I hesitate to jump in here since there are so many angry people. I grew up in a blue-collar, white Protestant community. The men in my family, and others I happen to know about, were all circumcised. My husband and his family, from hundreds of miles away, were all circumcised. It was taken for granted and never discussed. It was, and is, considered cleaner and healthier. When asked about it now, no one regrets it or thinks much about it.
I mention all this simply to say male circumcision is not only a Jewish practice, and lots of men seem to prefer it.
133
What's the gender-neutral PC term for a mohel? A zohel?
Yes it's a religious procedure, the word for covenant or brit is mentioned/repeated something like 13 times in Genesis Chapter 17 when God speaks to Abraham about the rite of circumcision, amazing redundancy for a text that's generally sparse with words, to say the least. (Disclaimer, I'm not religious in the slightest, but I know my Torah by heart backwards and forwards in Hebrew.)
As such I find the numbing injection over the top. I've witnessed many circumcisions and the 8 day old male infants handle the procedure just fine. It seems like the needle and local anesthetic would be more painful than just getting it over with, we frequently make similar decisions in medicine when for instance a patient needs scalp wounds approximated with staples.
As for the vanity license plate, do folks not have a sense of humor anymore? There's a Seinfeld episode for everything, including a mohel whose snipping goes rather badly . . . (I believe the NYT ran an obituary for the actor with the shaky hands . . . ) and there are a bunch of Jewish jokes about mohels.
Gribenes anyone?
4
I won't forget what happened when I had sex with a guy I met and he wasn't circumcised. He developed something on his foreskin, it was not pleasant. After seeing the MD at the student clinic on campus, the MD gave him instructions on hygiene or recommended he get circumcised. The guy chose circumcision and I stayed with him before and after the medical procedure. His parents were furious at his decision. We stopped being intimate after the circumcision, but stayed friends. He said, I wish my parents had circumcised me. He was embarrassed, he said the unpleasant foreskin issues were gone, and when it happened with me, he said it wasn't the first time. So, this issue happened to him often! He was so grateful I encouraged him to have this medical issue addressed and looked at. After graduation, we stayed acquaintances and he told me, he finally was having sex without worrying.
So, when I got married and had boys, I decided to circumcise them for hygiene and medical reasons, after my own personal experience while a college student.
24
To all those who say circumcision reduces sensation, let's postulate that it does.
What is women's number one complaint and/or joke about men's sexual performance? "He doesn't last long enough?" "It's over too soon".
Wouldn't reducing sensation (if that is really the case) be an Advantage to sexual intercourse for both straight and Gay men?
6
Am I supposed to see women performing genital mutilation on young boys as a victory for feminism?
And if I question that, I might be anti-Semitic?
For what it is worth, I am a circumcised Jewish man.
450
@woodyrd
Do you consider yourself mutilated?
21
@woodyrd
Feminist best-selling writer Hanna Rosin, when asked about the fact that boys and young men commit suicide 3.5 times as often as girls and young women, and when asked about the fact that young men now get only 40% of college degrees, stated that these are victories for women and girls.
No doubt she’d feel the same about women performing ritualized genital mutilation on baby boys.
23
@woodyrd yep, that's a good pair of questions. There is some evidence that (male) circumcision impedes transmission of some STDs. One of the larger debates is whether circumcision negatively impacts pleasure during sex --- a difficult question to answer, and for which the only clear answer is "it's not clear whether there is much difference."
For me the more interesting question is "who thought up male circumcision in the first place?"
--- a circumcised non-Jewish man.
25
Some of the uncircumcised commenters are holding back. My uncircumcised friend showed me his infection. We did manual labor. Showered after work. Maybe it’s easier to keep it clean if you work in an office. It did not go away easily. Sorry but I don’t envy him.
10
HOLISTIC? The holistic approach to non-therapeutic genital cutting would be to SKIP the genital cutting. Holistic families should read Celebrating Brit Shalom for the hows and whys of BLOODLESS naming ceremonies for boys, girls, and intersex babies.
29
My husband and I decided to cancel our son's bris the night before--husband started googling about possible complications, no matter how rare. In the end, we just said we'll let our son decide whether he wants to uphold this tradition. We know it will be more painful as a teen or adult, but at least it will be our son's choice.
So we lost the deposit on the mohel, family and friends gathered for bagels and spreads. Some people were supportive, others critical. No big deal.
It's wonderful to see women taking up leadership positions formerly reserved for men, not only in religion, but everywhere!
17
Thank you for an interesting article. I don't see why a woman cannot perform this medical/cultural ritual. I think some practices can be difficult to discontinue even after new information arises. This ritual, however, is more complicated which makes it even more interesting. I'm talking about oral suction circumcision, or metzitzah b'peh. I was hoping to hear an update about this practice in New York since New York City officials linked the practice to 17 cases of infant herpes since 2000, of whom two died. So, really this practice is more than just the removal of the foreskin. Shouldn't metzitzah b'peh also be discussed in this forum? Thank you.
7
A religious ceremony in which the person physically affected has no say strikes me as barbaric. If a man as an adult elects to undergo this procedure, I would not have made this observation however the infant has no choice in what must be considered first and foremost a physical mutiliation from which there is no recovery.
I am circumcised as is my oldest son, but thanks to their mother's wisdom the other three sons I fathered remain whole. Judging by their satisfaction and that of their partners my sense is she made the right decision.
It is difficult to think, even imagine, any man whether a sexually experienced adult or not would willingly undertake the removal of this clearly protective sheathe of skin, but if so it would be enlightening to know his response.
45
I'd want someone with a medical degree and experience doing this on my son than someone that had some ritual training but little to no training in medical matters beyond that.
6
Kramer had it right in the Seinfeld episode, where he tried to stop the mohel from performing the circumcision...
The American Academy of Pediatrics' official position is that any imagined benefits are insufficient to recommend the practice as a universal measure. Condoms are vastly more effective at reducing the risk of contracting STDs or vaginal cancers--the putative health benefits to male circumcision. And studies have proved that infant boys absolutely feel the pain of circumcision.
This is mutilation. It is the gratuitous removal of healthy tissue, performed upon an infant. And it's a wonder that it's allowed to persist.
There are lots of religious traditions that are now hopeless anachronisms. Circumcision is one of them.
84
It always amazes me the number of people who bodily autonomy wins over religious views when it comes to abortion, but also think religious views win over bodily autonomy when it comes to circumcision.
Let the kid turn 18 and then decide if they want a man to circumcise them, a woman to circumcise them, or not to have it done at all.
Or at least stop being dismissive of evangelicals wishing to impose their beliefs on others.
43
It's important to clear up some misunderstandings here (judging from the comments).
Traditional Jewish practice has been for ritual circumcision to be performed by trained practitioners and specifically NOT doctors. The simple reason being that this is a RELIGIOUS ceremony.
It is specifically *not* a medical procedure and has nothing to do with any health considerations. (Of course, the mohel should be properly trained for all potential complications so that the procedure is conducted safely.)
Safe circumcision has been practiced by observant Jews for (literally) thousands of years.
Observant Jews circumcise their 8-day old boys because G-d commands it just like any other religious commandment.
There are no other reasons or counter reasons (other than medical considerations that could be a potentially health hazard to the baby) for observant Jews.
12
Kramer had it right in the Seinfeld episode, where he tried to stop the mohel from performing the circumcision...
The American Academy of Pediatrics' official position is that any imagined benefits are insufficient to recommend the practice as a universal measure. Condoms are vastly more effective at reducing the risk of contracting STDs or vaginal cancers--the putative health benefits to male circumcision. And studies have proved that infant boys absolutely feel the pain of circumcision.
This is mutilation. It is the gratuitous removal of healthy tissue, performed upon an infant. And it's a wonder that it's allowed to persist.
There are lots of religious traditions that are now hopeless anachronisms. Circumcision is one of them.
15
No child should have a piece of his or her body surgically removed absent a compelling medical reason, which circumcision in the US has not. This is genital mutilation for aesthetic or religious (superstitious) purposes and it out to be outlawed.
56
Nonpersonage, in a fugue of holier-than-thou self-infatuation that is quite familiar here in the North Bay, asserts that it is "absolutely clear" that circumcision is ritual genital mutilation. Well, it certainly is ritual and genital, but "mutilation?" That's a characterization, not a fact--are appendectomy, tonsillectomy, ear-piercing, and tattooing (to cite just a few examples) "mutilation"?
9
Reading these comments clearly many people feel that circumcision is inappropriate primarily based on the fact that the individual has no choice in the matter. (Comparisons to female genital mutilation aside - since there is no real parallel)
I have not seen a mention of the fact that the tradition of circumcising boys is fundamental to Judaism and supersedes all other Jewish religious laws, and is a tradition that anyone with any real affiliation to Judaism at all would find hard to do away with.
I think that, along with the little apparent downside, and perhaps an upside in a possible lowering of STD tranmission will see this practice continuing.
7
For me it is just a crime against the physical integrity of an innocent child.
55
It's not anti-Semitism. It's male genital mutilation.
The only difference between this and female genital mutilation is that one is religious and the other is more often cultural. One is acceptable and the other is illegal in most countries outside of Africa. Either way, it’s wrong.
I know parents are eager to do this on the eighth day. But why don’t they honor their child and wait until the boy is of age? If he wants to honor his religion and be circumcised then, he can choose it.
42
The practice should be condemned and outlawed every bit as much as female genital mutilation is.
Given the news regarding recent horrors deriving from ultra-orthodox practices (dead children due to mohels with herpes using their mouths to clean the wound area), this seems like a no-brainer.
