Circumcision

From RationalWiki
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Reverted edits by WatcherIntheDark (talk) to last revision by Reyemile)
(Undo revision 1360633 by Reyemile (talk))
Line 1: Line 1:
 
[[File:Activist.jpg|thumb|Circumcision can be an emotive issue.]]
 
[[File:Activist.jpg|thumb|Circumcision can be an emotive issue.]]
'''Circumcision''' is a procedure whereby the [[foreskin]] of the penis is removed either for medical or religious reasons.
+
'''Circumcision''' is a procedure whereby the [[foreskin]] of the penis is removed, required of all [[male]] [[Jews]] due to their [[religion]]. This procedure is also performed in the [[Muslims|Muslim]] religion.<ref>Although not prescribed in the [[Quran]] it is a [[cultural]] norm for most Muslims.</ref> The majority<ref>http://www.boystoo.com/history/statistics.htm</ref> of [[American]] males are circumcised, though this has more to do with [[tradition]] than religious requirement. As circumcision is a form of genital mutilation, some groups have protested against the practice and believe it should be ended.<ref>http://nocirc.org/</ref> These groups often cite a perceived decrease in [[sex]]ual pleasure and the lack of consent on the part of the often infant child as evidence of [[child abuse]]. A recent study also suggests that men who have been circumcised have more difficulty reaching orgasm, their partners have more [[vagina]]l pain, and a worse sex life overall.<ref>http://sciencenordic.com/male-circumcision-leads-bad-sex-life</ref> 
  
== Medical issues ==
+
Others<ref>http://www.circinfo.net</ref> defend the practice, as they claim the alleged detriments of the procedure are entirely based on dubious [[anecdotal evidence]] and [[woo]].<ref>[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14751371?dopt=Abstract PUBMed: Circumcision in adults: effect on sexual function.]</ref> More importantly, in sub-Saharan Africa, where HIV/AIDS is a serious public health issue, circumcision has been found to be an effective way of lessening the risk of the transmission of the virus. <ref>[http://circumcisioninformation.com/weiss.html]</ref> <ref>[http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10461-006-9169-4/fulltext.html]</ref> <ref>[http://journals.lww.com/aidsonline/Abstract/1989/06000/The_relationship_between_male_circumcision_and_HIV.6.aspx]</ref>
The World Health Organization is quite clear on the role of circumcision in reducing [[HIV]] transmission in epidemic regions:
+
{{Cquote|There is compelling evidence that male circumcision reduces the risk of heterosexually acquired HIV infection in men by approximately 60%. Three randomized controlled trials have shown that male circumcision provided by well trained health professionals in properly equipped settings is safe. WHO/UNAIDS recommendations emphasize that male circumcision should be considered an efficacious intervention for HIV prevention in countries and regions with heterosexual epidemics, high HIV and low male circumcision prevalence.|||<ref>http://www.who.int/hiv/topics/malecircumcision/en/ </ref>}}
+
However, for those living in areas where HIV infection is not endemic this is less of an issue. Indeed, the BMA has this to say
+
{{Cquote|There is a spectrum of views within the BMA’s membership about whether non-therapeutic male circumcision is a beneficial, neutral, or harmful procedure or whether it is superfluous, and whether it should ever be done on a child who is not capable of deciding for himself. The medical harms or benefits have not been unequivocally proved except to the extent that there are clear risks of harm if the procedure is done inexpertly. The Association has no policy on these issues. Indeed, it would be difficult to formulate a policy in the absence of unambiguously clear and consistent medical data on the implications of the intervention. As a general rule, however, the BMA believes that parents should be entitled to make choices about how best to promote their children’s interests, and it is for society to decide what limits should be imposed on parental choices. What those limits currently are is discussed below, together with the legal and ethical considerations for doctors asked to perform non-therapeutic circumcision.|||<ref>http://jme.bmj.com/content/30/3/259.full#xref-ref-3-1 </ref>}}
+
So, in short, outside of high risk areas, the jury is still out.
+
  
 
+
An estimated 30% of the global male population is circumcised,<ref>http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2007/9789241596169_eng.pdf</ref> with the most circumcised areas being the [[Middle East]], [[Africa]], [[Southeast Asia]], [[Australia]], [[Canada]] and the [[United States of America]]. In the United States, it appears the percentage of newborn males that are circumcised has changed little in the last decade.<ref>http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6034a4.htm?s_cid=mm6034a4_w</ref> It is virtually ''non-existent'' in most other [[West]]ern nations, except among Jews and Muslims.<ref>A much more detailed survey on [[wp:circumcision|Wikipedia]]</ref> It totally isn't genital mutilation because, well, [[Confirmation bias|just because it isn't, okay]]!?
==Informed consent==
+
 
