Circumcision facts by intaction.org : 1947: Dr. Eugene Hand of the American Medical Association, said in Newsweek, ”where the promiscuous and uncircumcised Negro had an incidence of venereal infection of “almost 100%,… for the widely educated Jew, circumcised at birth, the venereal disease rate has remained the same or decreased.” 1870: The renowned Dr. Lewis A. Sayre of NYC’s Bellevue Hospital claimed to cure a boy’s paralyzed legs with circumcision. He also claimed to cure epilepsy, mental disorders, hip-joint pain, & hernias with circumcision. “Genital irritations” & masturbation were deemed to be the cause of these issues. Sayre was a leading figure in the popularization of circumcision in America. He was later elected to president of the American Medical Association.
Studies have reported that 117 babies die every year from circumcision or complications arising from it. [Bollinger, Thymos: Journal of Boyhood Studies 2010 ]. Additionally the traumatic stress from circumcision impacts the baby’s developing brain, inflicting psychological trauma. The strong pain signals impact the newly forming neural connections in the brain. Babies enduring this pain also suffer from PTSD. Physically circumcision destroys the functions that the foreskin performs during sex–it is one of the most touch-sensitive parts of the penis, and removing it drastically changes the dynamics of sex. People claiming that circumcision is safe and harmless is just an illusion for them to defend the decision they have likely made.
There are essentially three stakeholders involved with the decision to circumcise an infant. The baby-patient, the parent-guardian, and the doctor. The physician is supposed to be bound by ethical principles of beneficence (serve the best interests of patients and their families) and non-maleficence (“first, do no harm”). The standard of “serving the interests of families” can be a slippery slope as doctors can be forced to do things against their better judgement to appease parents. Pro-circumcision or religious advocates typically want babies circumcised immediately because older children and adults would opt out if given the opportunity. See even more details on circumcision.
Over the last decade there has been a movement of men who were circumcised as infants and have articulated their anger and sadness over having their genitals modified without their consent. Goldman (1999) notes that shame and denial is one major factor that limits the number of men who publicly express this belief. Studies of men who were circumcised in infancy have found that some men experienced symptoms of post traumatic stress disorder, depression, anger, and intimacy problems that were directly associated with feelings about their circumcision (Boyle, 2002; Goldman, 1999; Hammond, 1999).
Intaction is funded via private donations and volunteer assistance primarily by men and women that have been adversely affected by genital cutting. We promote the benefits of an intact body and the harm of genital cutting. We seek to achieve our goals through education, advocacy, and activism. We empower our members by providing them a constructive way to address the physical and emotional harm that was inflicted on them. Action is in our name. Foreskin is in our DNA. We accept the challenges of creating change, we meet our goals, and then chart new ones. We have no highly paid directors or staff like some big name popular causes. In fact, we are not paid at all. Our compensation is the satisfaction we receive from the many people whose lives we have touched. We help assure parents that keeping their son intact was the enlightened decision. We’ve helped many babies to stay intact. We help build body positive confidence in intact men so they can appreciate their own natural body. We’ve helped many cut men, essentially victims of genital cutting, to feel like they now have a voice, when as infants they didn’t have a choice. Discover extra details on https://intaction.org/.