Public health needs to supersede religious belief. Once it's outlawed, mohels who perform infant circumcision - or, indeed, any circumcision prior to the age of consent - needs to be prosecuted as a sex offender.
38
The Old Testament Rabbis were very selective about what they required and what they prohibited for Jews.
Tattoos, worshiping idols and multiple Gods, eating pork and shellfish were out.
Honoring your father and mother and identifying with your tribe through circumcisions were in, even for the parents of Jesus.
A pretty good record I think.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision_of_Jesus
5
May be someone can explain to me why female circumcision is barbarous but male circumcision is not? Is it a function of the relative genital sensitivity lost? Or is something else going on?
27
Circumcision has no medical purpose at all. In the Jewish religion it is done so that parents can prove their fidelity to the Jewish religion by inflicting an injury on their male children. The practice probably precedes Judaism. It was adopted by Abraham in his efforts to create his religion because it wouldn't seem that much different from the religion people where he was were doing it before.
The mutilation of a baby boy's penis dries out the skin on the tip of the penis. When this is done hundreds of nerve endings that live on the tip of the penis die when the tip is no longer lubricated by the foreskin. The result is that the most sensitive skin of the boy is desensitized, reducing the boy's sexual pleasure. Christians who adopted the practice did so in the hope that a boy's sex drive would be diminished.
It is a barbaric practice that is being eliminated in almost all countries other than those with Jewish and Muslim populations. The practice is nothing more than child abuse. Parents, religious people, and doctors who do it should be punished for child abuse.
51
Folks, it's not mutilation. It's not barbaric. It's safe. It's nothing like removing a girl's clitoris. Yes, there are pros and cons from the medical perspective, but for Jews, Muslims, and some other groups, it is an essential statement about welcoming a child into the covenant.
99
@ZisseKalman YES circumcision is nothing like removing a clitoris. But MOST of the FGM on earth does not cut the clitoris, and is precisely analogous to male circumcision, and illegal for 94.8% of the planet.
Forced non-therapeutic genital cutting is unethical. Circumcision alters sex dramatically.
80
@ZisseKalman You are wrong. Male children are deliberately hurt by their parents to prove their fidelity to their religion. It hurts the child and desensitizes the most sensitive skin a boy has. It has no religious impact on the child at all and is not a welcoming unless being abused is welcoming a child. The child's well being is sacrifice. It is child abuse and the parents, religious people, and medical people who do it should be punished.
107
All I can say is that I was grateful, as a Jewish woman, when I found out I was having a girl. I am glad I did not have to make a decision about whether to follow my tradition and circumcise or follow my heart and forgo it.
114
@Beth The problem today is that mothers and fathers are not educated about keeping the little boys and girls clean in that "area". I have a son who was not circumcised and I practised what my mother (God bless her souls) and her generation had showed us about the hygiene and left that body of knowledge that works!
19
@Beth We canceled our son's bris the night before. Husband started googling possible complications and freaked out. Lost the deposit on the mohel, MIL was outraged, but at least it will be our son's choice whether to uphold this tradition.
72
Reading the comments, I'm impressed by the many men and doctors--many of them Jewish--who are themselves circumcised and object to the practice or suggest that circumcision be delayed until a boy comes of age, so that it's not performed upon an unconsenting infant. Good for them. The tenets of faith shouldn't conflate our responsibility to protect infants' bodies and preserve the rights of children to make their own choices about an elective, irreversible surgery on their genitals--a choice that should be theirs and theirs alone, and made when they are adults.
And reading some of the comments from proponents/apologists for circumcision, I'm also struck by the many specious comparisons to vaccines and how parents give their kids vaccines and kids don't have any say, because vaccines are a public health good..
Circumcisions are not remotely the same thing as vaccines. Vaccines confer near complete or total immunity against disease. Circumcision, categorically, does not.
38
It's beyond time to do away with this barbaric physical mutilation. My son is still intact, I was not so lucky.
382
@J Darby
I'm the uncircumcised son of a circumcised father, and I always knew he was proud that he didn't subject my brother and I to it as a kid, but I never thought about how it might affect him. Good thing to think about, thanks.
75
@J Darby Good for you sir !
35
I was raised Jewish and therefore mutilated when I was 8 days old. Circumcision is a barbaric practice that deeply affects a man’s sexuality and pleasure throughout his life. I am 50 years old and I am still dealing with body and sexual issues to this day because some people decided they had the right to mutilate my body when I was an infant. I urge all fathers and mothers to reconsider this archaic and unnecessary religious practice. Stop mutilating your boys for no reason! The documentary ‘American Circumcision’ on Netflix is quite informative.
166
@Marcelo Krasilcic
Thank you for sharing your personal (and painful) experience. I hope more people will reconsider their acceptance of this widespread (in America, at least) practice, perhaps after hearing from people like you. May you find peace and wellbeing!
30
Circumcision should be a choice, not a default practice performed on infants, whether as part of a religious ceremony or for cosmetic reasons. I resent the suggestion that this opinion is anti-Semitic. I will speak out against this practice in the same way that I speak out against attempts to suppress LGBT rights in the name of religion. Religious freedom is a fundamental American principle, but I believe that should stop at any practice that infringes on the personal autonomy of others. Babies—who may grow up to adopt different beliefs than their parents—fall into that category. I'm not anti-circumcision. Research results on whether the practice diminishes sexual pleasure for men are mixed, and sometimes the procedure is medically necessary. But we're talking about a person's genitals here. Why is it so controversial to suggest that the person who those genitals are attached to should get to decide what happens to them?
424
@Jen As a Jew circumcised at eight days who deeply resents that fact, I agree both that forced circumcision is morally wrong, and that to say so is not necessarily an example of anti-Semitism. However, the implication that religious freedom stops at "any practice that infringes on the personal autonomy of others" bespeaks your failure to recognize that any religion in which a child is reared infringes upon their personal autonomy by filling their heads with superstitious nonsense from which it is impossible to escape unscathed. The choice to view ritual circumcision as a problem, but not to view teaching Catholic children that they are ingesting human blood and flesh when they take communion as one, is perhaps a mild form of anti-Semitism, or at least selective myopia.
42
@Jen Parents have the right and responsibility to make all medical decisions on behalf of their young children. No baby wants immunization shots, nor to get her ears pierced. The former is a medical necessity. The latter is a practice in many cultures. With the exception of anti-vaxxers, no one questions those practices.
10
@Lawyermom comparing circumcision to immunization is a red herring. Most European and South American men are not circumcised and the rate of HIV is no higher than in the US where most males are. In other words, not getting a measles immunization is a public health threat. Not getting your baby boy circumcised is not. Stop trying to equate the two.
91
let's be absolutely clear about something. what were talking about here is ritual genital mutilation. can you imagine an article praising the entry of men into the field of forced clitoral removal?
581
@nonpersonage The World Health Organization recognizes that male circumcision can help prevent HIV and has made it a priority in parts of Africa, including making the procedure available to adult men. It is also a recognized medical procedure covered by health insurance if performed by a physician— which may be another reason some parents are choosing physician-mohels.
And while some mohels are rabbis, many are not.
38
Unlike clitoral removal, sensation is preserved. It is not the same. A woman without her clitoris derives little or no pleasure from the sexual act. I have enjoyed sex, each and every time, for over 50 years.
70
@nonpersonage
We've been doing this for thousands of years. It doesn't appear to have harmed Jewish men in any way that I can determine.
57
We’re Jewish (and doctors). And we made the decision NOT to perform this irreversible, elective and non-therapeutic cosmetic surgical procedure on our newborn son last year, despite a lot of family pressure to do so. Despite a lot of misinformation out there on the topic, the idea that this surgical procedure confers any meaningful medical benefits and that the benefits outweigh the risks/harms is a myth (that even many doctors believe) and not actually supported by a dispassionate review of the evidence.
679
@AL
Thank you for your brave, honest, and objective stand. It takes way too long for the beliefs of the primitive past to be replaced by the knowledge of thos informed
99
@AL Great stand AL. It takes lot of courage to stand against the norms and rituals and especially when they are so deeply entrenched in a religion. One is treated with contempt, frowned upon on even a hint of dissent.
I respect your views. Good job.
63
@AL Thank you for saying this. I have lived abroad in various countries over the years (where thus is not the practice). Americans have wholeheartedly embraced this procedure. It’s part of our national ethos of thinking we know best, and can ‘improve on nature.’ I can say from my experience as a girlfriend/friend/wife, it most certainly is not an improvement and certainly not kind or enlightened to impose upon another person.
82
It is child abuse/mutilation, pure and simple. No parent has the right to decide which body parts their child can and cannot keep. This practice belongs in the dark ages. The world is properly outraged over female genital mutilation but male genital mutilation is celebrated as normal.
308
@Mark Bau The comparison to female clitoral removal is not valid.
13
Male circumcision should be banned, too. It’s no less painful, or damaging, to boys than female circumcision is to girls.
178
That’s a lie. They are completely different levels of harm. Female circumcision is genital mutilation that has absolutely no purpose and ruins any sexual pleasure for the rest of your life. Male circumcision causes no actual harm and in fact reduces the risk of STD transmission.
38
@Sam Bender-Prouty I'm gonna need to see a source on that claim - "“extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".
7
@Sam Bender-Prouty that's where you're wrong kiddo.
There's about half a dozen different types of known female genital mutilation ranging from infibulation at the most extreme, all the way down to simple scratching of the labia.
Every single one of them are banned as human rights offenses.
Every single study claiming medical benefits and lack of harm to male circumcision are heavily disputed as to their validity by medical professionals and experts around the world.
