Monday, August 09, 2010

U.S. Circumcision Rate Falls to 32%

From Mitchel L. Zoler
DrMomma.org notes colored


Image (above) from the July 2010 International AIDS Conference in Vienna. This photograph is from the slide presentation by Charbel El Bcheraoui, Ph.D., an epidemic intelligence service officer in the division of HIV/AIDS prevention at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, who spoke at the Conference. The slide shows that the circumcision rate for U.S. baby boys dropped from 56.2% in 2006 to 32.5% in 2009.


VIENNA – Circumcision rates for newborn boys in the United States dropped steadily and markedly over the past 4 years, based on the largest review of U.S. rates ever done.

Circumcision rates fell from 56% in 2006 to 32% in 2009.
(Bcheraoui, et al. 2010)

The review, which included more than 6.5 million U.S. newborn boys during the period, also showed that adverse event rates following newborn male circumcision were low, and that the most common adverse events were “mild and easily corrected,” Charbel El Bcheraoui, Ph.D., said at the 18th International AIDS Conference [a conference backed by several pro-cutting groups, and funded with big $ from pro-MGM supporter, Bill Gates, (who also spoke at the conference), and one that Intact America attended in an effort to highlight accurate research pertaining to HIV and circumcision. This research by Bcheraoui, et al. also takes a pro-cutting slant by attempting to demonstrate that genital amputation of newborns is not 'as bad' as previous research has shown it to be. Although they do not come out and say it directly, it seems as though they are suggesting we'd better step up the cutting in the U.S. before we see the extinction of MGM and a rise among babies(?) getting HIV when having careless sex without condoms. Funny... the U.S. already has the highest rate of HIV of any developed nation, and we also have the highest rate of circumcised sexually active men. Circumcision must not be the vaccine for HIV as some have (ridiculously) proposed.]

The dramatic decline in circumcision rates during 2006-2009 continued a trend that began in the United States earlier in the decade, although the fall appeared to accelerate recently, he said. Bcheraoui, an epidemic intelligence service officer in the division of HIV/AIDS prevention at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, attributes the circumcision surgery drop to a 1999 statement by the American Academy of Pediatrics that said existing data is not sufficient to recommend newborn male circumcision (Pediatrics 1999;103:686-93). Another factor may be that following the AAP statement, states began to withdraw Medicaid coverage of newborn male circumcision. [Another factor is the increased spread and availability of accurate information available to parents and physicians via awareness raising groups such as Saving Our SonsDoctors Opposing Circumcision, the National Organization of Circumcision Information Resource Centers, the Circumcision Information Resource Pages, Intact America, DrMomma.org, the MGM Bill, NOHARMM, and similar organizations. In addition, many scholarly books examining circumcision were published in the U.S. in the last several years. When parents are fully informed on all aspects of the purposes of the prepuce, circumcision, and the intact male, they do not elect to amputate this organ from their healthy newborns.]

Bcheraoui's study used data from the largest U.S. consolidator of electronic health care reimbursement claims, which included data on 117 million unique U.S. patients annually undergoing short hospital stays, and data from more than 800,000 unique U.S. health care providers. In this database, 6,571,500 newborn boys underwent circumcision during 2006-2009.

Dr. El Bcheraoui and his associates said they had no disclosures.

[32% is a good start (I'm still hoping to review the actual data gathered in this study) - it is much better than the previously presumed 50% of boys cut as quoted by the CDC in 2008, but we have a lot of educating left to do. Medical students are still not trained on the prepuce organ, proper intact care, or circumcision implications. 6,571,500 babies circumcised in the United States between 2006-2009 equals just over 1.6 million boys/future men each year who had a healthy, important part of their penis amputated without need - impacting not only them in a variety of detrimental ways, but their future partner(s) as well. Until the U.S. MGM rate matches those of other informed, developed nations (i.e. 99.7% of males remaining intact) then we know there is still a problem in need of our attention.]



Chart above represents the state-by-state MGM rates for 2008 (previously, the last year available - these rates have decreased in the last 24 months). States in red had the highest percentage of boys cut at birth (~75%), yellow states next (~50%), beige states (~25%), while states in green had the lowest (0-24%). Gray states did not report. 2008 stats were based on all hospital and physician's office surgical records for boys under the age of 1 year as reported to the CDC. Circumcision is classified as cosmetic surgery of an infant. 
*View updated states and links at MGMBill.org*


CDC Presentation Slide

~~~~

95 comments:

  1. Isn't this mind blowing? I'm so incredibly moved by this result. It represents a breakthrough moment. Even with all the bogus "research" and press push about the hiv nonsense, WE STILL DID IT! The rate fell through the floor like never before in history.

    I agree with you that the AAP policy is not the primary "thing" that caused it and the work of all the amazing folks (including you) in the movement can not be denied. We'll never know for sure but thinking about millions of boys with intact bodies is what will give us all the burst of energy we need to see this thing through till it's completely stamped out. My thanks to everyone who has ever spoken up for baby boys. Gloria Lemay, Vancouver BC http://www.glorialemay.com/blog

    ReplyDelete
  2. this is absolutely amazing! I do have a question though.. How do you all talk to other parents about circumcision without sounding like a "creepy lady who want's to talk about a baby's (or little boys or even another man's) genitals". I have several ladies whom I attend church with and find that most of them find it offensive that I would be trying to talk to them about such a private subject. Not that I just bring it up in conversation, it has to be worked in to pertaining subject matter, but we are at church and religion does play a huge roll in choosing to circumcise. I am Christian, so it's easily dismissed with the scriptures, but when you apply it to real life, to our (their) little boys, it becomes too personal and then uncomfortable to them. Plus, I only have girls, so I kind of don't have a leg to stand on on this subject to them. How can I continue on with this movement talking with other parents when I am not being received at all. My sisters all have boys and so can talk about it, but not me according to public response.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Mistie ~

    Statewide, Utah's rate of MGM was around 40% in 2007-2008 (the stats this map is based on).

    Frequently, an easy way to approach the subject is to have something already on hand (such as the info pack we give to clients with articles and DVDs) and just say, "This is something I found interesting" or "This is something a physician gave to me that I found impacting" and "You might be interested"

    Give them the pack, and encourage them to let you know what they think. (You can, of course, also create your own pack of info that you give casual friends). Ours seems to have a high rate of parents keeping their sons intact if they do indeed read the 8 articles and watch the 3 DVDs included (actually, most decide not to cut after going through a fraction of the information, but it is all provided in an effort to answer all the myths out there).