+
Performing an irreversible, elective procedure on a baby incapable of consent raises ethical and legal concerns.<ref>http://www.cirp.org/library/legal/povenmire/</ref>. However, the procedure is performed in the US by urologists, not just by witch doctors and rabbis. For the medical community at least, these concerns are not persuasive. Also, it may benefit children to have the surgery performed in infancy if there is a significant chance they would elect to have the procedure later in life. Circumcision carries more medical risk when performed on older children and adults<ref>http://www.circinfo.net/risks_in_adults_and_older_children.html</ref>, especially if general anesthesia is necessary. <ref>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2697561/</ref>.
+
  
 
==Biblical references==
 
==Biblical references==
 
In Judaism, the call for circumcision is first found in [[Genesis|Genesis 17]]; specifically, {{bible|Genesis|17|10}}-14, as a covenant (or contract) between [[Yahweh|God]] and [[Abraham]], and unto his descendants (e.g., all male children of [[Israel]]).<ref>Somehow, Abraham found this agreeable &mdash; apparently the act was a "gateway" into being able to be convinced of the less-reasonable killing of his son, [[Isaac]], later in the same book.</ref> Where his son Ishmael was circumsized at the age of 13; Issac was seen as more holy for being circumcised on the 8th day of life. Issac was not as holy as Shem though; Shem was born without a foreskin, a rare medical condition called aposthia. Furthermore the penalty for circumcising before the 8th day is not stated in the bible.
 
In Judaism, the call for circumcision is first found in [[Genesis|Genesis 17]]; specifically, {{bible|Genesis|17|10}}-14, as a covenant (or contract) between [[Yahweh|God]] and [[Abraham]], and unto his descendants (e.g., all male children of [[Israel]]).<ref>Somehow, Abraham found this agreeable &mdash; apparently the act was a "gateway" into being able to be convinced of the less-reasonable killing of his son, [[Isaac]], later in the same book.</ref> Where his son Ishmael was circumsized at the age of 13; Issac was seen as more holy for being circumcised on the 8th day of life. Issac was not as holy as Shem though; Shem was born without a foreskin, a rare medical condition called aposthia. Furthermore the penalty for circumcising before the 8th day is not stated in the bible.
 +
 +
Interestingly, [[Christian]]s who get circumcised are actually going against the [[Bible]] as [[Paul of Tarsus]] specifically speaks against it (as synecdoche for the Law of [[Moses]]) in [[Galatians]]. {{bible|Galatians|5|6}} suggests that [[Jesus]] did not care about whether you were cut or not, but Paul's words paint him as suffering from a little <s>butthurt</s> dickhurt.
 +
 +
It is worth considering that originally, only the very tip of the foreskin was cut away. It wasn't until the Hellenization period that periah, the removal of the ''entire'' foreskin, caught on. This was because a fair number of [[Hebrew]] traditionalists were upset with how younger men were ''restoring'' their foreskin under advice and/or pressure from the [[Greek]]s, who viewed even the slight circumcision as a vile travesty against the sacrosanct physical body. Despite the end of Hellenization, reversion to pre-periah has been... slow.
  
 
==Female genital mutilation==
 
==Female genital mutilation==
 
{{main|Female genital mutilation}}
 
{{main|Female genital mutilation}}
  
The procedure sometimes called "female circumcision" (FGM) involves excision of parts of the female genitalia, usually including but not necessarily limited to the clitoris and the inner labia. Unlike male circumcision, FGM offers "no health benefit for girls or women" and "is a violation of human rights," according to the WHO.<ref>http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs241/en/</ref> However, male circumcision should be debated fully on its own merits; the mere fact that it's [[Not as bad as|not as bad]] FGM is not by itself proof the circumcision is okay.
+
The procedure sometimes called "female circumcision" (FGM) involves excision of parts of the female genitalia, usually including but not necessarily limited to the clitoris and the inner labia, the vast majority of which procedures are carried out without the consent of the individual involved. Most studies conclude that FGM is significantly more dangerous than circumcision; this, however, should not be used as an [[Not as bad as|excuse]] for performing the latter.
  
Circumcision's a touchy point with [[Men's rights movement|men's rights activists]]<ref>http://www.womenagainstmen.com/medical/male-genital-mutilation-circumcision.html</ref>, because they believe that outrage over FGM and acceptance of circumcision is proof of anti-male bias. This is a [[false equivalency]], and as with most issues stemming from that intellectually lobotomized movement, their objection has little basis in science or logic.
+
Interestingly, circumcision is not banned in most countries where FGM is. It's a touchy point with [[Men's rights movement|men's rights activists]], and is the closest thing they have to a valid example of inequality that favors females argued by the movement (but, unfortunately, not always for the right reasons).
  