29
We should let the boys themselves to make the decisions on their own body when they become eighteen years old.
486
@White space
Ouch!
11
@nanu
LOL! You’re right. Ritualized genital mutilation is a regular laugh riot. I’m sure you’d also see the rib-tickling humor in cutting away the labia of infant girls. Now THAT is funny! Am I right, or am I right?
14
@White space
Absolutely true.
Don't indoctrinate them about religion. Don't teach right from wrong. Don't teach them that people can change the course of history through their own personality and force of will. Don't . . ..
But to paraphrase Bobby Kennedy's paraphrase, "Some people see things and ask why, others see things and ask why not."
The adult is formed long before his eighteenth birthday and for thousands of years Jewish men have joined the covenant with their ancestors Abraham, Issac, and Jacob, Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, and Leah on their eighth day of life.
It has served our people well. Is has served humanity well.
19
I think this procedure should be forbidden.
No medical reasons behind it.
328
There are actually many medical benefits to circumcision. Circumcised males are far less likely to develop a UTI, phimosis or paraphimosis, and are at lower risk for HIV transmission.
112
@ED DOC
And yet western medical commuity doesn't see them justifying to treat circumcision as mandatory procedure for newborns.
There are also risks involved of course - risk of injury being the most serious.
48
All that true but based on studies from Africa
There are not studies on something simple: fathers teaching their sons how to clean themselves
Circumcision has been associated with accidents as well. Glans cut etc. Also it’s been associated with long term deformities
So NO , there are no reasons
The US is the only country in the world where circumcision is performed routinely.
53
So many now know what a mistake infant circumcision has been, all along. Brit Shalom is the way to go. Respect begets respect. Respect humanity.
12
As usual the supporters of this unnecessary mutilating procedure praise the benefits, specifically hygiene.
I always wonder why these people don’t have their finger nails surgically removed. That way they don’t have to clean them anymore. So much more convenient.
It’s not like a bit of water and soap and regular bodily hygiene’s can’t fix this issue...
I guess I shouldn’t be surprised when rational thinking goes out of the way because of religion and tribal attitudes. It is more surprising that large number of non-Jewish Americans (Unlike the rest of the world) still believe circumcision is a good thing.
31
The real question that educated Jews should be asking themselves is whether genital mutilation is really something they should even be considering in the 21st Century. Is circumcision anything more than a primitive tribal ritual? There is really no medical justification for ritual circumcision. Prevention of STDs is better accomplished by better hygiene, not by a surgical procedure.
20
It amazes me how boys in this country still do not have the basic right to bodily autonomy. Why do we continue to allow the mutilation of our boy's genitals to be accepted and expected?
26
Under which God is this nation indivisible?
2
"No, your Honor, she was circumcizing me in the bck of the car."
3
At least she is able to numb the poor suckers up, prior to the procedure. That's definitely an advancement. I remember hearing the screams from the daily procedure, when I was making rounds (unrelated, thankfully!).
6
Genital mutilation is barbaric. Calling it bris does not change that. It should be outlawed. If, when adult, men want their foreskin surgically removed, good for them. But mutilating babies should be criminalized.
27
Male genital cutting violates the basic human right to bodily autonomy and robs future men of an important, functional body part (mutilation), along with 70-80% of their erogenous sensation. It is an excruciatingly painful procedure (torture) and a sexual violation of a person unable to consent (rape).
It's long past time for all cultures and societies to end this barbaric practice. Make circumcision an adult ritual for those who choose to participate in it.
29
I am appalled that the NYT has lended its platform to perpetrators of genital mutilation. The thought process behind this article appears to be that the entry of women into any male dominated realm, no matter how abhorrent, is a feminist act. I claim the feminist act here is to denounce all forms of genital mutilation. Circumcision should be a personal decision.
30
Any physician who performs ritualized genital mutilation on children has abdicated their responsibility to ‘do no harm’ and should have their medical license removed.
27
How is this different than African cultures and female genital mutilation?
This is sickening.
29
I think this is a primitive barbaric ritual. And, regardless of what some may think, I am not "Anti-Semitic."
25
I like being circumcised. I feel clean and free, unencumbered.
9
Rabbis are not needed for religious ceremonies so a non-rabbi female mohel is in keeping with Jewish tradition. All that is needed is a minyan.
5
Ready? Are you SURE you're ready? Okay, go do a quick search for "infant herpes death from ritual circumcision with oral suction"
8
A bris is a totally unnecessary medical procedure.
This is a barbarous act unworthy of anyone, including licensed medical doctors.
God save us all from stupid ancient religious practices - or whatever a "higher being" you believe in.
I am glad that my son is intact and so is he. If a male wants to remove his foreskin, he can decide to do that after he becomes 18 years of age. I note that almost no males elect to do this procedure today in countries with good sanitation and medical care.
I hate to see such stupidity and misplaced religious fervor in the New York Times.
34
" . . . I was like, ‘No.’”
Can we LEAVE OUT THE "likes"?????
3
Another perfect example of ridiculous and cruel religious and cultural 'tradition'.
24
I, as an adult circumcised male, cannot understand how this is allowed to continue -- religious tradition or not. Everyone is in an uproar, rightly so, about female circumcision, yet few speak out against male circumcision. The groups that do are somehow considered fringe. I do understand the motive behind female circumcision, however, to take a male baby, strap him to a gurney, and cut off a piece of his body that clearly nature (or God, if you want) intended, is horrible. I have no idea how my life may have been different had I been left intact. And I will never know. I, like millions of baby boys each year, had no say in the matter. Shame on anyone who hides behind religion or tradition as a reason to continue the torture of baby boys.
35
His body, his choice. Circumcision is child abuse. You know no right to do this to a child.
29
Circumcision is a barbaric hangover from a time of poor personal hygiene. Just like the prohibition of eating pork, from before we knew about trichinosis. Now they have both become part of religion, which means it can not be disputed.
16
It's an outrage that male genital mutilation is still practised and accepted as legitimate. Aside from these barbaric religious rituals that serve zero purpose it's unacceptable that it is still practised so widely amongst north American babies that are not subject to antiquated religious dogma.
Thousands of boys are severely mutilated and die every year from this odious practice. End it.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06w06wg
31
Genital mutilation, pure and simple
Just ban it already!
22
Some of my Jewish guy friends have said their EX's have been mohel's from the day they got married to the end of their divorce
1
Ritual circumcision? You mean the intentional disfigurement, and torture, of boys for no medical purpose. No wonder they do it to infants because if the boys could speak, they would plead and plead to be spared this barbaric ritual from the Iron Age. It is considered cruel to dock the tails and ears of dogs but cut off the foreskin of a baby boy is okay?
34
Ritualized mutilation, no matter which gender performs it.
23
If female genital mutilation is seen as horrific, why not male genital mutilation?
24
This is sexual mutilation in the guise of “religious” freedom. Let’s worry less about gluten in our bread and start a campaign to end this savage ritual.
22
there is only one word for this
barbaric
26
To begin with circumcision for religious traditions is despicable and ungodly; worse, it is an unprovoked assault on a helpless infant who happens to be male.
29
So Dr. Amy Brown finds the mohel's license plate, "SNIP IT" offensive, but she clearly has no problem with the actual act of mutilating a baby boy by chopping off a piece of his body that clearly nature (or, for her, God) intended. Please stop hiding behind religion to continue this barbaric practice. Boys, like girls (and men, like women) should have a say on what happens to their body -- no matter the religion.
31
If you live in a bit of the world where new babies are not routinely circumcised (so news flash, most men still retain their foreskins) then I'm sorry, but it is difficult to cheer any adult who makes a living mutilating babies. I cannot think of another routine procedure, done for non-medical reasons and without consent that has such a life changing effect on adult capability. Jews have shown themselves to be adaptable and capable of changing the way they live in nearly all other aspects of how they live. I do not understand why they have not also adapted this ritual to a more humane practice.
25
Should tattooing be allowed as well if one's religion embraces it?
6
Apparently, women are and always have been just as unenlightened and brutal as men. How does a circumcision performed by a woman make this more "spiritual". This is a nauseating and disgusting article promoting a practice of mutilation that has absolutely no value for the voiceless victim who cannot give consent.
26
So, soon we'll see a story about non-traditional practitioners of female genital mutilation and honor killings? Come on NYT! Male Genital Mutilation is not female empowerment!
22
Barbarism- regardless of the gender of whom ever is performing the mutilation.
22
When you consider the Jewish justification of male circumcision from the ancient past, it makes the idea even more barbaric than it is objectively.
Maimonides said: It was done to "quell all the impulses of matter" and "perfect what is defective morally." Sages at the time had recognised that the foreskin heightened sexual pleasure. Maimonides reasoned that the bleeding and loss of protective covering rendered the penis weakened and in so doing had the effect of reducing a man's lustful thoughts and making sex less pleasurable. He also warned that it is "hard for a woman with whom an uncircumcised man has had sexual intercourse to separate from him."
So, "circumcise to reduce male sexual pleasure". How abhorrent.
This act of barbarism, foisted routinely on so many millions in the name of "religion", should be dismissed as the clear antithesis of anything holy that it is.
25
This all seems like a bad idea. If you want more sensitive, somatically intelligent men, stop genital mutilation at such a tender age, or at any age!
19
I am encouraged by all the comments recognizing circumcision as a mutilation of infants' genitalia.
Most circumcised men never see what they are missing. They don't know other men's penises can be so much more sensitive, and that they are missing an entire part of their sex organ (from which others derive pleasure). Mot men simply never get to see what it's like with non-mutilated penises.