    You can request a pack by filling out the form here: http://www.savingpenises.org/info-packs.html

    We'd also be happy to send you small info cards with the information so others can request their own info if they so choose. Email: peacefulparents@gmail.com

    the cards: http://www.facebook.com/home.php#!/photo.php?pid=5067032&id=202794322670&ref=fbx_album

    For close friends, this shouldn't be as difficult -- we are talking about unnecessary genital amputation of a healthy newborn baby. This is most certainly *not* a 'private' issue to be slid under the rug. How many of us would boldly speak up if we knew that our friend was planning to slice off the prepuce ('clitoral hood') of their newborn baby daughter at birth? The organ is the same. The prepuce on a boy ('foreskin') is homologous and analogous to the prepuce on a girl. If you would not amputate this organ from your own daughters, and would not wish for someone to strap you down, and slice away your own prepuce, then you most certainly have a reason to speak up on behalf of others.

    This is also a human rights issue. It is a *mothering* issue. Just listen to mothers who have actually learned what was done/taken from their beloved child (or who stood by while it was taking place). There are so many who regret it, so by speaking up we are also helping other moms in their mothering journey. I cannot even tell you how many mothers have thanked me (with tears in their eyes) for talking with them before they had yet another son circumcised. Many are just looking for support and a reason to protect their sons in a cut-happy U.S. culture.

    http://www.drmomma.org/2010/05/i-circumcised-my-son-healing-from.html

    Circumcision complicates breastfeeding.

    http://www.drmomma.org/2009/12/effects-of-circumcision-on.html

    It impacts our future daughter's lives as well if they partner with men. Women's Health & circumcision:

    http://www.drmomma.org/2009/07/how-male-circumcision-impacts-women.html

    And, in your case, it is also a Christian issue. (Much more on circumcision and Christianity can be found through this page:

    http://www.drmomma.org/2009/06/information-on-circumcision-for.html

    So you absolutely have many, many grounds to stand on when talking about this subject with others. It takes a bit of practice to do so without hands shaking -- but no matter the outcome, you can know that you TRIED for the sake of the baby who who later meet -- and this is better than staying silent. Plus, you will be surprised - there ARE parents ready, willing and wanting information, but sometimes it takes just one person saying, "Hey, please think about this - research it - I know many people who are really thankful they did."

    (cont. below)

    ReplyDelete
  4. (cont. from above)


    Just knowing the purposes of the prepuce organ is enough to clearly recognize this body part is meant to be in place on all mammals - male and female.

    http://www.drmomma.org/2009/09/functions-of-foreskin-purposes-of.html

    We'd never perform any other unnecessary surgery on a newborn baby and it is federally against the law to amputate ANY body organ, limb, part from a minor child without medical need --- except the prepuce of infant boys.

    Some would argue this too (by legal definition, the FGM Bill, and the 14th Amendment) is illegal -

    http://www.drmomma.org/2010/04/circumcision-already-illegal.html

    and men have won lawsuits against those who cut them at birth.

    http://www.drmomma.org/2009/10/class-action-lawsuit-circumcised-men.html

    But this is one 'parenting' subject that should be very *easy* for us to talk about because there is a very, very clear and explicit answer: Keeping our healthy infants whole and intact is beneficial for them, and amputating organs without need is not.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I was so excited when I saw this number. It gives me a little more faith in humanity.

    If you don't want to see ads, use Firefox and download the AdBlock Plus add-on. I never see ads on any website. It's wonderful.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This is great news! Let's keep it going!

    Mistie - I have found circumcision to be one of the toughest subjects to talk about with other parents! Either the parents are already informed or they don't want to be. I haven't found a lot of middle ground, like there is if you bring up co-sleeping or some other parenting topic. I hope someone has some good suggestions for us.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I don't like the undertone of the report but that won't stop me from using the numbers:-) 33% Woohoo! Goodbye locker room - you weren't a good argument though.

    ReplyDelete
  8. The pro-circ Powers that Be will not admit the existence of the mother-to-mother intactivist movement, much less its effectiveness.

    The link in the head is not to the full text of the article, but to a press release based on the article.

    @Mistie: Utah and Texas are white because of missing data.

    Your experience accords with mine. I too have only daughters and what's worse, I'm male! People are willing to talk about it if they initiate the conversation, which in my square world, they never do.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I eagerly await an update colour coded map.

    By attributing this rapid decline to the 1999 AAP policy, the CDC is sending a clear message to the AAP: change your policy.

    A drop from 56% in 2006 to 33% in 2009 would be a runaway victory for intactivism, and I know of no evidence of a rapid sea-change of this nature. Hence I reserve judgement about the 33% until I read a lot more about how that result was obtained.

    The study counting serious complications that manifested themselves within 90 days after circ, found a rate of 1:1000. I claim that that rate cannot be dismissed as trivial. I also suspect that it is an undercount. First, many circumcision complications take more han 90 days to manifest themselves.

    Second, when doctors screw up, they often don't dare bill for what they did and for the cost of subsequent repairs. I bet insurers are not happy at all at having to pay out because of problems of iatrogenic origin. I conjecture that a lot of circumcision accidents and problems are not reported to insurers

    @Gould: your post is bang-on about the difficulty of being an intactivist!! I raised the subject of intactivism in the 1990s with a mom of two boys. She replied saying that she had kept her own sons intact, "because evolution knows what it's doing." But then she went on a tirade because I had dared raised with her what she deemed to be an intensely sexual subject. We have never spoken since.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Soooo...my oldest son is cut :-( so I can tell him he's able to have lots & lots of risky promiscuous sex, and he's good to go right? so long as the female is on the pill (provided he decides to have sex with females)...right? I only need to have the condom talk with my youngest since he's intact? Is that how it works???

    *yes I'm TOTALLY kidding, I'm going to tell BOTH my kids to wear a condom

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are right. Men that are circumcised do not have to use condoms to prevent sexually transmitted disease but must do so to try preventing pregnancy.

      Delete
    2. Um.....lolololol! Go back to Infectious Disease 101 Anonymous If this were true please go to the CDC's website, look at the stats, and explain how STDs are turning up in a population of mostly circed males!

