Making a comparison between male and female genital cutting is usually dismissed or condemned. When, for example, the Council of Europe recently passed a motion declaring both female genital cutting (FGC) and the circumcision of young boys for religious reasons “a violation of the physical integrity” of children, Tanya Gold, writing in The Guardian, called it: ** CLICK HERE** for the complete article.
“Things have changed considerably in just the last few years with respect to mass media and the topic of circumcision. Several articles are published every month now – if not every week — in major newspapers and websites here in the U.S. and abroad.”
“As a result, it’s somewhat of a luxury to find myself being critical of a piece written by an author who self-identifies as a “Humanist” and presents his personal views as “progressive” on the topic of circumcision.”
CLICK HERE to visit the Intact America Blog for the latest article.
“Despite health benefits, routine circumcision in newborn males is on the decline in the U.S. According to the Centers for Disease Control, 79 percent of American men report being circumcised. Many parents of boys are opting out of the age-old tradition despite a recent study from the University of Illinois-Chicago that found a link between male circumcision and a decreased risk of HIV contraction”. CLICK HERE for the complete article!
“I write as a male Jew circumcised at birth in 1958 as part of ritual. I would rather not have been. Yes, male circumcision isn’t as extreme a practice as female genital mutilation. However, I know from personal experience that it results in such problems as desensitised sexual feeling, frequent soreness and occasional bleeding” CLICK HERE to read the full article!