As a gay, circumcised, Jewish man - I know exactly what I'm missing.
It boggles my mind that sex could have been so much better. I had no choice in the matter: my body was mutilated and my ownership of it violated.
This is simply very wrong.
32
@PS Exactly! It’s too late now (and I am sorry for you and them), but rather than force-share the misery with the next generation, they should follow your example, acknowledge they never had a choice or a chance to know ‘what if,’ and protect that right to choose for the next generation of men. These replies defending the practice with ‘I love sex and feeling clean’ from men who had no other experience to compare to, are really discouraging.
15
The optics of female mohels are pretty awful.
11
Please remind me again what the acceptable female ritual circumcision is
thanks
19
I can't believe this. Circumcision is genital mutilation without the boy's consent. I owe so many ills to my circumcision. The hypersensitivity it left me with made intercourse excruciating for me and helped to end my first marriage. Relatedly, the same hypersensitivity led over my young life to a serious fixation with my genitals that included...you get the idea.
20
Genital mutilation should be illegal.
29
Another in the NY Times series of "women good, men bad."
11
Great! We got an angry feminist, with your stuff in one hand and a knife in the other!!!
10
I don't know about this.. Jewish women usurping the role of a rabbi...?
child abuse by any other name
24
Listen, if it would make a Fascist cringe, perhaps it is time to let it go, and adopt Brit Shalom. Infant circumcision is a torture session that no well person chooses for themself. Please respect the humanity.
Jesus & the Unabomber
4
Or maybe just stop male genital mutilation altogether? Just a thought.
26
"Childhood circumcision" is a euphemism for male genital mutilation. You shouldn't force a baby to undergo elective surgery. Furthermore, it has stigmatized those of us who are *not* circumcised in a very personal way. The circumcised penis is the "normal", "correct" penis, and the uncircumcised one is "dirty" and "gross". It's 2020. We shouldn't be subjecting infants to genital mutilation.
34
My two sons are circumcised. Why?
From the Mayo Clinic: (https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/circumcision/about/pac-20393550) "Easier hygiene. Circumcision makes it simpler to wash the penis. However, boys with uncircumcised penises can be taught to wash regularly beneath the foreskin.
Decreased risk of urinary tract infections. The risk of urinary tract infections in males is low, but these infections are more common in uncircumcised males. Severe infections early in life can lead to kidney problems later.
Decreased risk of sexually transmitted infections. Circumcised men might have a lower risk of certain sexually transmitted infections, including HIV. Still, safe sexual practices remain essential.
Prevention of penile problems. Occasionally, the foreskin on an uncircumcised penis can be difficult or impossible to retract (phimosis). This can lead to inflammation of the foreskin or head of the penis.
Decreased risk of penile cancer. Although cancer of the penis is rare, it's less common in circumcised men. In addition, cervical cancer is less common in the female sexual partners of circumcised men."
Some uninformed people compare male circumcision to female genital mutilation (formerly called female circumcision). Male circumcision differs in that it does NOT remove all sexual feeling from the male, a big difference.
7
@RLiss But does it remove some or a lot of sexual feeling in any or some ‘patients.’ Is it imperative to do this to an infant who might never (likely) suffer these issues and who might, if given a choice, prefer to manage them rather than undergo an irreversible procedure that deforms their penis?
13
@RLiss every one of these reasons is thoroughly qualified: “rare”; “unlikely”; “low risk,” etc.
Why not get your tonsils or appendix taken out at birth? They’re far more likely to cause problems later on in life.
16
@RLiss
Correct. It doesn’t remove ALL sexual feelings. No one is arguing otherwise. It does however remove many sexual sensations.
Consider ice cream as an analogy. A bowl of vanilla ice cream is enjoyable but a large ice cream sundae with chocolate sauce, whipped cream, and cherries is far superior. Although your sons can still enjoy their ice cream you’ve deprived them of their right to experience the joy of a large sundae.
9
Sick! Barbaric!!
Oh I’m not talking about circumcision. I’m talking about the Trump presidency.
I’m fine with the briss. A little cloth soaked on wine and the baby boy is too.
And I’m glad to see these wonderful women adding so much meaning to the ritual.
4
@Jay Why That's sick. Let's discontinue all this talk in the name of the "Covenant of Abraham". Sick stuff for sure.
8
Great. Women are practicing genital mutilation.
24
Please, nytimes space is valuable.
6
Stop the barbaric practice of involuntary genital mutilation.
21
The mutilation of children's genitals is the single most disgusting thing about the Abrahamic religions. How is this different from Islam and their FGM? It is NOT different.
Just do ‘t do it.
23
Here we are once again.
Circumcision of helpless male infants is okay because it is a religious tradition. And the free exercise of religion protected by the Constitution (and supposedly required by one version of God) permits/demands genital mutilation of males without their consent.
Primitive religious barbarism and infant mutilation remains the right of the adults of a particular religion, while the Western World screams about female genital mutilation anywhere at anytime.
Oh, but we hear, male circumcision is not like female circumcision. It is only a difference of degree. And of course that it is performed on infants in Judaism.
Muslims raise the sons in a culture that convinces the male children that their circumcision is a reward for reaching adulthood. Why can't Judaism do the same thing? The mark of God would still be on their penises for anyone who has a need to look, but they would have consented to the procedure.
It boggles my mind that a mother could allow circumcision to happen to their infant male children. Now, it is the mothers themselves who are doing the cutting.
21
@Nik Cecere Correction: Some Muslim cultures do practice, though circumcision is not mentioned in the Quran. For Muslims it is about hygiene, not religion, but then then their religious culture does ask for arm pit and pubic hair removal.
Let's have a rule: no cutting off parts of people's sexual anatomy until they are old enough to give informed consent. I wish I could know what it is like to have intact anatomy, but absent some major medical advance, I never will.
28
This is disgusting! Circumcision on an unconsenting person should be illegal, but the thought of a woman altering a male infant's genitals should make every conscious male furious. This is not a good look from any angle.
21
Nothing quite like watching the peace loving, open minded, enlightened liberals that are the NYT readers go full intolerant. These letters are dripping with hatred, arrogance, and, yes, anti-Semitism. The hypocrisy of liberalism at its finest.
8
@Evan Wow. Keep reading! We might be intolerant of domestic violence, theft, bullying, rape and murder, too! SMH.
7
What were talking about here is ritual genital mutilation.
And the article should have mentioned the part where the Rabbi fills his mouth with wine and places it over the child's penis possibly passing STDs, particularly herpies.
18
Comparing male circumcision to FGM is like comparing being scratched by a cat to being mauled by a tiger.
Unfortunately this non-issue has become a raging, vituperative battle that seems to be dominated by penis fetishists.
4
This story is morally repugnant. No woman who chooses to mutilate a baby's penis should ever complain about "men telling women what to do with their bodies." Circumcision is an abomination. It's mutilation and should be outlawed.
32
Leave the poor baby's penis alone! Men have a right to choose. This is not right. No boy should have an unwanted circumcision. All boys deserve the right to grow up without unwanted cutting and to make personal choices when they are adults. Leave it alone and stop abusing baby boys!
25
"Mohelet"? There's a word that will keep me smiling all day.
4
Can we stop the nonsense about genital mutilation? The procedure doesn't harm the child, and in fact reduces the incidence of some diseases later in life, and has some other health benefits.
Female circumcision: does harm the female and is intended to limit women's pleasure from sex and sexual activity.
The two procedures are nothing alike and not parallel.
17
@DH BS. Half the world is uncircumcised and have no ill effects. Stop hiding behind religion to continue a barbaric procedure that is not needed in today's hygenic world.
23
@DH
OK. Let’s just cut away the labia of baby girls. That’s very nearly the exact equivalent procedure. That sound OK to you?
Or maybe, just maybe, we should allow these young human beings to make their own choice about it?
20
@DH circumcision is mutilation. If there were no reason for the foreskin then boys would not be born with them. The removal of the foreskin reduces sensitivity and male sexual pleasure the same as does female circumcision. And the argument that it may prevent the incidence of diseases later in life could be an argument for early childhood mastectomy.
12
My grandparents were orthodox, although, I became resentful of the procedure as an adult for several personal reasons. Methods of modern hygiene are suitable for that aspect and someones genitals are their own business to decide.
28
At seven or eight I found out that a part of my little Jewish body that I held multiple times a day in the bathroom had been altered without my advanced written informed consent. To this day I am outraged, as someone with a deeply engaged and active Jewish life, and remain amazed by friends and family who come from Jewish backgrounds but have no Jewish involvement at all, not even holding a Seder or lighting Hanukkah candles - those last two cultural vestiges of Judaism in a secular society - who will still have their sons altered, by a doctor of course, and not a mohel.
25
I have friends of all religious backgrounds who have suffered permanent damage as a result of infant circumcision. Most circumcision damage doesn't show up until the boy becomes a sexually active man, and he may not know that amputation of part of his sex organ caused the damage. In either case, he most likely will not tell his parents.
"Circumcision fails to meet the commonly accepted criteria for the justification of preventive medical procedures in children." ~European Medical Community https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/131/4/796
33
Religious practices are generally primitive and irrational, but this particular ritual is primitive, irrational and cruel.
We are conditioned to be so very tolerant of anything done in service of someone's faith.
Nuts.
39
This is a barbaric, horrific custom and should be abolished.
42
There is now an active controversy on circumcision.
More and more Jewish parents, both in the United States and in Israel, are deciding against circumcising their newborn sons.
