unnecessary, permanent amputations of erogenous tissue for no reason and without the consent of the "patient." And among those 899 unnecessary and useless surgeries are botched circumcisions, infections, and even death from sepsis or hemorrhaging.
While we're on the topic of prophylactic amputations, we could end breast cancer today if every infant girl had her breast buds removed. Can I assume you are in favor of this, too?
Finally, the only reason that people in cultures that practice MGM refuse to recognize that it is fundamentally the same as FGM is because of their own cultural prejudices: "When they do it, it's mutilation but it's beneficial when we do it." Cutting off part of a child's genitals for cultural or religious reasons in the absence of medical necessity of last resort is genital mutilation, period. The sex of the victim is irrelevant.
14
When I had my first son, a doctor in the hospital told me I was going to cause my son untold embarrassment if I did not have him circumcised. I am not Jewish. This doctor insisted that my son would be embarrassed in gym class every time he took a shower with the other boys. He wouldn't look like them. This is how pervasive circumcision was in the Nineteen Sixties. Mothers were bullied by doctors into having their sons circumcised for the most ridiculous reasons. I told the doctor "No, I'm not going to have my son circumcised, no matter what you say." He gave me a look of pity mixed with scorn. I'm glad things have changed in the medical profession since then. "Dr. Wellby" and his condescending, paternalistic colleagues have retired.
71
This was my experience in the 1960s; I did feel embarrassed. (Why did we not have private showers?) But I am glad that my mother in the 1950s, when I was born, like aphroditebloise, did not go along.
I am not so sure things have changed in the medical profession when I hear mutilations of defenseless infants justified for at best modest health reasons rather than on grounds of ritual or fashion.
I am not so sure things have changed in the medical profession when I hear mutilations of defenseless infants justified for at best modest health reasons rather than on grounds of ritual or fashion.
8
Parents who choose a medical circumcision over a bris are making a big mistake. In the hospital, they take your little baby away, strap him to a special board, use a clamp over the foreskin, which only prolongs the procedure before they cut it off. At a bris, your little boy is in the arms of his father or another loving relative and the procedure is swift. My nephew barely let out a whimper. Then the rabbi told his mother to nurse him and if he had any anxieties about what happened he was comforted right away. Actually, I was surprised how unstressed he was. In Europe, several countries are trying to outlaw the bris, claiming it's child abuse. In the US, it is still a religious right to circumcise your son. It is not a religious obligation that should be given up lightly.
16
It is child abuse. Wrapping it in a "ritual" only blinds the participants to that fact.
31
sl, "swift" does not justify a parent doing "my religion on somebody else body" with a permanent change, without the healthy patient's consent. americans would be moral to learn from iceland not to allow cirumcision until the patient is old enough to choose his own faith or belief and which doctor to believe.
2
Freedom of religious belief is rightly unlimited. Freedom of religious practice should end when it involves modifying other people's bodies. If not, why don't I just practice my newly inspired religion of NoEarsism on you with this very sharp knife?
4
Children's rights, not parental rites! Sexual mutilation of newborn infants is barbaric in the extreme - a throwback to prehistoric rites of blood sacrifice. Neonatal circumcision is incompatible with human rights and an emergent scientific understanding of the human foreskin.
70
Only medical circumcision should be legal -- babies deserve pain management. And mohels should NOT be placing their lips on the wound.
10
"Pain management"?
Why is this form of genital mutilation any more acceptable than other forms of genital cutting?
Why is this form of genital mutilation any more acceptable than other forms of genital cutting?
14
if you mean doctor circumcise a consenting adult after being informed of the risks and that benefits are "lacking concensus" as british medical association published i can agree with you.
3
Let's see if I understand this, young Jews in Israel, men and women, fight for their country at the risk of death, capture and torture. At the same time our precious time is wasted by this article that includes the issue of the possible brief pain to an eight day old. Is this our reality?
15
What does one thing have to do with another? The pain is excruciating - baby boys who are genitally cut have higher rates of cortisol (stress hormone) for up to six months and react with more pain to vaccinations. Many, who are described as sleeping, are in shock. Over 100 baby boys die each year from circumcision related causes, i.e. bleeding, infection, some babies have burst lungs from screaming so much. In addition there are many errors, requiring corrective plastic surgery, including the loss of the entire penis. Not to mention, the irreversible loss of essential genital tissue for the rest of their lives.
37
curiouser, discussing the "children's rights" and child abuse is not a "waste" of time unless parents insist to treat healthy children like salad to slice up.
1
I've been to many brises' and the pain is not excruciating. The babies barely cry and there is only a tiny bit of blood. This is not mutilation if done on a newborn by a qualified, trained professional. If done as an adult, I'm sure it's painful and dangerous.
If you don't particularly care about your Jewish heritage, go ahead and opt out. Take them to church to make sure they have a well-rounded view of religion.