      Delete
    3. I hope you meant it sarcasticly but for the people who will read what you wrote and don't understand sarcasm:
      There was a mistake in the conclusions of the reasrch. The correct conlusions are that circumcision actually doesn't have any effect on your chanced to get infected with HIV.
      be careful and more important - don't risk your partner just because you may have HIV and not even know it (and think you couldn't have because you are cut)

      Circumcision: Canal for new HIV infections:
      http://dailynews.co.zw/index.php/news/34-news/6026-circumcision-canal-for-new-hiv-infections.html

      Study reveals: circumcision doesn't reduce HIV spread
      http://www.nyasatimes.com/malawi/2012/03/08/circumcision-doesn%E2%80%99t-reduce-hiv-spread-study-reveals/

      Delete
  11. My usually very professional, not-in-your-face midwfe, couldn't resist a 'huzzah'! when she asked me whether we were going to circumcise our son when he was born. I said, "if I can't bear READING about the procedure, how can I subject my little baby to it?" :)

    ReplyDelete
  12. "if I can't bear READING about the procedure, how can I subject my little baby to it?"

    HERE HERE!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Nicky~ I love your comment about not being able to read about it! All 3 of my sons are intact.

    ReplyDelete
  14. my MIL had a lot of misinformation to share when she discovered we weren't going to cut our son, it's not her fault - it's what was drilled into her head - but it really really bothered me. ♥ the downward trend.

    ReplyDelete
  15. I fought for my son to be a part of this statistic. If my hubby hadn't agreed I'd just be divorced but no way would my son have been cut just to agree!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Holy hell, yes!! So, so happy to see this today!

    ReplyDelete
  17. I wish my state wasn't a red state! :( I have a nephew coming next week and I am so afraid for him!

    ReplyDelete
  18. I want to say in 2007 my first son was born and against my better judgment, I went with what daddy wanted and had him circumsized. Still, I regret it to this day and occasionally cry about it. However, my second son was born in August of 2009 and he is now apart of this dropping statistic :) NOT circumsized and every single time I change his diaper I am SOO happy I didn't do it with him.

    ReplyDelete
  19. And I also wanted to add, my fiance who was so adament on having our first son done is now regretful he pushed to have it done and is actually HAPPY our second son is not cut because he knows how ridiculous it is!

    ReplyDelete
  20. Wonderfull that it's on a decline! How can anyone be happy that they cut a part of their son's penis off? Would you feel the same if the dr cut your daughters genitals? Probably Not! What's the difference between the two? IT'S MUTILATION

    ReplyDelete
  21. Wow! Too bad I'm in a red state. But our little guy is one of those intact in SC!

    ReplyDelete
  22. that's awesome it is decling SO steadily!!!

    ReplyDelete
  23. so, so happy and relieved to read this!!

    ReplyDelete
  24. Yay!! I'm in a green state :)

    ReplyDelete
  25. If adult men in Africa want to circumcise themselves, have at it. They are adults who can make their own decisions about their bodies. Removing my child's appendix would reduce the risk of it rupturing later in life, but that doesn't mean I'm going to cut it out for some possible future prevention. I'm so glad more people are choosing to let their children keep all of their sacred body parts!

    ReplyDelete
  26. I have saved 2 penises that I know of so far... and I continue to post circ info for all my friends and family (nobody EVER comments on those posts). I hope that some moms to be are quietly reading and absorbing info. I love to hear MGM is on the decline in the US, and Canada is on track to possibly ban the procedure. Baby steps...

    ReplyDelete
  27. my little guy intact YEAH! good to know I'm among friends who support this decision.

    ReplyDelete
  28. My son is intact. I lost track of the moronic, misguided and downright bad "advice" that was spewed my way when asked if my son would be cut or not. My favorite: the locker room. Well, he'll be in the majority now!

    ReplyDelete
  29. I am happy that I view my son as a human being with the RIGHT to make choices about HIS OWN BODY. I have NO RIGHT to make decisions about HIS PENIS. Never would I let him be strapped down and remove the BEST part of his penis with NO pain meds, talk about sexual torture! Your finger tip has 48 nerve endings. The part of your son that you allowed to be cut had 20,000 nerve endings. Those who support circumcision, take a razor blade to your genitals and tell us its all good.

    ReplyDelete
  30. All the same arguments have been made in favor of FGM (cleanliness, less disease, looks better, parents' decision). We just can't see the forest for the trees in the USA.

    http://www.drmomma.org/2009/09/cut-documentary-film-on-fgm-female.html

    http://www.drmomma.org/2009/09/history-of-female-circumcision-in.html

    ReplyDelete
  31. As a mother, I would think we'd be elated to have one less procedure to have to watch our child endure. If I had a "choice" whether or not to subject my baby to an unnecessary and painful procedure, I'd be relieved that I could choose "No!"

    People's "choice as a parent" is more than a little questionable. Our baby's body belongs to him and it is unethical for us and our accomplice/doctor to redesign it according to our own personal preferences. It's not like we are saving his life, or even improving his life with circumcision. We are caving to cultural dogma that is on the way out because it has been repeatedly demonstrated that the benefits of circumcision do NOT outweigh the risks.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Point blank, a parent should not be able to make this kind of decision for their babies. It is a human rights violation to cut off a fully functioning body part without that person's consent.

    My first 2 sons are cut - a decision that I will regret every single day for the rest of my life. My 2 younger sons have the benefit of me knowing the truth and are intact. I can't believe that I put my 2 older boys through such a horrific unnecessary HARMFUL procedure! Our pedi is against circumcision and has intact boys herself! :)

    ReplyDelete
  33. I'm in a red state. But have three intact sons.

    ReplyDelete
  34. The "circumcision prevents STDs" myth has been debunked. Unless getting circumcised means condoms are no longer needed, the point is irrelevent. Intact men are as easy to clean as circumcised men. You just slip the forskin back in the shower once the man is OLD ENOUGH to do so himself, NOT before. Before the forskin is still attached to the glans & is self-cleaning.

    Intact men are generally more sensual lovers. Circumcised men need to employ the "jackhammer" method during sex because their penises have been terribly desensitized. Think about it: the head & frenulum of the penis are the most sensitive areas. The forskin acts as a protective jacket to the head, which keeps it sensitive. When that jacket is crushed, ripped away, then cut off the penis, the head becomes more calloused & loses a lot of sensitivity. Oddly enough, more circumcised men report premature ejaculation & the vast majority of men reaching for Viagra are circumcised, due to desensitivity.

    http://www.drmomma.org/2009/10/change-in-how-intercourse-works.html

    http://www.sexasnatureintendedit.com/

    http://astore.amazon.com/peacefparent-20/detail/0970044216

    1 in 3 circumcisions will result in some form of complication like shock, blood loss, emotional attachment issues, breastfeeding difficulties, scarring, incorrect healing requiring more surgeries, infection, painful & tight erections, erectile disfunction, permanent disfigurement & DEATH. The amount of babies that die every year due to circumcisions is the SAME as the amount that die from Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS).