The traditional attitude is "We were commanded". What I say is: How do you know that the men who, many centuries ago, wrote down that we were commanded were right? Anybody alive today who believes that God literally talks to him is recognized to be insane. (I do not assume that the ancient writers of the Bible were insane, only that they were putting their own words in God's mouth.)
18
Some people believe that male circumcision is genital mutilation.
11
It is amazing that in the 21st century circumcision is still somehow considered ok. Why don't we call it what it actually is -- genital mutilation that serves absolutely no purpose. A truly humane civilization would ban the barbaric practice.
36
Ritualized genital mutilation is still ritualized genital mutilation regardless of whether the perpetrator is male or female.
29
The photograph of that tiny baby with adult hands on him is supposed to a tender image, right? It horrifies me that tenderness is commingled with an innocent about to be subjected to unchosen cutting. It's not an image of caring; it's one of complicity.
83
A barbaric practice. I sincerely doubt that there are many or any circumcisions done in my hometown, " The Republic of Amsterdam " It seems that not just Jewish or for that matter Muslims in this Country but for whatever reason most males seem to undergo this truly abhorrent procedure. Leave the penis alone.
47
This sort of things should have been in the history books among all the awful crap we've done to people.
IF an adult wants to modify their own body, that's another issue.
Forcing it on a child because a bloodthirsty god demands ritual sacrifice from infants?
What century do we live in?
58
When one considers the variety of ancient practices Jews have left behind it's a shame we don't also let go of circumcision, as it's simply the primitive practice of genital mutilation.
If we'd had a son instead of a daughter, I never would have allowed it, and never would have thought our son any less Jewish for lack of it.
42
This whole practice being performed by anyone outside of a medically sterile setting seems extremely unsanitary. By the way, I know of some boys whose parents chose not to circumcise and whose then sons developed problems with infections around the foreskin. They then had to have the procedure in their teens which was very painful, so there is some benefit from a health standpoint in this procedure for males, where there obviously isn’t one in the case of females, which I see some people comparing this to.
1
@Kelly I know some parents of girls who got problems with their breasts later in life so they had their breasts removed. Guess parents should take action earlier. We should remove breasts from children.
European doctors are very clear: there are no prophylactic reasons that could justify such an operation on a child. What is normal and healthy needs no treatment.
21
Things that, when done to women are unacceptable/rude/criminal are not automatically unacceptable/rude/criminal when done to men. Do suggest that they are is a vile form of misogyny.
3
"And because Dr. Rumbak is a licensed doctor, she was able to give the baby an injection to numb the pain before the procedure. Mohels without medical licenses cannot do this."
An injection? All it takes is a strip of gauze soaked in a topical anesthetic cream ( lidocaine and prilocaine).
38
@Albert Donnenberg: At least the pain is acknowledged. That's something. Not much, but something.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
27
@Albert Donnenberg European doctors are pretty sure EMLA or similar local anethetics are unsufficient. Babies feel pain.
33
@Albert Donnenberg :
the numbing injection is given with a very tiny needle and works very well. Anyone considering circumcision must demand this is done.
19
Yikes! As a man, perhaps I should move into the field of instructing menstrual pad placement. This is so dumb. Men and women are different. We are far more alike than different, but we are different. Moving back to see the global picture, I believe we should find how all people are so much more alike than trying to find the scant differences. As mentioned here before, when someone says "he (or she) is "weird", I substitute "weird" with "Different from me". Try it sometimes. It is simple, but enlightening. This builds tolerance and acceptance instead of the ugly opposite. So many on this planet espouse the opposite. Whether this is religion, sex, politics, race, color, social activities, rituals or whatever. We should do as John Lennon wrote, so simply, but eloquently: "Come together". Not as Trump or Modi or Kim or Duterte or Maduro (etc) want(ed): "Pull apart", instead of "Come together".
3
I've known one adult to have this procedure done; he told me it was the most uncomfortable, painful experience he's ever had. That said, he had a legitimate medical reason to have it performed--and he elected to do so. No baby has that option. It seems like cruel and unusual punishment. Let's not pretend aesthetic appeal isn't one of the main reasons for this anachronistic practice.
28
I'm a circumcised man from a Jewish family.
If I'm blessed in future to have a male child, there is absolutely no chance I would circumcise him.
It is genital mutilation. No other name for it.
I'm so happy to see so many responses to this article from people who feel the same way as I do.
87
Men should have more empathy for circumcisions because they are the ones with the organ involved. These doctors are medicalizing an event that has been done without anesthesia forever. Except for Abraham who had to circumcise himself at the age of 99 most boys in good health have their brit at eight days with no problems. They are held by a loving relative and if my nephew is a good example, he barely noticed the cut. It is a lot better than the barbaric way circumcisions are done in the hospital.
This article was yet another place for people to vent their antisemitism without knowing the facts. Circumcision protects against cervical cancer. In Israel, where most men are circumcised, pap smears are not routine. Some African tribes which did not have the tradition of circumcision have opted for it because there are medical benefits. Jews have died to protect the right to enter their boys in the covenant of circumcision. It is shocking that in the US, anti-semitism is so rampant that an article about the entrance of women into this profession of mohel, generated so much venom.
11
@S.L.
Re: your claim that circumcision protects against some kinds of cancers....
Routine infant mastectomies would unquestionably reduce the rates of breast cancer. But one of the reasons we don't do that is because we don't have the consent of the person WHOSE BODY PART IS BEING CUT OFF.
Appeals to possible (but questionable) future medical benefits as well as appeals to tradition do not trump the right of every person, male or female, to decide whether a part of their body should removed - forever.
22
I fail to see how a barbaric practice without person's convent is anything to marvel at. Perhaps, instead of labeling it as a win for gender equality, this article can highlight the fact that there are still people who are willing to do insane stuff because they follow those claiming to hear voices in their heads.
29
Circumcision of male infants is a religious or cultural practice that does generally carry a low level of risk to health or live when there is otherwise no immediate medical need to perform the procedure.
Proponents in highly developed countries state circumcision is safely performed millions of times a year AND it has some medical long term benefits.
However, the statistical risk is not eliminated as result of a large number of procedures. The longterm benefits in these discussions are overstated as existing hard scientific evidence is either limited, deemed low quality or situational less relevant in highly developed countries.
It is interesting to note that non-medical circumcision is still covered by most insurances in the US while the opposite is true in Europe. This raises the question if a cultural practice is kept at least partially alive for business reasons. In addition, proponents for the elimination of the insurance requirement to cover birth control are equally opposed to eliminate coverage for circumcision...but I digress.
11
When serving in a hospital in Viet Nam some half a century ago, I saw our urologist perform at least one circumcision a week on grown men. It was not an elective procedure. Especially in sandy regions, unless there is careful hygiene, phimosis (inflammation and strangulation) is a real problem.
9
Cue the opinions on circumcision.
I'd rather point out that, yet again, the NY Times manages to make identity the driving force behind what it covers and how. It is true that this field (like many others) has seen an increase in female representation over the last generation or so. I've been to a number of circumcision ceremonies with male and female mohels and that's about all I have to say about that. The ceremonies were all religiously powerful and technically/medically successful. The gender of the mohel has had zero bearing on the outcome in either regard and I'm not sure how the reporter supports the claim that the presence of females in this business, offers parents a new "holistic" option.
5
VERY SICK. Ancient tradition like the Hal alal slaughter of animals. Trauma is imprinted for generations. There is no religion in the world that I would allow to dictate that my son or daughter experience genital mutilation.
26
@Maureen
Pretty sure no one's asking you to. The question is, why can't you tolerate other peoples' choices that are different from yours?
8
I believe that that women who have circumcised partners have a markedly
decreased risk of cervical cancer.
11
@sjj Most circumcision damage doesn't show up until the boy becomes a sexually active man, and he may not know that amputation of part of his sex organ caused the damage. In either case, he most likely will not tell his parents.
"Circumcision fails to meet the commonly accepted criteria for the justification of preventive medical procedures in children." ~European Medical Community https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/131/4/796
15
@sjj: Operating out of belief is precisely the problem.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
7
@Brother K
Thank you!
This is what I have been trying to raise awareness to in my own comments. No one is talking about the dulling of a perfectly formed penis that plays an important, albeit, sexual and reproductive role in addition to other vital functions in male physiology. Whoever had the procedure as a child or infant cannot know what the exact effect has been, what perhaps they are missing. They never had the opportunity. I highly suspect many defend this practice in part out of a subconscious, wishful thinking that it’s just cosmetic and maybe helps avoid an STI or commonplace infection. As a resident in Europe I can definitely attest to the fact that the medical community here thinks much more holistically —far less aggressive, less trigger-happy to jump to what can be seen as ‘big gun’ solutions to manageable illness. Their opinion on circumcision comes as no surprise to me.
9
It is a blot on our species that in this century of light, when science has very much done away with mythologies, that some ancient practices are still retained by people, some of whom manage the destinies of humanity today. With the impending coronavirus pan-epidemic should people go on precession down main street to keep evil away?
17
@Lara
The blot on our species is that people are so rigid in their thinking and intolerant of other people's choices
1
There seems to be strong agreement in the comments that this is a barbaric ancient ritual that should be ended. The comment I would like to add is that I was circumcised just after birth, I am now 63, and have felt my entire life that sex would have been better for me and my partners had had I been left complete. In the English language literature it was common for circumcision advocates in the 1800's to suggest the method would reduce masturbation and lustful drive, why is that part of the history seldom discussed.
