[ ARC forum 2 ]
Written by Frank at 07 Jul 2002 02:27:06: Re: They are on to something
As an answer to: Re: They are on to something written by Halfclip at 06 Jul 2002 20:11:11:
While it may be true that a few want to eliminate all circumcisions, the vast majority of us only want to eliminate neonatal and child circumcisions. We have absolutely no problem with an adult male cutting whatever he wants. We certainly are happy to advise on problems such as phimosis that have simpler solutions than amputation and the side effects it has.
Sometimes we get carried away when a man comes to a site thinking he wants to be circumcised. Many of us have had to deal with the downside and our first reaction is panic that a man would consider doing it. We should be confident that the man has come to listen to advise and has an open mind and most likely doesn't want to go under the knife. However, circumcision is as permanent as anything that can be done and we do infact, panic.
On the other hand we also meet with people who would make neonatal circumcision mandatory. These people such as Edgar Schoen and Brian Morris have websites that out and out lie about the facts to mislead people and promote mutilating men's bodies against their will. If an expectant parent is already leaning in the direction of circumcision, those sites are often enough to pull them across the line and no amount of truth can prevail.
Now, let's have a calm and balanced discussion with respect of everybody's feelings and opinions about the issue of infant female circumcision.
Frank
The biggest problem I have with the anti circ camp is that their tactics want to eliminate all circumcisions instead of just those at birth. They want guys with phimosis to believe that their adult penis is perfectly normal with an unretractable foreskin etc etc.And each camp will find ways to produce statistics that support their claims.
The one study which brought some refreshing news was the recent on in africa where they discovered a significant different in aids propagation between varous tibes and found that the differences in lifestyle was circumcision and then proceeded with some studies to find that it wasn't the glans that was different between cut and uncut, but rather the inner foreskin. The way they arrived at that conclusion seemed to indicate that they did not have an agenda when they begun and that their finding seems to be more believable.