Parents should not decide for children
Circumcision, in its male form, is granted a wide berth in society because of religious tradition. Abrahamic law demanding that the male penis be intentionally mutilated is an ancient and well-established custom.
While modern medicine likes to cloak the practice in terms of the “hygienic,” it is well known to diminish sexual pleasure. The ancient Jewish writer Maimonides, for instance, approved of it: “Circumcision simply counteracts excessive lust, for there is no doubt that weakens the power of sexual excitement.” (By the way, he wrote centuries before anything resembling modern medicine even existed.)
Research backs up this claim: The British Journal of Urology states that the foreskin possesses “specialized nerve endings” and makes up about one-third of the penile skin. In 2013, a Belgian study noted a “significantly” less pleasure in circumcised males when compared to the uncircumcised.
All surveys aside, the only people who can authoritatively say whether or not circumcision reduces pleasure are those men who have undergone the process in adulthood. And what they have to say isn’t great. According to the Jewish Circumcision Resource Center, one man said, “After the circumcision there was a major change. It was like night and day. I lost most sensation. I would give anything to get the feeling back. I would give my house.” Others have had similar experiences.
Now, as pitiable as it may be, loss of sensation in adulthood isn’t the main problem. No, the main problem is taking a knife and cutting into the genitals of newborn children.
As you might expect, videos of the process are not easy to watch. When writing about this subject, it is important to understand the reality of what one deals with. I think I understand now. While I won’t go into details, the video I saw involved a screaming that continues to tear at my mind. I encourage those who have their doubts to watch such a video.
It is true; some children, undergoing circumcision, fail to cry out at all. As Rabbi Harold Kushner tastefully put it: “My son cried more at his first haircut than he did at his bris.” The explanation for this is obvious; the child is in a state of shock. The stress hormone level in the blood of the circumcised child (one reliable measure of pain) continues to spike. It is likely that they not only feel pain but are in such intense agony that they draw into themselves, unable even to cry out.
And for what? Those that put forth health reasons for the issue usually huddle around one response: They say that circumcision leads to a reduction in sexually transmitted diseases and other infections. The best evidence suggests that this is correct. The American Medial Association states that circumcision can cut HIV infection rates by somewhere between 40 percent and 60 percent.
This might mean something if condoms didn’t exist. By practicing safe sex and keeping well-scrubbed, one can neatly avoid those risks. No infant surgery is required. And what, exactly, are the chances that the child will get an STD before he reaches the age when he can decide for himself if he likes his pesky foreskin?
Additionally, as with any surgery, circumcision can go horribly wrong. Infection, hemorrhaging and puncturing of the urethra are risks which the parents are willing to have their child bear. Sometimes, children have died as a result.
Imagine that horror, if you can.
Parents have no right to decide whether or not they will be circumcised. Such a decision needs to be undertaken by the individual when he has reached the appropriate age to decide for himself.
But those who willingly offer their child to the knife are much harder to forgive. They force him to undergo a surgery that affects no one else and never will. They knowingly subject him to a pain which no adult male can think of without flinching.
They may take refuge in the knowledge that he will not remember this pain. But a torture unremembered is still torture, and no amount of surgery will be able to make the un-whole whole again.