    http://www.drmomma.org/2010/05/death-from-circumcision.html

    Babies cut most certainly suffered incredible pain. MRI scans have shown that the child feels this pain profoundly & his brain waves do not return back to normal. This can lead to ongoing emotional issues. Female victims of genital mutilation are permanently traumatized, so are many male victims.

    Parents may never know if their son develops erectile disfunction or has a life full of painful erections because of our ignorance.

    No recognized medical association recommends routine circumcision. Why do you suppose that is? Because it is painful, barbaric & totally unnecessary. We each must find the truth & spare future babies from this humiliating, debilitating pain in the future.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Proud to say all my boys are/will be intact!! :)

    ReplyDelete
  36. I'd love to see Christians reading their Bible a little more carefully. Specifically Acts 15: 1-2, 7, 10; Romans 2: 17-19, 3: 1, 29-30, 4: 10; 1 Cor. 7:17. I think you'll find the verse from 1st Corinthians to be particularly enlightening. Christians are specifically instructed NOT to circumcise in accordance with the old covenant. This well informed Christian has a great deal of intelligent things to say about it: http://www.udonet.com/circumcision/christian.html

    ReplyDelete
  37. Colleen - thank you for pointing those out. As a Christian father, I believe it is sinful (without question) to commit such violent acts against our children. Yes, circumcision and the refusal to learn about the way in which you will cosmetically alter your infant's genitals via amputation is a sin.

    ReplyDelete
  38. I think I will add my two cents. I don't see that many of the parents that have posted so far have been men so I guess it would be good to add some perspective.

    First of all, the stats that a lot of circumcisers use are 30+ years old and vastly outdated. Recent studies are inconclusive about the claims. Familydoctor.org states that, "The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) says the benefits of circumcision are not significant enough to recommend circumcision and that circumcision is not medically necessary. "

    I was not circumcised, and I was told it was because my father wasn't. I can say from personal experience I haven't had any UTIs or other infections.

    Frankly I find the idea of circumcision being beneficial because it may slightly reduce the risk of UTIs a bit disturbing, we might as well encourage female circumcision (which is widely acknowledged as senseless genital mutilation) as well since women are much more prone to getting a UTI than I have been with my intact penis.

    Thankfully my son has been able to avoid the knife as well and he has not had any adverse effects from having kept his foreskin intact either.

    ReplyDelete
  39. I read this statistic about a week ago researching with hubby online. He was circ'd as an infant and is now processing and healing. He said he always knew SOMETHING was wrong. We have talked about this at length. He said he was in high school before he ever saw an intact penis. It's been my experience men don't really compare penises and especially not with their sons. I've often wondered if daddy loses an arm are we going to amputate to keep son 'looking like daddy'? Anyway, I feel if more men talk about how they feel about being circ'd more men will question why they were and maybe that % will drop even more radically? In the mean time there are a number of nonsurgical foreskin restoration devices. Yay! I think sensitivity and functionality can be restored, with a little help.

    ReplyDelete
  40. @Mistie:

    My bad. Texas, Utah, and Florida are pale yellow because yellow codes the smallest circ rates after green. Note that all green state are in the Far West, the land of the Complete Johnson.

    The states lacking data are colored gun metal gray.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Would everyone pay close attention to what Kristen wrote below?

    "Intact men are generally more sensual lovers. Circumcised men need to employ the "jackhammer" method during sex because their penises have been terribly desensitized. Think about it: the head & frenulum of the penis are the most sensitive areas. The foreskin acts as a protective jacket to the head, which keeps it sensitive. When that jacket is crushed, ripped away, then cut off the penis, the head becomes more calloused & loses a lot of sensitivity. Oddly enough, more circumcised men report premature ejaculation & the vast majority of men reaching for Viagra are circumcised, due to desensitivity."

    Even if all this is only half true, it is still damning. And the full truth is even worse than that.

    I see no reason to believe that ALL cut men are jackhammers in bed. But I know that SOME are, because a few women have shared their bad experiences with me. And SOME is bad enough. There is a style of intercourse Danielle Steward of YouTube calls "power f&&&ing" that is so utterly disgusting that I call it date rape. Only a man with a largely insensitive penis could do anything like that.

    Many of you ladies out there have had bad experiences in bed before your marriages. And there is a very real possibility that the American obsession with the bald penis explains a goodly part of those bad experiences. That is a massive tragedy. My spouse recently told me that 3 men she dated years before meeting me came in less than 15 seconds. Needless to say, the first date with these guys was also the last. She says that's what PE really means in practice. Each of these men was cut. I have met men who have told me that their marital sex lives shut down around age 50, because their ability to feel anything largely died. They were cut.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have met men who have told me that their marital sex lives shut down around age 50, because their ability to feel anything largely died. They were cut.

      yes,and to make it worst a woman's vagina becomes less moiste with age,we all loose moisture with age.

      if circumcised men were having sons at 50 as oppose to 20 to 30 many more would opt not to have their sons circumcised.

      No wonder America is not only the land of Viagra,but of K-Y Jelly as well.

      Delete
    2. The good thing about this data is; that as these intact boys grow into men,they most likely will choose not to have their sons circumcised.
      It is a proven fact that most intact men worldwide choose not to have their sons circumcised ;proving that if intact men were so full of "diseases" and problems wouldn't they be the first one seeking circs for their sons?
      So if you multiply this trend it would mean that in a couple of years the states in green would have circ rates as low as Canada,New Zealand and Australia have now.I also think that Texas and Florida's circ rates will continue to drop drastically due to heavy migration of immigrants who come from countries where male circumcision is not the norm.

      Delete
    3. Just a note,it is said that the Western states,the Southwest,Texas and Florida continue to have their male circ rates to drop due to the constant immigration of people from countries that do not circ males.
      But I have observed that Oregon and Washington states do not fall under this category ,I am also observing that North Carolina has a much lower circ rate than its neighboring Southern states.So what happened in these predominatly white American states that the circ rates dropped so drastically? was it education? the doctors? It would be interesting to do a study why circ rates dropped so drastically in these states and implement what they did especially in red states.

      Also by observing the map I see a regionally thing where western states have the lowest male circ rates,the Southeast and Northeast 50/50 and the Central and Upper Midwestern states and the northern Southern states have the highest circ rates. It is interesting to note that when Canadian circ rates were dropping also the Canadian Praire provinces were the last and more adamant to drop circ rates.I know there are many open minded people in the Midwest ,do you think they are circing just because they think everyone does it? its the norm,its what we do? Funny how these people descendents of Germans,and other Europeans who did not circ are stuck on circumcision.Was it after WWII and trying to become more "American"? or where most people rural and due to hygeine? I do not know? I am trying to understand why these people in these areas are so stuck on circumcising their sons? I think they do not even question it,as oppose to free thinking people in the West .Also the economy is bad in the USA in general and we are more mobile than ever,and as our sons grow it will be even more so ,who says your son is going to stay in your area all his life the way you did,also taking in account that the jobs and economy is growing in the Sunbelt.If so if he moves from the Midwest to the Sunbelt all of the sudden he will be from the mayority to the minority.