47
@MJS This is a very important point that few are making (the effect on sexual health and pleasure). I do wonder why this procedure became so commonplace in the States yet not in Europe? Is it related to our nation’s puritan streak? Is there some connection to these beliefs and writings from the 19th century? This would make for an interesting article. Why did Americans adopt this when across the pond they do not (unless medically warranted, usually later in life)? Moreover, why are we still holding on to it? I think the latter question has a wholly different answer that reveals so much about the American psyche and health care industry.
14
We should NOT be circumcising our boys. Never ever ever ever.
57
@Lauren
Who's "we." Pretty sure no one's asking you to. The question is why you can't tolerate other people's choices?
5
@Evan It should be the individual being given a choice, not the parents or family. Procedure's irreversible.
20
@Evan Because those circumcised r not given a choice!
18
Genital Mutilation needs to end. This practice is disgusting and abhorrent and speaks to everything wrong with religion - blind faith and doing things "because we always have"
66
@JP
Please try to have modicum of information about what you are commenting on before hitting "submit."
@Evan I'm afraid JP's right. Your comment is just reflexive naysaying, as are the rest of your comments throughout this thread.
If you don't have substantive, data-driven evidence to support your claims, then perhaps your position is wrong.
13
Why is it female genital mutilation is considered a crime while vastly more prevalent male genital mutilation is considered a joyous rite?
30
@Bitter Herb Actually a good question, if only it wasn’t rhetorical. How about you actually inform yourself and seek the answer to that question?
2
I am proud that I am Jewish. I am proud that I am circumcised. I am proud that I am not a gentile.
7
Great. I’m proud no adults took a knife to my infant penis.
27
@Fenhalls That is quite an accomplishment to be proud of! Congratulations!
2
@Fenhalls Bully for u, Fenhalls! That does not give u permission to circumcise boys who cannot give consent!
7
Here’s a novel idea, How about we stop the barbaric practise of genital mutilation ......period
36
@Riley Lopez
Here's another novel idea: How about we respect and tolerate other people's choices?
6
How about let the person choose for themselves if they want their penis cut in a manner that is permanent?
15
@Evan
No Problem if you choose to cut off parts of your body. And let everyone else decide for themselves.
7
Yes. it is something to celebrate that women are leading the way into a brave new world of male genital mutilation.
21
Why not leave ‘things’ the way your god created them?
27
Stop it! Stop torturing and mutilating babies.
42
@Anne Russell
Stop it! Stop being intolerant of other people's choices!
3
Women should have rights over their own bodies. Why then would we celebrate the mutilation of infant male genitalia by woman or man? If when men are older and choose to practice this arcane ritual for their own reasons, then it is their choice to cut off a intimate piece of their body. No theirs mother’s not their fathers.
Stop this horrible practice against baby boys.
26
I hear the thought of the people who have never had to operate on adults who haven’t been circumcised. The ancient people who originated the practice before modern medicine saw the health benefits which to some extent still exist. While middle class and above men will likely have better hygiene and medical care, at birth not everyone will have such a life. Penile cancer is almost never seen in circumcised men, I have had to do amputations on occasion which is obviously devastating to some men. Cervical cancer is less frequent in partners of circumcised men, though with the new vaccines that will probably decrease in the future. Pediatric urinary infection is less frequent and in the before antibiotic age that was benefit. I applaud the physicians who have taken up the training both men and women to make the ceremony safer.
23
As a preventive measure for penile cancer, circumcision also fails to meet the criteria for preventive medicine: the evidence is not strong; the disease is rare and has a good survival rate; there are less intrusive ways of preventing the disease; and there is no compelling reason to deny boys their legitimate right to make their own informed decision when they are old enough to do so. https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/131/4/796
19
@James MD urologist WHAT! Breast cancer is a huge problem for women. Following your logic, we should remove the female breast upon birth to prevent them possibly having to remove them later in life if they get cancer. Most of Europe is uncircumcised. How come I've never heard of a big cancer issue with men there? I'm not sure what scares me more now, the fact that this barbaric practice is still OK with many or that you are a doctor.
15
I'm happy to learn of this change--it is totally not surprising. However, might I suggest the wording of the title be changed? "Jewish Women Move Into a Male Domain: Ritual Circumcision" first had me thinking that women were being circumcised, a most definite no-no.
3
I vehemently disagree with the statement that disagreement with circumcision for religious reasons is inherently anti-Semitic. I am a women married to a Jewish man, we are parents to a very young son, and let me be clear: circumcision is genital mutilation that I pray will end in my son's lifetime.
30
Your baby isn’t Jewish so need to be circumcised anyway
It is unbelievable that in this day & age, non-medically necessary, permanently genital altering surgery on a baby is legal.
30
Medieval witchcraft brought to you by fairy tales.
31
Male genital mutilation!!! Why is this even legal!! Disgusting!!! Horrible!! Save these little boys from these horrible arcane rituals.
28
Guess how the Nazis selected Jewish males from others in a lineup during World War II?
.
4
@Belle Poitrine Yes, of course...so when the antifa get into power, they'll know how to select the fascists, right?
Let’s end male genital mutilation. If a boy wants to have the end of his penis removed, let him make that choice as a legal adult. There is no excuse for this practice in the 21st Century. I say this as an ethnic Jew who was not given the choice — as a baby, the decision was made for me. My Mom regrets it, as well. If you are against female genital mutilation (as you should be), you are ethically bound to be against it for males as well as females.
44
We are not Jewish but we definitely wanted our son to be circumcised, it just looks better and is cleaner. Others can do what they want but that's what we wanted, it's our business and he is happy with it too. It was upsetting, though, that at the hospital they took him from the nursery by himself to perform the procedure. He is a teenager now and it still bothers me to think that I wasn't there to accompany him.
9
@Roberta
Would those reasons still persuade you if you knew about the potential (likely, and permanent) loss of sensitivity that the procedure causes? I ask because I know men who have really suffered as adults because their community/parents made this decision long ago. The ‘looks better’ comment really strikes me as unfortunate. Please know that I am not trying to be judgmental. I am just quite sad for these boys and do not understand the hypothetical ‘could prevent an infection’ and ‘might be more in style’ reaction to natural body conformation.
14
@Roberta Oh, so it's about appearance here? Who cares what the kid thinks.
10
@Snookums I'm going to go with my husband's opinion, who doesn't have a problem with loss of sensitivity. You may not agree, but looks do matter. If I had another boy, I'd still circumcise, much easier as an infant than for a grown man.
3
Although I'm Jewish, the practice of male circumcision is absolutely abhorrent to me unless it's done as an absolute medical necessity such as in cases of infection, etc. It's no less than the equivalent of female genital mutilation (FGM) which, at least in enlightened western societies, is illegal. So, too, should male circumcision be made illegal with harsh penalties for violations as in the case of FGM. If a male wants to be voluntarily circumcised at age 18 then fine. But to mutilate babies is not fine. Religious freedom is fine, but human and animal sacrifices are not fine, nor are male circumcision or FGM. Stoning, a punishment described in scripture, is still practiced today but only in vicious and backward societies. Exodus 22:18 and Leviticus 19:31 advocate the killing of witches. Witches? Really? There are still vicious and backward societies where people believe witches exist and kill suspected witches. We used to execute suspected witches in the US, but we’ve since become more knowledgeable and civilized. Those who are aghast at ritual circumcision, usually accompanied by a party in Judaism, should explore Intact America, which is a registered non-governmental anti-infant circumcision organization created in 2008 to advance the view that the circumcision of non-consenting minors is unethical and medically unnecessary, and therefore should be abandoned. Counterarguments made by circumcision advocates are sheer baloney and false rationalization.
33
@Mike F. Intact America, as well other organizations including Attorneys for the Rights of the Child, is sponsoring the 16th International Symposium on Genital Autonomy, Circumcision, and Children's Rights on August 29-30, 2020 in Atlanta. Anyone with a deep interest in this subject may want to attend. Details will soon be up at www.intactamerica.org.
21
Circumcision is a barbaric practice. It is not made less barbaric by having physicians of any gender perform it. It's remarkable that such a thoughtful and otherwise admirable culture persists in the righteous defence of it.
There's the cruelty of it and then there is the patriarchal aspect. The sacrifice that only males can make, the initiation into a sacred brotherhood that the womenfolk can never enter.
26
Is it performed differently in a hospital?
1
@nanu Yes!!
2
There is nothing new to females performing circumcisions just perhaps religious rituals one.
Even when I was a medical student in the 1970s, unless parents didn't wish it or they desired a religious one, male children were routinely circumcised in the hospital before they went home by both male and female pediatricians.
4
"They can't feel pain yet", is what I was told when circumcision was stressed as an important part of my newborn son's future hygiene.
Then they proceeded to strap the newborn infants' limbs to a restraining board that resembled a form of crucifixion. The moment the "surgeon" touched them with the scalpel, the shrieks of those previously calm babies clearly indicated that the promise of painlessness was a massive LIE. All the circumcised babies' cries echoed through the hospital ward for the better part of the day and night and continuing afterwards, particularly when a diaper was newly wet or changed.
29
@Entera I'm so sorry for you Entera. That will haunt you forever, I'm sure.
11
@Entera Both my sons were circumcised right after birth, in my presence. I don't remember any cries echoing through the very small hospital, nor any problems while changing diapers.
4
It should be noted that the timing of the circumcision is not arbitrary. The 8th day after birth is believed to be the time when the infant is least sensitive to pain.
3
@Steve There is absolutely no evidence that this is true. Indeed, we now know that babies feel pain as least as intensely as adults do and perhaps more so. Circumcision was used to prove this in the 1980s!!
15
How is it that this not not illegal?
