Why are we still having a circumcision debate? Can’t we leave the private parts of little boys alone?
A doctor I interviewed last week said he thinks we live in Galilean times.
If you remember back to your history classes, Galileo was the Italian physicist and astronomer who championed the idea that the Earth was not the center of the universe.
This idea was so heretical to the powers that be that Galileo recanted.
Despite his public renunciation of his ideas, Galileo is still credited with playing a major role in the scientific revolution.
The doctor I interviewed is smart and articulate and well-read. His ideas are at odds with the establishment. He calls it an “ideology.” He sees a lot of modern medicine as an ideology of beliefs that is not founded in science or best practices.
Part of that ideology in America, I think, is the idea that it is okay to cut off a piece of a newborn boy’s sex organ.
The circumcision debate
That we are still performing circumcisions in this country when it is not medically indicated baffles me.
I wrote a strident angry piece about the evils of circumcision. The good editors at BlogHer felt it was too in-your-face.
So I wrote another much more civil much less graphic piece about why I’m against circumcision. It was published side by side with a pro-circumcision piece.
A century from now I wonder how we will judge the beliefs of our time.
Circumcision is a painful, unnecessary, and cruel practice.
Even done carefully, it leaves a raw and open wound. Every time a baby urinates in his diaper the wound stings. Just thinking about that hurts me. There really is no circumcision debate. It’s just not something we should do to infants.
Why would we want pain and hurt to be part of our baby’s first experiences?
It’s time for a cultural revolution.
We need to stop harming baby boys.
Published: February 2, 2011
Updated: January 21, 2020
Leave a Reply