      Delete
    4. roger desmoulinsMarch 28, 2012 9:53 PM

      The great variation in circ rates by locale (and across countries) has convinced me that RIC is not medically driven, but a major problem in the sociology and social psychology of human sexuality. The Midwest and the Upper South, I call The Empire of the Bald Penis lol! I have no idea as to why this is. I am not at all surprised that citizens of the Empire find it very hard to rethink the matter; the belief that the penis should be bald is a powerful fetish.

      North Carolina is a rare eastern state that denies Medicaid coverage for RIC.

      West of the Rockies, a fair bit of rural people never adopted circumcision. The Latino and Asian influx of the past 50 years reenforced this. Then along came Crunchy Motherhood and Attachment Parenting.

      The next Big Event: Texas drops Medicaid coverage.

      Delete
  42. This is great news, but now look for the medical/pharma establishment to crank out all kinds of disinformation to get the rate back up to 80% like it was in the 70s. Yes, they stand to lose money with fewer circs being performed, but they are also quickly losing their prestige as gods in white coats, whcih has made them very defensive and nasty. Our son was born this past February, and I am proud to say he is intact, as were 5/7 boys in the new moms group I am in.

    ReplyDelete
  43. @Mistie
    You can try to talk matter-of-factly...sort of well, of course you know that Christians need not, SHOULD NOT, get circumcised...and slide into how great God is and how God created perfection; God knows what He is doing!
    Here are some more sites for you with info:
    Religious male circumcision
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_male_circumcision
    Why Christians need not be circumcised
    http://www.circumstitions.com/Xy.html
    Catholics against circ
    www.catholicsagainstcircumcision.org
    It is one of the biggest misconceptions amongst Christians that Christians need to be circumcised. That is the Old Testament, for Jews. The New Testament should preside for all Christians, and they should be left Intact!

    In Europe, the only ones who are circ'd are Jews and the recently arrived Muslims. But if you are not Jewish or Muslim, you will be INTACT.

    I have four INTACT boys. For me, it was a no-brainer to leave them intact, as we are from Europe and Christian.

    However, I have recently taken interest in this because it is a serious human-rigths issue. I witnessed baby boys being mutilated in the NICU (my third was born via crash c-section, a botched induction, and spent 5 weeks in NICU and another 3 mths in the hospital fighting for his life.)

    Hearing those babies scream made me cry.It hit home how cruel it was. These infants had been fighting for their lives, and now, just before discharge, they got cut as a going-away present! Sick, sick, sick.

    Fanny

    ReplyDelete
  44. Can circumcisers spell "tipping point"? Looks like we're well beyond it now!

    CIRCUMCISION:
    The Emperor's New Condom!

    ReplyDelete
  45. @RD, I can vouch for what you and @Kristen said. I was circumcised at birth and first noticed the loss of sexual pleasure in my mid-40s. By the time I was in my 50s I stopped having sex because there was no pleasure for me and my complained about me taking too long. I started restoring at 52 and the difference is amazing. My wife loves my restored foreskin and so do I.

    I just wish I had been born 50 years later than I was. I might be intact.

    ReplyDelete
  46. I've read the comments of those parents who say they circumcised and then learned about it and decided not to with their later sons, and I just want to say that you are great examples to others, to be able to change your mind and not just circumcise all your boys so they'd be the same, or whatever lame reason some people give to perpetuate the error. I'm so glad you shared your stories and I hope other parents will see that it is okay to change course!

    ReplyDelete
  47. To those that it seems hard to talk about circumcision-
    I have had no problem when giving the book "Circumcision Exposed". I give these free to expectant parents where ever I see them on the street or public transportation. They have all accepted the book easily. Rarely have I been asked questions or to open a dialogue though. Same with the book "A Jewish Perspective" for Jews. I have several copies of "Circumcision Exposed" I will give free If you think it will prevent a circumcision. (The book is getting out of date). But still, after my two nephews read Circumcision Exposed, they said they wouldn't circumcise. Giving a book lets not talking about the subject possible and shows that you care - important enough that they should read it in the non-judgmental comfort of their own homes, on their own terms. Free book call my cell leave a message and I will get back to you.
    Frank McGinness
    415-606-5205

    ReplyDelete
  48. As an intactivist here's some non confronting ways to help in general:
    Talk to a like minded friend in crowded consumer lines about circumcision.

    Make a comment to the grocery cashier based on the headlines of magazines there- like "I can't believe she circumcised her baby!".

    Put a bumper sticker on you car or garbage can - free at TLC-tugger. (thank you Ron Low and family)

    Wear the Intact America pin for intactness. People will ask you what the pin means. (also the logo used for the new international group Genital Autonomy.)

    Carry around with you a book on circumcision. This gets people thinking about it. But I have only had one person who opened a conversation. Still I don't always carry a book.

    ReplyDelete
  49. The pro-circ crowd at Wikipedia keeps deleting this new entry from the "Circumcision" article in the section Prevalence: "In the United States, circumcision rates fell from 56% in 2006 to 33% in 2009." Apparently the pro-Circs fear this news may get out to the public. Please visit the Wikipedia article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumcision and weigh in on this issue. Anyone can edit and make changes to the article. Thanks!

    ReplyDelete
  50. This has just blown my mind. Absolutely amazing! I will admit, it's been a few years since I've kept up with the statistics. I had no idea it had dropped that much. Incredible and a big applause to all of the parents out there who are caring enough about their children to RESEARCH and choose to leave their baby boys as nature intended. Now, to get that number under 5%.... lol

    I am a mom to a 6 year old boy who was left whole. I am also pregnant and if this one is a boy, he will also be left as was intended.

    ReplyDelete
  51. I was born at a time, 1947, when circumcision was seen by many doctors as a cure-all. I didn't know until I was 11 years old that my entire foreskin had been cut off. When I got married I had a lot of difficulty entering my wife, and she found it very painful even with copious amounts of artificial lubricant. Bear in mind that my penis is very average in length and girth. When my son was born in 1984, I demanded that his penis be left alone, and it was, and he has had no problems whatever with it. I am now devoting the next several years to developing a sort of foreskin, and hopefully will be able to resume intercourse after an interval of nearly ten years.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Friends, please get over to the Wikipedia article on Circumcision when you get a chance, and keep trying to edit it to reflect these new figures. The pro-circ zealots have hijacked the article and edit war any meaningful updates.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi. I'm an UNCUT Australian. Happily left as nature intended.