22
@Mc Ee Donald: Excellent question. Some years ago here in NYC at the height of the movement against female genital mutilation the NY City Council proposed a bill to outlaw the practice. It failed because the law had to be written in a gender-neutral way and would thus have outlawed male circumcision. So that was the end of the concern for genital mutilation. Another double standard.
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
16
I deeply wish my parents had let me decide for myself.
30
So good to hear that more women are getting into the field of genital mutilation. Warms my heart.
In a society where we even fuss over personal pronouns, it amazes me that this is still considered acceptable. No one deserves to have a part of them cut off without consent. It’s barbaric.
32
My wife wisely deferred to me to decide on the fate of our two boys. And I wisely deferred to our boys to decide.
84
@Michael
Same here for our son (never an issue with the daughter). I asked 2 doctors and 4 nurses for a good medical reason to do it. The best/only reason I got was "so he looks like dad".
Now he doesn't "look like dad".
29
@Michael As a Jew, I'm glad to be circumcised, and I'm specifically glad that I didn't have to go through the horror of making the decision for myself.
5
I can't help but feel that the "extra" skin around the tip of the anatomy is there for a reason- and that it is likely to protect a very delicate, vulnerable and exposed part of the body.
95
@Ellen trust me lady, we feel it too.
17
Judaism is, first and foremost, tribal in nature. Being admitted to the tribe involves some bodily sacrifices. Circumcision is one of these. If you allowed it to be performed later in life few would go through it. A tough day for the little one but soon forgotten. But with him for life. Whether male or female the mohel is an important part of the process. G-d bless them.
17
It is also a common practice in Islam.
7
@Bernard Shinder there are religious denominations requiring female circumcision of various types and severities as a bodily sacrifice.
Usually performed by women and it stays with the newly initiated lady member of the faith for life.
God bless them too I suppose.
12
Born in Holland, raised in Australia and married to an uncircumcised American, I strongly wish that the practice of circumcision would cease. We made two of our children cry when, as parents, they decided to circumcise their male offspring, and we expressed our opposition to it. Of course, once the deed was done, we realized we had lost the argument and have gone on to have normal loving relationships with our children and grandchildren. My husband at 75 believes he is much better off with a foreskin. It has served him and his sex life well.
42
I have no actual memories of my own circumcision.
I have never heard of anyone who does.
I don’t ever think of it today, except as a badge of being a proud member of the Tribe.
The still vociferous and widespread opposition to this practice today -- like the opposition to kosher slaughtering -- always leaves me feeling suspicious and uneasy about people's motives considering the many more urgent issues facing the world.
34
You should do an internet search for pictures of men’s penises that have been irreparably damaged through the process of circumcision. I dare you. And no, it’s not terribly pleasant.
20
@Nick Gold Do an internet search for what a penis with cancer looks like, or one that's been amputated because of cancer.
Circumcision reduces to close to zero penile cancer.
4
Nice try but the practice is widespread in America far beyond Jews.
You claim you haven’t had any ill affects, you’ve actually been living with a Black and White TV your whole life, while all the uncut men have Color TVs.
16
It is a brutal, unnecessary practice that cannot be compared to the choice a woman might make to have an abortion. The woman chooses for herself, circumcision is imposed infants. I wish the conversation was about how folks could find a gender neutral ritual that was healthy, rather than debate whether women are as capable of mutilating babies as men.
50
When will the male genital mutilation stop? This is not medically necessary and can result in complications. Judaism is an excuse, but not sure overrules the right to decide of the male child. The fact that large amounts of skin are removed from most males in the US (and nearly no other country for non-religious reasons) deserves more attention and concern.
62
@NPP Muslim men are also circumcised.
4
This is a move in the right direction. Circumcision is surgery & should only be done by a certified surgeon. Now the next step is to do away with this archaic barbaric procedure.
We must evolve if we are to survive.
19
A daily reminder of membership. Or partial membership.
10
I suppose that this week especially doesn’t need a mention of where the corona is located on our person.
7
Remember that many of the supporters of female mohelim don't reject the aegis of Jewish law in any event, so their views are not surprising. The question needs to be asked if Jewish law itself - halakha - endorses the possibility. There were women who circumcised their children during the war, and in fact the authorities dispute the idea. One issue pivots around the general principle that only one who is obligated in a commandment can perform it on behalf of another; thus women are of course not obligated in milah, but they are party to the Jewish covenant, or bris.
2
Religious rituals are supposed to be antiquated. They seem holier that way. Modernizing them just makes them seem less so. There is no reason but for the traditional and involuntary suspension of disbelief that women can perform ritual circumcisions. But take away involuntary disbelief and you turn rituals and religion into an unfashionable and revolting pantomime, that can close like the minstrel or vaudeville shows.
4
When my son was born in 2004, I found a woman with a PhD in nursing who also worked as a mohel. My guests (and my husband) thought it was weird, but guess what? She did an excellent job. With something so important, why not have a medical professional do the job.
66
@RLS with something this important: cutting off a living, healthy, functional and highly sensitive part of a poor childs body - why not not do it at all?
My body my choice - for boys too?
51
@RLS It should be the law to have a medical professional do this.
4
@RLS As so many others have asked in response to this column: Why do it at all?
31
As an uncircumcised adult male, I am fairly neutral about the procedure, because I see pros and cons.
First, to assuage people's fears about pain, I can say that the foreskin along the top and sides is quite insensitive -- it is sort of like the skin around your elbow. If I were to ever get this procedure done, I don't think I'd need anesthetic at all, that's how insensitive that skin is. You can twist it, yank it, scratch it, it is quite dull.
The bottom part near the frenulum however is a completely different story -- that part is extremely sensitive, and I pity anyone who loses it, both for the pain during procedure but more importantly for lost sensation afterward. So the style of cut is very significant. My impression though is that normally the frenulum area is kept intact, but not always.
On the other hand, I can tell you that despite keeping the area quite clean, fungal infections are a fact of life for me and others I've spoken to, requiring frequent applications of anti-fungal creme throughout the year. You might argue that it's a good thing, giving me more empathy for women when they get yeast infections, but it sure is annoying to live with, and disruptive to sex life at times.
Finally, I agree with the whole "let the child decide when he's old enough" philosophy, but unfortunately I don't think it heals as well when performed later in life.
So on balance, I see pros and cons either way. But if you do it, try to preserve the frenulum.
190
@Mag K Ah those pesky infections. They are considerably reduced through hygiene.
But to your point: we do not consider surgery as an option to combat vaginal yeast infections. For very good reason.
It is oh so easy to find good reasons to do bad things. And here we are.
78
There’s no female surgical option because there’s no way a surgery could help. You’re trying to equate two entirely different anatomies.
43
This is anecdotal evidence. Science does not support infections as normal for uncircumcised people.
60
This is a very complicated issue. I have personally performed well over 1000 circumcisions as a practicing OB/Gyn. Thankfully I moved my practice to an area where the family physicians and pediatricians perform them because I came to believe that the procedure is genital mutilation on par with female “circumcision” on a non-consenting person.
The practice, again as I came to believe, is religious tradition only because those early populations observed less disease in those who were subjected to the procedure.
Interject the American Academy of Pediatrics in the 20th century. They have had their opinions, and reversal and again reversal of their opinions. Currently they recommend the procedure for, in my opinion, cynical reasons. They, rightly, claim there is less transmission of viral disease of those that have been circumcised. However, if you carefully read their position statement, the real reason they recommend the procedure is so that it is covered by medical insurance groups.
In this era, while I wouldn’t call for a ban on the procedure, I don’t think that, no. 1, the NYT should publish a “puff piece” on this topic and, no. 2, we should, as a society and medical community, have serious discussions with ourselves and the parents of the patient regarding the necessity of this not benign tradition. It is not necessary and it is cruel.
79
@SRD Further, the foreskin serves a purpose in a young boy. For an infant or young boy, it should not be cut off or even pulled back during washing until it 'naturally' will be eventually released from the penis head.
13
Circumcision is carried out purely for the benefit of the parents. The child doesn't ask, nor gains any advantage in life, from having it done.
Because some things have been done for thousands of years, doesn't mean they are good, or should continue. History is littered with examples of practices that have long ceased due to a recognition of their faults.
96
I didn't know what either a "Mohel" or "Bris" was until I met Emily Blake, when she joined the Board of an arts organization that I'm also on. She's a truly committed and lovely person, and I'm so glad that she-and other female Mohels-are getting the attention and "business" they so deserve! Brava, ladies.
8
The comments, as expected, are over-the-top.
Women are just as qualified, perhaps more so, as their male colleagues.
As for circumcision, I had it done, as did my son and every male member of my family. They cried for about five seconds, and now they’re clean forever.
I don’t feel like I was abused, oppressed, or violated. But I’m amused that other people say that I was.
35
@David G - Our increasing understanding of human biology and the developing infant brain, unfortunately, tells us that the impacts of circumcision most certainly go beyond "about five seconds".
As for being "clean", although I'm Jewish, I'm not sure if you are referring to "clean" in a purely ritualistic/spiritual sense (like with claims for female circumcision/genital mutilation). However, as a doctor, there is no good/relevant evidence that routine infant circumcision makes boys/men cleaner in any meaningful/microbiological sense-- that is an old myth.
69
@AL
“The impacts of circumcision”
Is that another woke grievance that some people are adding to their list of outrages?
I don’t believe you’re a doctor at all. A physician would never give heresay that the effects of a minor procedure have long-lasting negative effects. And there are many studies showing circumcision as helpful in curbing the spread of HIV, infections, foreskin tears, and smegma.
Yes, I do feel cleaner, in every sense.
12
Clean from what ?