If you don't particularly care about your Jewish heritage, go ahead and opt out. Take them to church to make sure they have a well-rounded view of religion.
2
As a religion based on traditions, it seems odd to me that any Jews would choose this path. Having a son being circumcised is a wonderful and spiritual thing. Those who say it causes undue pain haven't seen modern reform Mohels use numbing gel in which the child doesn't even cry. Additionally they no longer give the child wine after for obvious reasons. What does it mean to be Jewish if there is not a baseline of tradition to follow?
14
del, i liked your question. what does it mean to be jewish? jewish tradition already answered that identity is based on the parents mother [or father for reformed jews and jacob son of isac etc.] so the baby is jewish before the ceremony. having circumcision may be "wonderful" for the parents who enjoy the celebration and gifts but is it wonderful for the baby? the baby LOSES a wonderful part. when he finds out what was removed he will not remove from his son.
3
What funny examples. A single mom who chooses to call her son Wilder. Jews don't choose names because they sound hip, they name their children after deceased relatives. It's a profound act of continuity. The memorial prayer for the dead is called Yizkor, basically Hebrew for remembrance, which is actualized by bestowing the name of the dead ancestor onto the newest entries into the family. As for Aaron, who married a non-Jew and acquiesced to her wishes, what can one say? His son technically isn't Jewish, period, despite what some might declare. Most every religion on the planet feels that the mom determines the religion of the child, because most of our history predated paternity tests. The statistics don't lie, the overwhelming majority of the children of such interfaith marriages have very little connection to Judaism. Not surprising, it's a rather demanding religion that makes many demands of its adherents, starting with the kosher dietary roles and observing the Sabbath. Given the choice, most kids opt for the pepperoni pizza.
13
dr [doctor?] your reply has no mention of the main topic circumcision. so i will be brief and then focus on your words. circumcision is removing healthy peice from a healthy baby without the consent of the patient.
regarding your reply, "technicaly not jewish period" is that what you would say about the biblical jacob? only his father isac was from abraham, not his mother rebeca. so consider that. reform jews have a solid basis to include paternal if the son wants jewish identity. admittedly you would agree not to circumcise the son of parents who only father jew. so on this we can agree for different reasons.
regarding your reply, "technicaly not jewish period" is that what you would say about the biblical jacob? only his father isac was from abraham, not his mother rebeca. so consider that. reform jews have a solid basis to include paternal if the son wants jewish identity. admittedly you would agree not to circumcise the son of parents who only father jew. so on this we can agree for different reasons.
3
My, how you ramble on about nothing but your own sense of superiority!
2
#BritShalom is #NotJustForGirls and there is a good Brit Shalom book out if you want to read it
Welcome your baby peacefully
Welcome your baby peacefully
12
I am not boy so I do not have to ask nor answer this question. If the father is circumcised and does not have his son circumcised, then the father will need to explain to his son why, if they are both jewish, the son's penis does not look like his father's.
Why if circumcision is such a strong part of Judaism, it was not important for the son. The son will grow up surrounded by other jewish circumcised males his same age so the son will never buy it was an old fashioned way of thinking. So if you do not plan to do it, make sure you have planned your answers for the next 18 years of why.
Why if circumcision is such a strong part of Judaism, it was not important for the son. The son will grow up surrounded by other jewish circumcised males his same age so the son will never buy it was an old fashioned way of thinking. So if you do not plan to do it, make sure you have planned your answers for the next 18 years of why.
11
Unless you plan to hang out at nudist colonies, you are comically overstating the visual impact of a small flap of skin.
48
are you sure it will be 18 years of "why" and not 18 years of, "wow thanks dad"? I'm sure the kid can get a circumcision at 13 if he wants one, no?
9
The foreskin is a specialized double layer functional piece of the genitals that is meant to be there.
Please learn anatomy, you sound highly ignorant.
Please learn anatomy, you sound highly ignorant.
35
If you don't want the baby to have the ritual circumcision, bris, then have your ob/gyn do it, and have a ceremony with the Rabbi. This is how St. Louis reformed Jews have met the Covenent of Abraham for decades.
14
The issue shouldn't be what kind of ceremony - the issue is that it is unethical, barbaric, and a violation of the baby's right to bodily integrity to amputate essential, healthy, complex, erogenous, protective and immunological genital tissue. . We don't own our children - they are entrusted to our care. His Body - His Rights!
11
...or don't mutilate your child. Much easier and your little boy will thank you.
11
what for? even a doctor should not cut any healthy patient.
2
The hospital where my son was born was eager to perform a (secular) circumcision. We said he could decide for himself when he was an adult. The horrified response was, "But if you let him decide himself he won't do it!"
It's a cruel bronze-age practice to inflict upon an unwitting child.