      I have tried to "edit" the Wikipedia article too, and it keeps getting censored. They claim it is unhelpful and removing 'well-sourced' claims.
      They make it seem that Australia has a rate/prevalence (they act as if there is no difference) of 58%. It is a well known fact that only 10-18% of Australian baby boys are circumcised. I was born in 1982 and hardly any of the guys in school were circumcised (I went to several, in two different states). The 58% they use refers to ONE study of ADULTS, and whether they were circumcised at birth. Neo-natal cutting was the norm in Australia and New Zealand in the 1950s, so of course the adult cut rate is going to be completely misleading compared to the current neo-natal rate.
      Also, they have sourced dodgy tabloid newspaper articles that claim a rise in the circumcision rate of new-borns. Elsewhere on the internet it is made clear that this 'rise' is only very small and in one of Australia's states (New South Wales), and lead by a single physician with an ax to grind (excuse the pun!). He should be struck off. (In fact, I think he might have been by now, not sure).
      Now to your country: I am over the moon that we have finally crossed the 50% threshold, and dramatically too. Especially considering the HIV bull. As I have read elsewhere on the internet this is "a cure desperately looking for a desease". Good work America!

      Delete
  53. Can someone post the link to the CDC website's circumcision stats? I was only able to find this (http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nhds/9circumcision/2007circ9_regionracetrend.pdf) and it stops at 2008. I want to debunk the "I don't want him to get picked on for being different" point.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Make a comment to the grocery cashier based on the headlines of magazines there- like "I can't believe she circumcised her baby!".

    Honstly if you made this comment in California you proabally will have ahigh approval rate like everyone saying "Yeah can you belive it!!",but in many other places in the USA who will be frowned upon,ganged up on,etc to the point that whole communities will not talk to you or shoun you like you are some looney or odd ball,but even in California where anti- male circ bills have been tried to be passed the Governor vetoted any kind of these bills to be put on ballotts even when there were enough signatures,this should be challenged in court as unconstitutional and everyone should write to the governor of California not to subcome to his own personal views.

    ReplyDelete
  55. About the HIV scare I think it is just the last attempted bu the pro-circ to "justify" male circumcision

    ReplyDelete
  56. The pro-circs know that the internet is the fastesest way to get information out.They wish it was like in the old days when no one talked about it and it was done as a "secret " taboo.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Stuff like this makes me sad. I was JUST coming on board w/ this when my boy was born 4 years ago. So, at 3 weeks old, I let him get cut. :-( Now I would never EVER do it again and neither would my husband, but we probably won't have any more babies. (Had a daughter since). But I always feel like I ruined his life or his life will just never be as awesome as an intact man when I read about things like this. :-(

    ReplyDelete
  58. I am competely against circumcision for SO many reasons. Thats one thing I hadn't even thought of discussing with my potential husband. Biggest mistake of my life! I love my husband dearly, but if I had known our opinions on these issues were complete oppsite we never would have married. My poor son got cut. I refused to be a part of it. I begged to not have it done. Husband insisted. I cried for months, hated my husband, felt bad about my sons future with his wife. He is now two and I still feel awful. Every time I see it I can't help but think about it and feel awful. It looks like they botched it, but will probaly never go in to a Dr to have it checked, and will probably never know how it will affect him sexually later in life. And my husband's biggest push for having it done was to look like him. Ugh!!!! He wouldn't even let me talk to him about all the reasons NOT to do it. All I can do is pray that if we have any more children, they will be girls. I honestly don't know what will happen if we have another boy ;(

    ReplyDelete
  59. Where is God in all this? You cannot be a real Christian and be uncircumcised. Also you are setting your son up for a lifetime of ridicule. How "peaceful" is that? Plus I have known 3 wives that demanded their husbands who were un circumcised get the surgery. They cannot deal w the creepy, freakish sleeve of excess skin.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Learn your bible. Galatians 5:6 "For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love."

      Delete
    2. If you think Circumcision is important to be a Christian, then you're basicly spitting on Christ's sacrifice on the Cross.

      "Yeah, hey Jesus, I know you suffered and died for our sins and all, but I'm gonna make my baby suffer (and possibly die) because what You did wasn't good enough. I need to scarify and make my son suffer like You did, because that's what Good Christians do. You know since I didn't have a choice in the matter, my son shouldn't either."

      Delete
    3. Wow, you are one ignorant and possibly very stupid woman (or man????)! Hmmm...probably just a troll male who was cut at birth and is now very jealous of any man who was left as nature intended.

      I pity people like you...I'm also a bit grossed out by you too!

      Delete
    4. "Watch out for those wicked men – dangerous dogs, I call them – who say you must be circumcised. Beware of the evil doers. Beware of the mutilation. For it isn’t the cutting of our bodies that makes us children of God; it is worshiping him with our spirits." – Phil 3:2-3 or "And I testify again to every male who receives circumcision, that he is in debt to keep the whole Law. You who do so have been severed from Christ...you have fallen from grace." - Gal 5:3 or "Behold, I, Paul, tell you that if you be circumcised, Christ will be of no advantage to you." – Gal 5:2

      Real Christians do not question God by removing what he has put in place! And the fact that your friends did not love their husbands enough to accept their beauty as God made them is really sad. And now that the circ rates are so low it is those that are cut that will be made fun of and one day have to ask why did the mothers of the uncut love them enough to leave their bodies alone and mine did not?

      Delete
    5. The law of circumcision was only for the Hebrews and Under is right, the New Testament explains that it isn't required for entrance into the family of Christ.
      A lifetime of ridicule, REALLY? That's laughable. It isn't like when you meet a person for lunch you have to declare your intact/cut status.
      Sounds like the wives you know need to re-evaluate. If he was overweight would they force him to have liposuction?

      Delete
    6. "the creepy, freakish sleeve of excess skin." is my favorite part of my husbands body, i accept him for how he was born... perfect.Your 3 friends husbands should ask for a divorce and find someone who truly loves them and accepts them.

      Delete
    7. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    8. God created us in His image - foreskin and all. God asked His people to circumcise BEFORE Christ came and did the final blood sacrifice on our behalf. The circumcision of the Bible/Torah is NOT the medical circumcision done today on babies. It's very difficult to compare the two. Jesus Christ came to save the Jews and the Gentiles (uncircumcised). Please, don't put your desire to cut off part of God's creation back on Him. That's not fair and inaccurate.