10
A few years ago AARP did an article that, among other things, if you wanted to live longer, you should go to women doctors. I've taken that advice, and I think yhe same may apply here. A woman mohel is likely, at least to be on the average, more willing to connect with the family on a spiritual level. Men, in general tend to be more hierarchical. (I know I'm generalizing here.) Still, for all its traditional value, I wish circumcision was better appreciated for its value as hygiene. Like the old dietary laws, that promulgated the avoidance of easily tainted foods, circumcision, at a time when cleanliness was less available than godliness, focused on an area that thended to be a receptacle for infection.
I see by the comments that anti-cicrcumcisionists are as passionate as anti-abortionists. I don't understand why people's decisions are so troubling to some.
9
@michaeltide This last comment equating anti-circumcisionists to anti-abortionists is very troubling. Abortion is typically a procedure sought out by the person receiving the surgery and yet still very controversial. Circumcision is a surgery performed on another person without their consent. That is not a tradition to celebrate.
58
@michaeltide
There is no equivalence between the two. If anything, the comparison is probably more in line with those of us who are passionately pro-choice, and believe in a woman's right to choose what happens to her own body. Which is to say: I'm not anti-circumcision—I'm for the newly born person's right to choose circumcision when they're old enough to make the decision for themselves.
16
@MJS I was comparing the passion that commenters bring to the position, and the fact that they want to legislate other people's choices.
3
The article gives the impression that care, attention and information is the exclusive domain of the women mohels. My experience has been to the contrary (my son’s mohel made pre and post visits with daily calls thereafter while also spending time with family, providing a gift for the baby etc) so while I don’t argue that these specific women mohels have provided nice care to the babies and their families I do argue with the implication that it can’t be found in men.
11
@Nathan F That was our experience as well. And I really don’t understand the need for everything to be personalized, leaflets given to attendees, etc.
3
65 years ago I was successfully circumcised by a mohel and I was unable to walk or talk for a year !!
149
Same thing happened to me 55 years ago!
16
You just won the internet.
13
@Bruce Egert yep it was very traumatizing I couldn't use a toilet for even longer
15
The Times has no problem calling out the scientific ignorance of climate change denialism, but when a story touches on an unscientific practice embedded in a religious and cultural community’s identity, they give it a pass? Why am I not surprised?
181
@Paris Spleen That's not just the NYT, that's the United States.We fetishize faith, whatever that means, and treat it as an unquestionable virtue. There is faster way to shut down a disagreement than to claim something questionable is a "sincerely held religious belief."
42
@Paris Spleen Climate change denialists are arguing against the science of climate change, so they’re coming at the issue from the same lens but disagreeing on the resulting opinions. Jewish parents choosing circumcision for their children are performing a religious ritual which they have never claimed to be primarily scientific or medical, so writing this story without a “scientific call out” is really not the double standard you are perceiving. Not every cultural act is scientific, and that’s ok!
13
@Lady Edith no... Its a very specific "sincerely held religious belief" that is privileged over all others, otherwise the US would be fine with at least some forms of female circumcision as well.
2
I was born and raised a Roman Catholic but feel that I should have been Jewish. All my best friends are Jewish Jewish, everybody thinks I'm Jewish and I really appreciate so much about the culture and religion. Except circumcision. it's a horrible, barbaric and antiquated ritual which should be outlawed. I know this is not a popular or accepted perspective but it's just how I feel.
174
@Michael
Well, really glad to see so many folks in support of ending this. Thank you!
20
“Comforting?” My advise to young men is to sue if they had this barbaric practice performed on them without consent.
108
@ronk212 And they'll get laughed out of court
8
@Greg....A 2000 case in New York made headlines as one of the seminal foundations of this legal trend when an 18-year-old successfully sued the hospital where he was born for civil battery for circumcising him as an infant. Civil battery is essentially nonconsensual bodily contact that causes pain or other injury.
https://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=127183&page=1
9
You could be forgiven for thinking that women would want to steer away from any type of genital mutilation of an infant. Particularly one where the patient has no say in the procedure.
94
@Richard
And men should too.
17
Circumcision is debatable. I fail to understand why this procedure is done at such an early stage when the child has no say..
79
@Nitin C Because he would refuse if asked when he was 18.
19
Great story but this is antiquated ritual needs to end. There’s no medical rationale for it. I’m glad my mother against us going through this despite our Jewish background.
210
@Dan f You're not Jewish. Nobody who is Jewish says they have a "Jewish Background." They say they are Jewish and they are proud to enter into the covenant
7
Circumcision should be outright banned as unnecessary and other wise performed only by a Doctor if required. Many will argue that this ritual has been performed for centuries but then again the same can be said about the many girls whom are mutilated for the same reason as circumcision which is mutilation. These rituals should be ended and although many more Jewish Pediatricians are combining the procedure as a medical procedure combined Jewish religious act. However I noticed these Pediatricians are viewing this an easy and significant boost their their practice and the lines are blurring in doing and advocating for circumcision when it is for the most part 98% (I am guessing) unnecessary surgery otherwise.
81
“Numb the pain”
“First, do no harm.”
Why are medical professionals performing an irreversible unnecessary medical procedure without consent on the most vulnerable in our society? It has been so moving to watch the growing movement of adult men standing up for the bodily integrity of males—the same bodily integrity we guarantee for infant females. Basic human rights transcend religious “freedom.”
215
@Amy Luna because there's money in it, like the article said "it's just business".
13
@Amy Luna: First Do No Harm is not in the Hippocratic Oath.
https://www.thoughtco.com/first-do-no-harm-hippocratic-oath-118780
It is a myth.
What is in the oath is a ban on abortions. Still want to cling to that outdated fantasy?
https://emcphd.wordpress.com
2
@Amy Luna This. Hear, hear! How is this not a violation of the Hippocratic Oath? It is the removal of healthy, normal tissue from a non-consenting infant (and it's a procedure that can and does have mishaps).
10
An incredible painful procedure for the child with no evidence of clinical advantage, except for old studies from African countries that don’t apply today.
There are not studies on something simple: fathers teaching their sons how to clean themselves.
Circumcision has been associated with accidents as well. Glans cut etc. Also it’s been associated with long term deformities whoever there is an accident.
So NO , there are no reasons to do it
The US is the only country in the world where circumcision is performed routinely.
113
@Jlad approaching this issue from the view point that medicinal studies must be what justify the procedure completely overlooks the fact that that article is about a religious ritual, something that doesn’t need medicinal science to justify it’s existence. If you have a problem with secular circumcision, then that’s a different question with different motivations.
9
@R In Italy it's not regularly done on male children. In fact, it's only covered by the national health service when there is a medical reason for it. And yes... any kind of surgery done on a child solely for "religious" purposes should also be justified by medical science. This is not a benign procedure... we live in the 21st century... and no, religion does not take precedence over a child's civil rights. They can decide what "tribe" they want to belong to when they're old enough to know what tribe, means.
I grew up in the US, but returned to Italy roughly 25 years ago. I've not been witness, in the last 25 years, to men pulling their hair out because they grew up uncircumcised. When there is a medical reason, by all means. When done by a consenting adult, by all means. For religious purposes, I don't think so.
26
The female pediatrician/mohel who performed the circumcision on my three great nephews was a success on all counts. We were confident in her medical ability while appreciating her explaining the ritual and its meaning to an assemblage of respectful congregants of secular and religious backgrounds. A meaningful and memorable experience.
17
My sons are older now - but fast with no complications worked for our family. Seems today's parents require more of a formality, more ceremony, and this is not a bad thing. The humanity mentioned in the article is housed more in the family around you, not necessarily needed in the mohel.
4
Call me old fashioned, but it’s just not working for me to have the first woman to touch my sons stuff, be cutting it. Just not sending the right message.
46
@jb What is the right message? That other men will cut your "stuff"?
35
I attended an all-male high school in the Fifties that had a large swimming pool where we all swam naked. I remember feeling a little embarrassed about it the first time I went in, but came away thinking that the old time rabbis had it exactly right to devise a procedure that made finding yourself faster and cleaner. They were very practical people.
15
This is great but I have zero complaints about my son's male Mohel, the wonderful Rabbi Malkah. We are a mixed religion family and while he is orthodox and he was great with the baby and the family and the procedure was amazingly fast with no complications.
2
With all of the gloom and doom that so involves much of the news, a lovely little story … just a beautiful, blessed event for all involved as it makes what is still too often a less than happy time something truly special.
19
@Horseshoe Crab
How is a story about cutting off a part of a humans body without the person giving permission a "lovely little story"?
156
Except for the pain that is caused on the child
Even with the best anesthesia, still hurts
They cry for hours after it’s done
64
@Jlad I've attended many a bris, and the babies do not "cry for hours." However, I'm extremely glad the new mohels use anesthetic. A pediatrician friend of mine recently became a mohelet, and she told me "I don't believe in causing babies any pain." She performed her first bris on twin boys and it went very well. If you are simply anti-cirucmcision, no matter what the circumstances, you are entitled to your opinion.
6
Lovely.
But I still wish I had mine back
214
@Michael c Pretty much all agree on the right of religious self-determination later in life. But this act is irrevocable. I too want a do-over.
85
@michael c. This is America; some medical entrepreneur out there is probably offering to do exactly that. Minus the sensory function of course.
8
Not new. I had a female mohel 19 years ago for my son’s circumcision. Her best feature was that she answered all the questions I had patiently, and that was comforting.
20
Dr Blake performed our grandson's bris and she was wonderful in making the religious aspect very meaningful and indeed joyful with the assurance that only a trained medical professional can provide.
40