 
==Footnotes==
 
==Footnotes==
Line 29: Line 25:
 
[[category:medicine]]
 
[[category:medicine]]
 
[[category:judaism]]
 
[[category:judaism]]
 +
[[Category:Alternative_medicine]]

Revision as of 05:40, 31 August 2014

Circumcision can be an emotive issue.

Circumcision is a procedure whereby the foreskin of the penis is removed, required of all male Jews due to their religion. This procedure is also performed in the Muslim religion.[1] The majority[2] of American males are circumcised, though this has more to do with tradition than religious requirement. As circumcision is a form of genital mutilation, some groups have protested against the practice and believe it should be ended.[3] These groups often cite a perceived decrease in sexual pleasure and the lack of consent on the part of the often infant child as evidence of child abuse. A recent study also suggests that men who have been circumcised have more difficulty reaching orgasm, their partners have more vaginal pain, and a worse sex life overall.[4]

Others[5] defend the practice, as they claim the alleged detriments of the procedure are entirely based on dubious anecdotal evidence and woo.[6] More importantly, in sub-Saharan Africa, where HIV/AIDS is a serious public health issue, circumcision has been found to be an effective way of lessening the risk of the transmission of the virus. [7] [8] [9]

An estimated 30% of the global male population is circumcised,[10] with the most circumcised areas being the Middle East, Africa, Southeast Asia, Australia, Canada and the United States of America. In the United States, it appears the percentage of newborn males that are circumcised has changed little in the last decade.[11] It is virtually non-existent in most other Western nations, except among Jews and Muslims.[12] It totally isn't genital mutilation because, well, just because it isn't, okay!?

Biblical references

In Judaism, the call for circumcision is first found in Genesis 17; specifically, Genesis 17:10-14, as a covenant (or contract) between God and Abraham, and unto his descendants (e.g., all male children of Israel).[13] Where his son Ishmael was circumsized at the age of 13; Issac was seen as more holy for being circumcised on the 8th day of life. Issac was not as holy as Shem though; Shem was born without a foreskin, a rare medical condition called aposthia. Furthermore the penalty for circumcising before the 8th day is not stated in the bible.

Interestingly, Christians who get circumcised are actually going against the Bible as Paul of Tarsus specifically speaks against it (as synecdoche for the Law of Moses) in Galatians. Galatians 5:6 suggests that Jesus did not care about whether you were cut or not, but Paul's words paint him as suffering from a little butthurt dickhurt.

It is worth considering that originally, only the very tip of the foreskin was cut away. It wasn't until the Hellenization period that periah, the removal of the entire foreskin, caught on. This was because a fair number of Hebrew traditionalists were upset with how younger men were restoring their foreskin under advice and/or pressure from the Greeks, who viewed even the slight circumcision as a vile travesty against the sacrosanct physical body. Despite the end of Hellenization, reversion to pre-periah has been... slow.

Female genital mutilation

See the main article on this topic: Female genital mutilation

The procedure sometimes called "female circumcision" (FGM) involves excision of parts of the female genitalia, usually including but not necessarily limited to the clitoris and the inner labia, the vast majority of which procedures are carried out without the consent of the individual involved. Most studies conclude that FGM is significantly more dangerous than circumcision; this, however, should not be used as an excuse for performing the latter.

Interestingly, circumcision is not banned in most countries where FGM is. It's a touchy point with men's rights activists, and is the closest thing they have to a valid example of inequality that favors females argued by the movement (but, unfortunately, not always for the right reasons).

Footnotes

  1. Although not prescribed in the Quran it is a cultural norm for most Muslims.
  2. http://www.boystoo.com/history/statistics.htm
  3. http://nocirc.org/
  4. http://sciencenordic.com/male-circumcision-leads-bad-sex-life
  5. http://www.circinfo.net
  6. PUBMed: Circumcision in adults: effect on sexual function.
  7. [1]
  8. [2]
  9. [3]
  10. http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2007/9789241596169_eng.pdf
  11. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6034a4.htm?s_cid=mm6034a4_w
  12. A much more detailed survey on Wikipedia
  13. Somehow, Abraham found this agreeable — apparently the act was a "gateway" into being able to be convinced of the less-reasonable killing of his son, Isaac, later in the same book.
Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Tools
support