      As for a lifetime of ridicule, I must ask this... if you are a Christian, why are you parenting and living in such a way that reflects the society(worldliness) in which we live? We are not to live according to this world. And yes, we will ALL be ridiculed for that.
      It sounds like the women that you know are pretty demanding and don't understand the purpose and pleasure that a foreskin can have in a marriage. Or maybe their husbands had asked them to have *cosmetic* surgery as well.

      Delete
    9. Dear Anon,
      Are you anonymous b/c you're afraid of what you're saying? How can you be Christian & subject a baby to that? Do your religious research. Circumcision performed today is not as it was done biblically. Then it was a slit in the foreskin to shed blood & today it amputation of part of the foreskin. As for the Christian position, what do you think "Jesus shed blood so we don't have to" means? If men were not born perfect in God's eyes He would not have created a foreskin. Seriously think about it deep in your heart while you are praying. Think about those points I mentioned & ask yourself if God really intended for this COSMETIC surgery.

      Delete
    10. For most of Christian history, circumcision amongst Christians was not the norm. It wasn't until the Victorians and their dislike of everything sexual, that infant circumcision became pervasive. It was believed that a boy would be less likely to masturbate if his deepest brain associated sex with pain. And presently, circumcision is not the norm in most countries that are predominantly Christian. European men are almost universally uncircumcised. It's all acculturation -- American women think circumcised penises are better because all our lives we've been told that smegma is nasty and that foreskins have no use and cause disease -- all of which is untrue.

      Delete
    11. Um, just because YOU think an uncircumcised penis is unattractive, DOESN'T mean we all feel that way. Actually some of us are a bit creeped out by a CIRCUMCISED penis. I mean, who decided that mushrooms were sexy or attractive???

      Delete
    12. Right on, Maggie, you brilliantly showed why Christians should in fact celebrate the body God designed. Fortunately for all of us, the law of circumcision was fulfilled in Christ, and is no longer the sacrifice he asks of us. He asks instead that we be "circumcised of heart", because truly God would not design a part of the male body for the sole purpose of surgical removal. It DOES serve many purposes, not the least of which is enhanced marital intimacy, for both men and the women they love who are educated enough to know better. I'm saddened by the sheer volume of American ignorance on the subject, and posts like this one by Anonymous just show how cultural ignorance + religious ignorance = pain and dismemberment for more innocent boys and men.

      Delete
    13. Not only are we a Christian family, but a Torah pursuant Messianic family. (We keep the Old Testament and the Re-newed Testament). Not only is it Christian to not circumcise it is blatantly against the 'what you do unto the least of them'. As observers in Torah law we know that the sacrificial system has been fulfilled and is not a requirement of us anymore. The circumcision covenant was a blood sacrificial system. They didn't even cut off the foreskin until the turn of the century (1800-1900). They always clipped the end of the foreskin and so often (and still true in the Jewish communities now) the clip was so small that the blood doesn't even come out on its own, the moehel had to suck the foreskin to draw our the blood sacrifice. So the circumcision of today is not even what was done before and it was an experiment to curve sexual behaviors and bring a forced morality. Having nothing to do with Christianity/Judaism/Islam, just using "religion" as an excuse.
      Bottomline is: the re-newed testament (new testament) does not require circumsion and the old testament only required it as a blood sacrifice which is no more (the sacrificial system).
      And how Christian is it for a woman to demand anything of her husband? It specifically says in the new testament that the husband is the head. And those types of demands show the heart of the wife, superficial and not loving the way scripture tells us.
      As for a lifetime of ridicule, it sounds like uncircumcised penises will be the majority! And who will be seeing my intact sons (currently 2of them) penises? Just us (his family) and his wife! And we are definitely raising them to really consider their wives, they wont be running off with women who will demand anything ;)
      You seem very confused by what your Creator requires of you. You should be in some serious prayer and we will be praying for you also.

      Delete
    14. Not only are we a Christian family, but a Torah pursuant Messianic family. (We keep the Old Testament and the Re-newed Testament). Not only is it Christian to not circumcise it is blatantly against the 'what you do unto the least of them'. As observers in Torah law we know that the sacrificial system has been fulfilled and is not a requirement of us anymore. The circumcision covenant was a blood sacrificial system. They didn't even cut off the foreskin until the turn of the century (1800-1900). They always clipped the end of the foreskin and so often (and still true in the Jewish communities now) the clip was so small that the blood doesn't even come out on its own, the moehel had to suck the foreskin to draw our the blood sacrifice. So the circumcision of today is not even what was done before and it was an experiment to curve sexual behaviors and bring a forced morality. Having nothing to do with Christianity/Judaism/Islam, just using "religion" as an excuse.
      Bottomline is: the re-newed testament (new testament) does not require circumsion and the old testament only required it as a blood sacrifice which is no more (the sacrificial system).
      And how Christian is it for a woman to demand anything of her husband? It specifically says in the new testament that the husband is the head. And those types of demands show the heart of the wife, superficial and not loving the way scripture tells us.
      As for a lifetime of ridicule, it sounds like uncircumcised penises will be the majority! And who will be seeing my intact sons (currently 2of them) penises? Just us (his family) and his wife! And we are definitely raising them to really consider their wives, they wont be running off with women who will demand anything ;)
      You seem very confused by what your Creator requires of you. You should be in some serious prayer and we will be praying for you also.

      Delete
    15. Your lack of any form of intelligence both amuses and saddens me. I'm British and no where in this continenet do we circumcise routinely. It's pretty much thought off as a 'Jewish' tradition, and I don't know a single Christian over my end of this planet that severs her baby's genitals off for 'God'. I don't know a single person that has circumcised their child, I didnt even know what circumcision was and when I found out what Americans were doing I was sickened and distressed. When I was pregnant/gave birth nobody approached me about the state of my son's genitals and still to this day haven't (he's three next month), if I decided randomly to cut the end of his penis off I'd probably get disowned from my family and it would be MY son getting ridiculed at school (not that all the boys lob their tails out for all and sundry!!) for being the only one with half a penis! and you know what, if American boys get ridiculed... theres plenty of things to retort with 'Dude, your taking the piss because I have more cock than you?' or 'Why are you staring at my penis, YOU GAY!?' stuff like that! Also, the foreskin aids sexual pleasure, protects the penis and removing it is a form of torture for the poor babies! In a nut shell: I'm from a continent that does not circumcise and guess what WE ARENT ALL DYING OF STD'S AND PENILE CANCER!! :O

      Delete
    16. seriously??? Your response was ridiculous, laughable, and not very peaceful yourself.