It's a cruel bronze-age practice to inflict upon an unwitting child.
141
I certainly don't want to ignorantly stick my two-cent nose in other people's religious beliefs, but I find it hard to believe any god would care what you wear or what body parts you have. you leave all your earthly pieces behind at some point.
also, what is the conservative view of female circumcision? I would think it is viewed badly, but what is the argument that make circumcision is much better? I have heard medical arguments about cleanliness but I don't buy it.
also, what is the conservative view of female circumcision? I would think it is viewed badly, but what is the argument that make circumcision is much better? I have heard medical arguments about cleanliness but I don't buy it.
15
"But if you let him decide himself he won't do it!"
'nuff said.
'nuff said.
38
religious people believe that god does want such trivial things. the issue here is practicing my own religion on his body.
1
This is a good question, the answer not so easy. Parents should make this decision for themselves and the community should continue to support them.
A few years ago, a young man wanted to convert but was stopped when his father would not sanction the circumcision. Because of this arcane rule, the young man drifted away.
As a religion, we erect too many barriers and are very short on common sense.
A few years ago, a young man wanted to convert but was stopped when his father would not sanction the circumcision. Because of this arcane rule, the young man drifted away.
As a religion, we erect too many barriers and are very short on common sense.
9
Babies are not religious. You cannot practice your religion on other people.
37
@Duck, we're not Jewish, but my husband felt circumcision was medically necessary for our son.
I agree that it's questionable morally to practice your religion on a child, but not all circumcisions have religious motivations.
I agree that it's questionable morally to practice your religion on a child, but not all circumcisions have religious motivations.
1
Your husband was wrong. 2,000,000,000 intact males alive today, and stretching back aeons, show that it is not "medically necessary" for a healthy baby. Only in the USA is it still done for "medical necessity". The rest of the English-speaking world even did the experiment for you, cutting babies as enthusiastically in the 1950s as the USA, then giving it up, with no bad outcomes whatever. The USA is behind the play on this issue.
8
Don't do it Dana!
Your little Boy will be mad at you as soon as he realizes what you decided to do to him and you'll hear about it FOREVER. To the grave you'll hear about it. Trust me on that one.
Your little Boy will be mad at you as soon as he realizes what you decided to do to him and you'll hear about it FOREVER. To the grave you'll hear about it. Trust me on that one.
19
You have no way of knowing that. Plenty of men are happy about their circumcision. In many parts of the world, the circumcision is not done on newborns; it is therefore a memory adult men have, and something that men are proud of, or at least fine with. Americans have a way of being neurotic about everything, insisting that it will lead to lifelong trauma. There is no reason to think all men are upset and pining for a lost foreskin.
23
I have a 24 year old son. He has never questioned his circumcision. Trust you based on what? Perhaps it is you who have made your son feel less of himself because he is circumcised.
9
In over 60 years of being a circumcised male Jew who has grown up with many Jewish male friends and in JCC locker rooms, I have never heard anyone complain about being circumcised or feeling inadequate or being maimed or any of the things that the anti-circumcision movement accuses our parents of doing to us. Never.
76
The view of the World Health Organization should also be mentioned:
"There is compelling evidence that male circumcision reduces the risk of heterosexually acquired HIV infection in men by approximately 60%. Three randomized controlled trials have shown that male circumcision provided by well trained health professionals in properly equipped settings is safe. WHO/UNAIDS recommendations emphasize that male circumcision should be considered an efficacious intervention for HIV prevention in countries and regions with heterosexual epidemics, high HIV and low male circumcision prevalence."
(http://www.who.int/hiv/topics/malecircumcision/en/)
"There is compelling evidence that male circumcision reduces the risk of heterosexually acquired HIV infection in men by approximately 60%. Three randomized controlled trials have shown that male circumcision provided by well trained health professionals in properly equipped settings is safe. WHO/UNAIDS recommendations emphasize that male circumcision should be considered an efficacious intervention for HIV prevention in countries and regions with heterosexual epidemics, high HIV and low male circumcision prevalence."
(http://www.who.int/hiv/topics/malecircumcision/en/)
18
Look up the rate of HIV infection in Europe, where circumcision is almost non-existent. Circumcision will almost certainly have no impact on your child getting an STD.
54
Babies don´t have sex so let the boy decide when gets old enough to make his own informed decision wether or not he wants to get circumcised.
13
has research been done on other body parts that can be preemptively cut off to prevent infections? like tonsils? seriously....let's call this a pure religious think and keep out the pseudo-science mumbo jumbo. if it is a religious practice that people adhere to and like, then that should be enough merits on its own to decide whether it is a good thing or not. but one of the commenters here said you can't be a jew w/o one? I didn't realize that...I always thought of religion as very personal...at most part of your family....I am shocked that someone (who?) can decide if you are allowed in your religion or not.
4