      In response to the Christian aspect.. Putting a defenseless infant through immediate corrective surgery is in no way, TRUSTING OF GOD'S DESIGN. He made us in our image, did he not? Circumcision is the human way of saying "God, you made a mistake and it's up to us human's to correct it" This is just SILLY and CRUEL.
      PLUS there are DOZENS of verses in the Bible that address this! If you're going to make claims like this, do the research first.

      The Bible has made it very clear and to the Christian who tries to use it as a tool to show reasons to circumcise, sickens me.

      Romans 2:25-29

      Circumcision has value if you observe the law, but if you break the law, you have become as though you had not been circumcised. If those who are not circumcised keep the law's requirements, will they not be regarded as though they were circumcised? The one who is not circumcised physically and yet obeys the law will condemn you who, even though you have the written code and circumcision, are a law breaker.
      A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code.

      1 Corinthians 7:18-20

      Was a man uncircumcised when he was called? He should not be circumcised. Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing. Keeping God's commands is what counts. Each one should remain in the situation which he was in when God called him.


      Colossians 2:9-11

      You have been given fullness in Christ, who is the head over every power and authority. In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ.


      Phil. 3:2

      Beware of the dogs! Beware of the evil workers! Beware of the mutilation! For WE are the true circumcision, who worship in the Spirit of God, and glory in Christ Jesus, and put no confidence in the flesh.

      NIV

      I think the Bible has made it pretty clear, don't you?

      As to the women that demanded their husbands get a circumcision because they found the way their husbands sexual parts looked gross? Well. I am very, very sad for those men. But you cannot use other people's shallowness as a valid argument for circumcision. If they really loved their husbands, they would accept them how they are.

      Delete
    17. "Where is God in all this? You cannot be a real Christian and be uncircumcised."

      Where is your brain in all of this? You cannot possibly be a real Christian and be spewing forth this stupidity. You *are* aware that the bible expressly forbids the circumcision of gentiles, right? You are aware that the overwhelming majority of Christians in the world are intact, right? What self-serving rubbish. You MUST be American.

      "Also you are setting your son up for a lifetime of ridicule. How "peaceful" is that?"

      Unless your you plan to pimp your son to a bunch of ignorant people like you, maybe. Most people don't show their sons off naked for others to eat with their eyes. If you do, then I must agree, that is not very peaceful.

      Intact boys and men grow up to be just fine, as evidenced by the fact that 80% of the world's male population is intact, and not rushing to get the procedure done. The world continues to turn in spite of the fact that circumcision is actually quite rare.


      "Plus I have known 3 wives that demanded their husbands who were un circumcised get the surgery. They cannot deal w the creepy, freakish sleeve of excess skin."

      And those wives must have been superficial, materialistic and non-Christian. Getting robots for them would have been better, seeing as they could give a care about their husbands. If they cannot deal with a normal, healthy body part that god has given all males, then I'm afraid they are suffering from a paraphilia and should see a doctor.

      In the mean time, read what Galatians has to say about Christians and circumcision. Here it is, as I'm sure you don't even have a bible in your home:

      "Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith. For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love."
      Galatians 5:1-6

      Delete
    18. Trolls should just stay in the dungeon...

      Delete
    19. In case you haven't gotten enough scriptural reference...

      "For there are many rebellious people, full of meaningless talk and deception, especially those of the circumcision group. They must be silenced, because they are disrupting whole households by teaching things they ought not to teach—and that for the sake of dishonest gain." - Titus 1:10-11

      Delete
    20. In case that's not enough scriptural reference...

      "For there are many rebellious people, full of meaningless talk and deception, especially those of the circumcision group. They must be silenced, because they are disrupting whole households by teaching things they ought not to teach—and that for the sake of dishonest gain." Titus 1:10-11

      Delete
    21. My oldest son, who IS circumcised, has been ridiculed BECAUSE of his circumcision. Give me a break. Kids will pick any reason to mock another. It's the nature of childhood. Get real. Get educated.

      Delete
    22. roger desmoulinsMarch 28, 2012 9:44 PM

      Paul was a circumcised Jew, the son of a rabbi, and the circumciser of Timothy. But his letters make utterly clear that the new religion founded on Christ's sacrifice would have no bar of Jewish brit milah. Of the great figures of world history, Paul is the most steadfast intactivist. Reading him brings tears to my eyes. He understood that circumcision is a sexual obsession.

      And for a woman who calls herself Christian to demand that her husband or fiance undergo circumcision because seeing that sleeve of skin takes her out of her erotic comfort zone, is sexual idolatry, a demand that he cater to her fetish. It is like a man demanding that his wife perform anal intercourse even though it causes her pain.

      Delete
  60. Funny my husbands never been ridiculed and o couldn't even tell the difference between his penis and a circumcised one. If you believe the bible.as written then we are.created in.gods image. Isn't it a slap in the face to god to circumcise????

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. not only that, you're spitting on the Sacrifice Jesus made on the Cross. "ya I know you suffered and died for my sins and all, but it wasn't good enough, I need to mutilate my son too"

      Delete
  61. ^ Obviously you are not a "real" Christian or you would have considered your comment before posting it. Jesus Christ was a Jew, not a Christian. Jesus would never ridicule a human for the appearance of their flesh, the Christian principles of tolerance and love guide "real" Christians to embrace, nurture, and love one another despite our physical differences. If it were so "creepy", "freakish", or "excess" then God would not have created us with it IN HIS LIKENESS.

    ReplyDelete
  62. Actually, there are quite a few places in the Bible where it actually condemns circumcision.

    Acts 15:1-10
    Romans 2:17-19
    Romans 3:29-30
    Romans 4:10
    1 Corinthians 7:17-19

    And so on. Plus, the circumcision performed in biblical times is vastly different than what is performed now. Then, it was a tiny amount of flesh removed, now it is a full prepuce amputation.

    And that's not even going into the fact that it's nobody's right to choose for another what religion they will be, what practices they will follow, or what parts of their bodies they will sacrifice in the name of that religion.

    If those wives were so uncomfortable with their men's bodies, why did they marry them? Would it be equally as acceptable if a man forced his wife to undergo cosmetic surgery because he could not deal with some creepy part of her body? Nevermind the fact that the foreskin is not excess skin, it's incredibly vital and important skin, tissue, nerves, vessels, and glands that have significant function in the male's anatomy.

    ReplyDelete
  63. How peaceful is being ridiculed? Very, when the alternative is cutting normal body parts off your child simply to conform. I feel like accepting my children just the way they are and teaching them to respect and stand up for themselves would send them a much better message. Of course the ridiculing wont be an issue for kids being born right now, as this article just explained circumcision rates have fallen drastically.

    ReplyDelete

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails