This is acceptable?

A picture of a freshly circumcised infant penis. How can anyone look at this and think we need to have this done? How can anyone think this is normal?

Photo by: Patti Ramos

Stop Genital Mutilation

These are the faces of intactivism.

Patricia ~ You did a beautiful job. Thank you for the work you put into this project.

Video is produced by:

Patricia Alejandra Figueroa

They Cut Babies, Don't They?

A Letter to My Son (Lauren's story)

A Letter To My Son

By Lauren Stone © 2011

My Beloved Son,

Before you were born I was already planning all the best things I knew I could do for you. I would try and ensure that you had a gentle birth. I would give you the milk from my breasts although I had no support from my family, because I knew this was best. I would love you with all my heart and protect you from harm.

I read every book I could find on pregnancy and natural child care. I soaked it all in like a sponge. The one thing that I could not find was accurate information on circumcision. My public library hadn’t a single book that mentioned anything negative about it. So I asked men that I knew what they thought was best. I asked both circumcised and intact men. Some said it was good that I was asking questions, some thought I was silly, but answered nonetheless. Surprisingly they all said that it was probably the best way to go. Even my own intact father. My brother had been circumcised. I talked with my doctor who explained that is was a quick, simple, painless procedure and there was nothing to worry about. It was just ‘routine.’ I believed at that point that I was informed. I was not.

When you were taken from me at the hospital and carried down the hallway to a 'sound proof' room something inside me started to panic. A million thoughts were swirling through my head all at once... and then I heard you scream. It was a sound unlike anything I had ever heard in my life.

The hair stood up on the back of my neck and my knees buckled. It felt like my heart was no longer beating and I could feel my face flush and tears start to fall down my cheeks. There was a knot in my gut and I wanted to vomit. I was shaking and I muttered, “Oh God what have I done?” A nurse, almost laughing, said to me, “Oh he’s okay honey, he’ll be just fine and he won’t remember a thing.” I grasped at that delusion for a moment, but I knew that I would never forget it. I would never be the same person again.

When they handed you back to me I could hardly breath. The look on your face was that of shock, pain and betrayal. I held you close to me and whispered through my tears, “Oh my God, I am so sorry. I am so sorry, I am so sorry...”

All the sparkle was gone from your eyes and I knew that I had been lied to. I felt so betrayed and confused. I felt such guilt for having hurt you this way. How could I have not instinctively known that this was wrong? How could everyone in my country, in the world, not instinctively know that this was wrong? Why didn’t even a single person ever say to me that you were perfect as you were and this pain was unnecessary. Or even mention pain at all? I was so full of hatred towards the doctors. They knew what they were doing, and they lied to me. They hurt you and thought nothing of it. I was so full of hatred toward myself for letting those bastards hurt you that way.

I made a choice that wasn't mine to make, one that I wasn't equipped to make, one that I should never have been allowed to make.

Every time I bathed you, changed your diaper, or let you run free, I was reminded of my own guilt, of my own culpability for your suffering. I felt so ashamed. So stupid. So gullible for having believed it was nothing serious.

I close my eyes and I still see the dazed look of confusion in your face. The sound of your screams are seared into my brain. Not a single day has gone by that my heart doesn’t hurt. I am scarred too. But the scars I bear are in my soul.

The more I learned, the angrier and more deeply hurt I became. Especially when I realized the extent of what was taken from you and that it would affect you for the rest of your life. That it would impact your sexuality and your relationships.

I started to tell other moms what it was like, what I had learned, and not to let this happen to their babies. I didn’t want any other babies to be hurt or any other mother to ever feel the way I feel. My pain is what drives me to do something to stop this insanity.

28 years later I am still talking to moms and dads, to grandparents, to anyone who will listen. I don’t ever want another mother to say they didn’t know, or ask why no one told them the truth before it was too late. I think one of the hardest realities a parent can ever face is knowing that their own ignorance caused their child harm.

I saved your brother from the suffering I put you through. He is whole and safe and happy. I protected him because I learned the ugly truth the hard way. At your expense. He is very grateful that I learned to do better.

There is nothing I wouldn’t give to go back and change things. But that isn’t possible, so I work hard to try and save other baby boys from suffering needlessly as you did. I talk and talk and talk so that no other boy will be robbed of his right to a whole body.

So my darling son, I say this to you: I love you now as I have loved you always. I hope you can forgive me for what I didn’t know.

Love,

Mom

********************************************

The above letter was written and contributed by Lauren Stone and is copyrighted, and has been published in several places on the web. Lauren asks readers to visit the NOCIRC page for more information about how to help stop the routine and unecessary circumcision of infants.

Circumcision/ADHD/Autism

In 2007 I did an undergraduate research project correlating geographical incidence of three male-prevalent neurological disorders, ADHD, ASD, and Alzheimer's, with geographical prevalence of neonatal circumcision in the U.S. It's obviously been about four years since I did this investigation, and I still have my papers--but they are filed under a heap of boxes as I've moved several times since then.

The procedure I used was to access the neonatal circumcision rates for 26 states that participated in the 1995-2005 CDC/NHDS/HCUP surveys, and rank them in order of neonatal circumcision frequency as a percentage of population, 1 to 26. (The midwestern states like Michigan and West Virginia had the highest rates, and the western states like Oregon, California, and Nevada had the lowest rates.) I also found data for these 26 states regarding incidence of the three neurological disorders. I broke the 26 states into two groups, 13 highest circumcision rates, and the 13 lowest circumcision rates and computed averages for each disorder for both the high and low circumcision-rate groups.

Once I had the disorder averages for each group, I divided the high circ group disorder percentage by the low circ disorder percentage to get a ratio, high to low.

What provoked my study was the blog or posting of an anti-circ nurse who stated that she thought there might be a correlation between autism and neonatal circumcision (as autism is highly male-prevalent). Her thoughts actually got me thinking about circumcision and male-prevalent neurological disorders like autism and ADHD. I did find that there was a fairly significant correlation between neonatal circumcision and autism, as the ratio I found was about 1.10.

I hope you can see that if the disorder incidence was the same in both the high-circ and the low-circ groups, the ratio should be exactly 1.00. The 1.10 ratio for autism spectrum disorder was highly correlative. But the ratio for ADHD, nearly 1.50 was far more convincing and alarming. This finding still gives me chills.

The high-rate circumcision states were reporting roughly three ADHD diagnoses (on a population-percentage basis) for every two diagnoses (on a population-percentage basis) in the low circ-rate states. These results hit me like dynamite, and I felt (and still feel) that these results demonstrate that neonatal circumcision is profoundly traumatic and detrimental to the neurological health of males--and probably a significant contributing factor, not only to ADHD, but probably also to additional neurological disorders like tourettes as well. [For a long time, many people thought tourettes was a gene-specific disease common mainly among Ashkenazi Jews until tourettes began turning up massively in other circumcising, non Ashkenazi cultures (namely the U.S. general population). My results indicate at least the possibility that tourettes actually has more to do with a traumatic circumcision technique that slices away the prepuce to the base of the glans than with a genetic disorder.]

By the way, I found a very slightly negative correlation with Alzheimer's, a ratio of about 0.98, meaning that Alzheimer's and neonatal circumcision had almost no correlation.

The results of my undergraduate research project (URP) were minimized by some of the professors who attended my presentation, as they stated that correlation is not the same as causation. My results were also criticized because I didn't analyze for statistical significance.

My reflection is that where there is smoke there is often fire. A more exhaustive study, involving specific, longitudinal case histories (several pairs of identical twins, one circumcised, one not, for example), might convince people that there is direct causation. In my perhaps prejudiced opinion, the correlations that I obtained were scientific, objective, and highly indicative of a direct link between neonatal circumcision and ADHD, probably also with ASD but not in the same dramatic fashion.

(Please feel free to publish the above report at your website, or launch your own investigation based on my approach.)

Best wishes,

John

John can be found here.

Addendum from John to this post:

I'm afraid I come out looking a little like a Mengele when I suggested that longitudinal studies on identical twins might confirm causality. Although the theory in my suggestion is almost certainly correct, it would be absolutely unethical to conduct such an experiment on people (a point I failed to mention in my submission). I suppose such tests might be conducted on animals like mice or rabbit litters, but even this idea seems inhumanely cruel to me. I would far rather kill an animal outright than mutilate it sexually.

Kathleen's Story

When I was seven years old I saw my newborn cousin's bandaged penis during a diaper change. I was shocked to see such a thing and my mother nonchalantly explained to me that he had been ‘circumcised’.

My first sex partners had been cut as infants, though at the time I had never seen many penises and could not tell if they were or not at first. The first time I saw a naturally whole penis I was confused because it appeared to have no head, though now I know that it appeared this way because the penis was not erect or retracted.

When I met my spouse I didn’t notice right away that he was intact. He taught me alot about how the penis is suppose to function I was surprised that he didn’t spit on his hands or use lotion to pleasure himself, and that he could climax just by me simply fondling his foreskin over the head of his penis. I noticed that his foreskin provides a nice gliding action and with him I as able to experience sex the way nature intended.

We now have a son and he is whole. During pregnancy I read books about natural childbirth and midwifery. One book, Spiritual Midwifery by Ina May Gaskin, contained a section about the nature of the infants penis. I learned that a baby boy's foreskin is actually fused to the head of the penis at birth and retracts slowly over the years, typically by puberty.

I will always be so grateful that I learned all I needed to know in order to protect my son from this penis cutting cycle. Despite all that I knew at that point I didn’t feel strongly about speaking out against circumcision.

I knew that other parents were allowing for their sons' circumcisions but didn’t give it much thought until I attended a pharmacy tech course. During the reproductive system module we were given a glossary list and among the words were ‘circumcision’ I knew enough that I felt strongly enough about it that as a definition for the word I put, ‘the unnecessary removal of the foreskin’ the instructor marked me correct though she was in favor of male circumcision but strongly opposed to female circumcision (aka FGM female genital mutilation). This I realized after she showed us a video on youtube of a male infant being strapped to a circumstraint and having his penis cut. It was horrendous. She then showed us another video about the genital cutting of females in Africa and most of the other females became very vocal and outraged at that point. I asked them, "Why is it wrong to do to a female but not wrong to do to a male?" I shared some information with her and she said she would ‘google’ it This was a turning point for me.

I researched the topic of circumcision further and I’m convinced that the more one knows about the history of it and the functions of the male prepuce (foreskin) the easier it is to be totally against it and see through the smokescreen. I decided that someone should be talking about this…what has been done to baby boys here in America is no different than what is done to females in Africa. I was so happy to learn that many people have been fighting for genital integrity of all people all over the world and I use facebook to find like minded people and do what ever I can to join them. All this has led me to this point where I share my story in hopes of helping others see what circumcision really is. It’s a violation of human rights to forcibly and non therapeutically cut and forever alter someone else’s genitals/body. Religious rights of the parents/elders should not trump the rights of the individual/child who doesn’t/can’t consent . One's religious/cultural beliefs and cosmetic/sexual preferences should end where another persons body begins. Many people agree, including many doctors and Jews. Many of the people speaking out about and working to eradicate genital mutilation worldwide include doctors who refuse to perform it, parents who regret their child's circumcision, people who resent having been cut without their knowledge/consent, people who suffer sexual dysfunction as a result of being cut/mutilated and want to ensure protection of future generations to a whole intact body as nature intended and Jews who believe that genital cutting has no place in modern Judaism.

Many myths are still being spread to perpetuate the genital mutilation practices. Let’s educate ourselves and start a new tradition of wholeness for all people worldwide. There is no excuse and thanks to the Internet the information is at our fingertips. Start by researching the functions and purpose of the prepuce and the history of circumcision.

~Kathleen P., USA

Frank's story

I was circumcised as a days old infant. As far as anyone knew, I had a perfectly normal circumcision with no problems but I knew better. I had stitch tunnels, tube type features in my remnant foreskin. These would fill with something my body produced and looked like enormous blackheads. They eventually went away when I was in my early 40's thank goodness! I also had a skin tag that would become irritated during sex and would hurt terribly afterwards. Foreskin restoration eventually cured this problem. The last time I remembered this irritation happening was after having sex about 10 PM one night and I was in so much pain, I couldn't get to sleep until 5 AM. I had to get up 2 hours later to go to work. The next day was misery and I had to fight off sleep all day. All because somebody didn't like the way my penis looked when I was born.


~Frank O'Hara

Rosemary Romberg's Personal Story

Circumcision: My Own Story
by Rosemary Romberg

(originally published in Mothering Magazine, No. 22, Winter 1982, p. 34-39.)

When children are born and people grow up in this world, we expect each individual to keep all parts of his or her body. All people have hands and feet, fingers and toes, noses and ears. People are unquestionably accorded that basic right. Most people would be aghast at the idea that any individual should be unwittingly deprived of any part of his or her body. People without their expected body parts are usually regarded as unusual.Our feelings toward tiny babies inspire emotions of tenderness and protection. Babies are to cuddle and hold, to he kept secure in their parents' arms. Babies should nurse (preferably) at their mother's breast and sleep peacefully, safe and secure from any harm. Parents want to protect their infants from any unnecessary pain, discomfort, or unhappiness. The idea of cutting, pinching, or tearing the baby's skin, of injuring that baby, causing him to experience pain, crying, or bleeding, is totally against what most parents want for their infants.In the United States people make one glaring exception to these "rules" in that the foreskin of the penis of most newborn baby boys is routinely amputated shortly after birth.

Most American baby boys undergo the following procedure The infant is placed on his back in a plastic "Circumstraint" tray where his arms and legs are strapped down. Paper drapes are then placed over him with a hole where his penis is exposed. A hemostat is applied to the tip of the foreskin to crush it and then a slit is made to enlarge it. The operator then takes a small instrument and goes inside to free the foreskin from the glans of the penis - essentially tearing one layer of skin away from another since at birth the foreskin is normally adhered to the glans.

A small protective "bell" is placed over the glans and under the foreskin. By one method a metal clamp is placed over the foreskin and left in place for several minutes. Then the foreskin is cut off and the clamp removed. By another method a string is tied tightly over the foreskin and the plastic bell. Then some of the foreskin in front of the string is trimmed away. The handle of the bell is removed and the ring of plastic remains in place around the end of the penis. The remaining foreskin atrophies (dries up) within approximately one week and the plastic ring then falls off.

In most cases this is done to the infant without anesthesia, although when the same operation is performed on an older child or an adult it is considered painful enough to warrant an anesthetic.

As an American middle class woman I had always thought penises were supposed to look a

certain way with the exposed rounded "head" at the end. It never occurred to me that anything had been changed or cut off to make them appear that way. As far as I knew males were born with penises that looked like that. I had heard of the term ''circumcision" and knew vaguely that it had something to do with the penis and that the Bible said some things about it. However, this was something that I never questioned, thought about, or really understood.I am a person who seeks to educate and prepare myself for every experience in whatever way possible. Therefore in 1972, when my husband and I were expecting our first child, I read books, asked questions, watched films, and attended classes in natural childbirth. I believed that I knew everything that I needed to know about pregnancy, birth, and care of the new baby.

I gave birth to our first child, a son, by the Lamaze method, and successfully nursed him. However, I gave birth in a "traditional" hospital in which the baby was separated from me, kept in a central nursery, and brought to me on a four hour feeding schedule. Therefore I had little knowledge or control over what was being done to my baby.

When the baby and I came home and I first began changing his diapers, I found that he too had a penis in the style and shape to which I was culturally accustomed, with the rounded glans exposed. The end of the baby’s penis was bright red for the first few days, but soon healed. The baby screamed every time his diaper was changed. Being a naive new mother, I had no idea why diaper changing upset him so much. Perhaps all babies did that. I never gave the appearance of my baby’s penis any concern.Shortly after our baby’s birth I became a childbirth instructor and soon enjoyed the challenges and rewards of educating other expectant parents about pregnancy, birth and infant care.Two and a half years later, in 1974, our second son was born in another hospital, again by the Lamaze method. This birth experience included several "progressive" practices such as "rooming in." I was also more aware of the baby undergoing circumcision. The morning following his birth the doctor came by, took the baby to another room where he cut off his foreskin and brought him back to me about 15 minutes later. Although I expected that the procedure would be painful for the baby it never occurred to me not to have it done. This baby also now had a penis in the style which seemed "normal" to me. The new baby's penis healed within a few days and I forgot about it.

Two years later after our second son's birth I again became pregnant. During this time I underwent a tremendous amount of change in my thinking about what I wanted for this birth and baby. We made the unconventional and daring (for that time and place) decision to go

outside the traditional medical system, seek the services of a lay midwife and give birth at home. I was intrigued with Dr. Frederick Leboyer's philosophy of Birth Without Violence and wanted to use some of these practices for our baby's birth. I read that the baby who is welcomed into the world in this manner is calmer and more peaceful than the baby who is born to conventional

bright lights, loud noises and rough handling. Our first two sons were fussy and cried a great deal as new babies so I was very much interested in trying a different approach for our new baby's birth.

We made plans to use only dim lighting when our baby was born. We would hold massage and speak softly to our new baby and welcome him into the world with gentleness and love. We would delay the clamping of the umbilical cord. No silver nitrate or other chemicals would be placed in the baby's eyes .

During this time I also took additional training as a childbirth instructor in preparation for teaching more technical classes for people planning home births. I did extensive studying in many areas of obstetrics and newborn care. I considered myself more educated and knowledgeable about all aspects of pregnancy birth and baby care than most new parents.
The idea occurred to me that if our new baby was a boy, perhaps he should not be circumcised. However, I knew practically nothing about it . None of our doctors ever gave us any information about the operation - pros, cons, why or how it was done. Although mothers regularly discuss at length all aspects of pregnancy, birth, and infant care, I had rarely heard anyone else talk about circumcision. While I regularly discussed in detail such things as nutrition, breastfeeding,

exercises, breathing techniques, and postpartum care in my Lamaze classes, it never occurred to me to discuss circumcision. Despite my extensive knowledge in many other areas, and my wholehearted desire to do the very best for my children, my awareness of circumcision consisted of nothing more than a basic concept that that was the way that penises were "supposed" to look and a vague idea that it was somehow supposed to be cleaner.

Early one morning in April of 1977, our third little son came into the world in the peace and comfort of our home. He coughed, sputtered, then breathed quietly as he emerged into dim light and was placed on my tummy to be massaged, comforted, and held close to me. Babies do not have to do a lot of screaming to announce their arrival into the world. There is a profound difference in the experience of birth and the nature of the baby when he is welcomed into the world in this manner. During the next few days our new son nursed contentedly, slept peacefully, and rarely cried. He had a peacefulness and serenity that I had never known with my first two babies - something very special and rare.Another thing that was different about this baby was that he had a penis that was straight and long, coming to a point at the end. While I had always thought that intact penises looked "strange", this baby's penis seemed normal and natural the way it was. The first few days of our new baby's life were peaceful and joyous and our new little son was whole and perfect.

What incomprehensible force brought me from this beautiful, untraumatized birth at home to a strange doctor's office one week later - sitting there frightened and reluctant, holding my

sleeping, peacefully trusting newborn infant? "He shouldn't be different from his brothers or father." "I'm afraid he'll have problems." "Our relatives would object if we didn't have it done." All these thoughts went through my head, while all the while I wanted so much to protect my baby from any harm .

My husband and I found ourselves relinquishing our baby and leaving the building. When we returned about 15 minutes later the office was filled with our baby's screams! I found our precious baby on the doctor's operating table with a penis that was cut, raw and bright red! I remembered his brothers' penises looking that way, but while they, to me, seemed to have been "born that way", this baby had definitely been injured, damaged, and traumatized! My maternal protective instincts had been violated! I immediately held and nursed him, trying to relieve his pitiful screams. Soon he mercifully fell asleep and I took him home.

I felt like I had brought home a different baby. His tense, agonized little body reminded me of the way his brothers had been as newborns. Within a few days the redness around the end of his penis healed. But this time I was not about to forget! The trauma and torture that was inflicted upon this tiny, helpless little being was to come back and haunt me again and again. From this sprang my quest to do extensive research for my book Circumcision: The Painful Dilemma which was published in 1985 by Bergin & Garvey, S. Hadley, MA.As emotionally difficult as my own baby’s circumcision was, I still began my research with a

neutral stand on the subject. My sole concern was that the operation was so painful for a baby. My American middle class upbringing had led me to believe that circumcision conferred a number of health benefits on the individual. As a result of my research I have become opposed to infant circumcision. None of the popular myths about circumcision are valid. The startling facts I have unearthed all stack up overwhelmingly against the operation.The practice of male genital mutilation – of drawing blood from, causing pain to, and changing the appearance of the penis find its origins in prehistoric times. It is not known where, how, why, or with what group of people the practice began. Several possible explanations have been offered as reasons for circumcision. Among these are blood sacrifice, an initiation rite in which it was a test of torture and pain by which young boys “became men”, a fertility ritual, a means of subjection to torture and humiliation on conquered enemies and slaves, a means of “purification” that accompanied shaving of all body hair, a means of diminishing sexual desires, and an

expression of envy of the female menstrual process. For some peoples what has been labeled as “circumcision” actually consisted of a gashing of the foreskin rather than a complete amputation as we know it today. It is clear that explanations such as "cleanliness" or "cosmetic value" had nothing to do with the operation’s primitive origins. Female circumcision, which is repugnant to the Western mind, but is still practiced in other parts of the world, originated in much the same manner as did male genital mutilation. Rarely has circumcision been the personal choice of the individual. However, with the exception of the Jewish culture/religion and the present day American medical profession, extremely few peoples have ever performed circumcisions on babies. (1., 2., 3.)In Western society, since the time of early Christianity when St. Paul declared circumcision unnecessary to conversion to the Christian faith, it was rare for non-Jewish people to be circumcised until the late 1800’s. The practice, as an American medical fad arose out of the anti-masturbation hysteria of the Victorian era. (4., 5., 6.) People feared that if a boy had his foreskin he would learn to masturbate while washing his penis. At that time it was believed that masturbation led to insanity. Today most people accept the fact that masturbation is physically harmless and that circumcised individuals certainly do masturbate. Yet American parents continue to accept the operation as appropriate for their infant sons, knowing little or nothing as to why or how the practice originated.During the 1920’s and 30’s many article appeared in American medical publications advocating infant circumcision on the grounds that lack of foreskin would somehow prevent cancer of the penis and the female uterine cervix. Since the rates of these diseases are low among Jewish and Moslem people, both of whom practice male circumcision, many authorities concluded that circumcision must prevent these diseases. However, upon comparing the rates of penile cancer among America’s (mostly circumcised) and Europe’s (nearly entirely intact) males, one find that the rates of this disease in Europe are as low or lower than in the United States. (7.) Among

American non-Jewish women, when comparing those married to circumcised men and those with intact husbands, studies have found no differences in the rates of cancer of the cervix. (8., 9.,) Clearly other significant factors are related to both of these diseases and circumcision is not justified as a cancer preventative.

There have been many astonishing and tragic complications of the operation. Infants have hemorrhaged and developed severe infections of the circumcision wound. Plastic surgery has been required when too much skin was removed or the glans or penile shaft was accidentally damaged. Occasionally troublesome cysts, fistulas, and keloid formations have developed at the site of the circumcision wound. (10., 11., 12., 13., & 14.) There are documented cases of infants who were born male but were raised as females as a result of total loss of the penis due to complications of circumcision. (15.)The most common complication of circumcision is called meatal ulceration. The exposed glans, without protective foreskin, develops painful urine burns from contact with wet diapers. (16., 17., 18.) My own sons had this problem. Our doctors never advised us that this was a complication of circumcision. Probably they did not know this.
Many people choose not to believe that the newborn infant feels any pain when his foreskin is smashed, slit, torn back from the glans, clamped and cut off. Circumcision, in its primitive origins, was often deliberately intended to be a means of torture and a test of endurance in adolescent initiation rites.We think of' that as Barbaric, yet regularly do the same thing to babies. There have been no documented studies to support the popular assumption that babies have little or no feelings. Curiously, the earliest modern writings on infant circumcision, those that appeared in medical publications around the beginning of the 20^th century, were full of concern for the feelings of the helpless infant. (19., 20.) The belief that infants feel no pain came about years later during the 1920's, 30's, and 40's, during an era that advocated bottle feeding instead of nursing, rigid schedules, separation from mother and baby following birth, and rigid toilet training. Parents were warned not to rock, hold, or cuddle their babies for fear that they would "spoil" them. Popular attitudes and practices during that time totally ignored the baby's feelings and needs in many different areas.Recent scientifically controlled studies on the reactions of newborns to being circumcised have revealed that the infant characteristically lapses into a deep, "semi-coma", non-rapid-eye movement type of sleep which is an abnormal sleep pattern for newborn infants. This is clearly a stress-withdrawal reaction. (21.) Because some babies do not cry out in response to being circumcised, but instead lapse into this deep sleep, some observers have falsely believed that the operation is not painful for infants.Another study, attempting to evaluate gender differences among newborn infants, found that boy babies were generally fussier and more restless than baby girls. However, it was found that the greater fussiness on the part of the baby boys was due to recent circumcision - not gender. When the study was repeated, using only non-circumcised newborn boys, no behavioral differences between girl and boy babies were found. (22.)

Today, many American parents and doctors are becoming aware of these facts. There is a growing trend against choosing infant circumcision, which is following the recent trend towards natural childbirth and breastfeeding. Many parents do not wish to have their infants experience such a painful ordeal as circumcision. Also there is a growing acceptance of the fact that the body is designed correctly as it normally comes into the world and does not need to be surgically made different. Another facet of the issue is that of individual human rights. Many are questioning the ethics of altering another person’s body in this manner without his permission, especially in the absence of medical and even religious indications. Many parents are realizing that their child’s foreskin is rightfully his, and by consenting to circumcision they are causing the destruction of a valuable and useful part of his body. Parents should be aware that there are a substantial

number of men who do resent the fact that a part of their body was cut off and that they had no say in the matter .

Some parents still do choose circumcision for their infant sons. Usually these reasons are vague and uninformed. Many have accepted it as an automatic medical procedure when giving birth in a hospital or have believed that they had to have it done. Some believe that circumcision is important for cleanliness just as people in other countries believe that female circumcision somehow makes women cleaner. Some people are turned off when they hear that smegma collects under the foreskin and must be washed away. However, smegma is the same substance that collects on the genitals of women and girls and normally gets washed away on a

regular basis. In our society we have running water and bathing facilities unparalleled to any other time or place in history. Like all other body parts, cleanliness of the intact penis is not difficult or complicated. In contrast to the myriad dirty diapers, runny noses and spit up that all parents must attend to regularly, care of the baby’s penis is an extremely minor concern.Some parents worry that their son will be "different" from other boys if he is not circumcised, or feel that he should "match" his already circumcised father or older brother(s). However, with the growing trend to choose against circumcision, the intact boy born today should have plenty of peers who also have foreskins. Many intact males have enjoyed their "individuality." There are many families in which the father and son or different brothers "don't match." This does not appear to cause problems within the family.Some parents fear that if their infant son is not circumcised he may have to have it done at a later age. Many people believe that the operation is more painful for someone who is older than it is for an infant. This belief is unfounded, and the likelihood that he will have to undergo circumcision for a medical reason is small. Undoubtedly some doctors prescribe circumcision for problems that can and should be corrected by less drastic means. Newborn babies do heal rapidly and do not normally require stitches for circumcision. However, older children and adults are given anesthesia for the operation, and most importantly are able to understand what is being done to their bodies. If a boy or man chooses circumcision because he would simply rather be that way, then it is his body and he has made that decision for himself. Therefore, although he will certainly experience soreness, the operation should not be emotionally traumatic.

Certainly people's religious beliefs must be respected. The majority of devout Jewish people believe that circumcision of their infant sons is an expression of their "covenant with God." Yet today even many Jewish people question this aspect of their faith, considering it merely a tradition, or like the other American parents, merely accept it as a medical procedure. There are Jewish parents who have chosen to leave their sons intact.

Many people, doctors included, do not understand the normal development and correct care of the infant's foreskin. We have been led to believe that circumcision is "cleaner" and therefore believe that the care of the intact child's penis is very difficult and complicated. Frequently doctors forcefully retract the infant's foreskin during the hospital stay or at one of the baby's office visits. Parents are sometimes instructed to retract and clean under the baby's foreskin

every day. This practice is more traumatic to the baby than circumcision (since circumcision happens only once) and is what causes such problems as infections, phimosis (foreskin attached

to the glans of the penis) and paraphimosis (foreskin retracted and cannot be replaced). We are having to be educated to leave the normally tight and non-retractable foreskin of the infant alone until it gradually loosens of its own accord which can take up to three or four years. (23., 24,)
In 1980 I became pregnant with our fourth child. This time, based on my learning through all of my research, there was absolutely no question that if this child were a boy, he would keep his

foreskin. In January of 1981 our daughter was born. Today as I care for my baby girl who is so sweet, pretty, and perfect, the idea of anyone cutting up her genitals, making her bleed, or hurting her in any way is totally repugnant to me! I am thankful that our society has not developed any medical fads that cause pain and anguish to baby girls! Perhaps some day soon American people will accord that same protection and respect to our boy babies as well.

- - - - - - - -
Update: In 1985 I gave birth to our fifth child and fourth son. He has been left intact. Even I, after years of research, activism, and writing my book, was surprised to learn how ridiculously simple the whole matter truly is. Correct care of an intact son requires virtually no thought or action at all.


When Kevin was four I gave birth to our sixth and last child, another daughter. Why this baby did not have a penis required considerable explanation to a perplexed four year old boy.

When he was 7 years old I explained to him what circumcision was all about and why his penis was different from his Daddy’s and his brothers’. (He had never asked about it, and I don’t think he had ever even noticed.) As opposed as I now am to circumcision, I left open the option for my son that he could have the operation done if he felt that he wanted to "match" the other males in our family. As I was telling him how some guys have the foreskin cut off, Kevin’s face took on a horrified, frightened expression! His eyes grew big and his hands were cupped over his genitals as he shouted emphatically: "No!! That is NEVER going to happen to ME!!!"

As of this writing (2000) my son is a teenager. He could not care less what anyone else’s penis looks like. Although he is facing all the usual teenaged "crises" right now, the matter of foreskins or the lack of them is a total "non-issue" for him.

REFERENCES:
1. Bryk. Felix
Sex and Circumcision: A Study of Phallic Worship and Mutilation in
Men and Women Brandon House, North Hollywood, CA., c. 19672. Loeb. E.M.
"The Blood Sacrifice Complex"
American Anthropological Association Memoirs, 30, p. 3-40 .
3. Bettelheim, Bruno
"Symbolic Wounds" p. 230-240.
from Reader in Comparative ReligionLessa, William A., & Vogt, Evon Z.
Harper & Row, Publishers, New York, 2nd Ed., c. 1965
4. Remondino, P.C.
History of Circumcision from Earliest Times to the Present
Ams Press, New York, c. 1974
(original ed.) F.A. Davis Co. 1891
5. Marcus, Irwin M., M.D., & Francis, John J., M.D.
Masturbation: >From Infancy to Senescence
National Universities Press, Inc., N.Y. c. 1975,Ch. 16, "Authority and Masturbation", p. 381-409,
by Spitz, Rene A., M.D.
6. Barker-Benfield, G.J.
The Horrors of the Half Known Life
Harper Colophon Books, New York, c. 1976.
7. Persky, Lester, M.D.
"Epidemiology of Cancer of the Penis"
Recent Results of Cancer Research, Berlin, l977, p. 97-109.
8. Aitken-Swan, Jean, & Baird, D.
"Circumcision and Cancer of the Cervix"British Journal of Cancer, Vol. 19, No 2, June 1965, p. 2 1 7-227 .
9. Terris. Milton, M.D.; Wilson, Fitzpatrick, M.D., & Nelson, James H., Jr.,
M.D.
"Relation of Circumcision to Cancer of' the Cervix "
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vol. 117, No. 8,
Dec. 15, 1973, p. 1056-1066
10. Gee, William F., M.D. & Ansell, Julian S., M.D.
"Neonatal Circumcision: A Ten-Year Overview: With Comparison of the
Gomco Clamp and the Plastibell Device."
Pediatrics, Vol. 58, 1976, p. 824-827.11. Grimes, David A., M.D.
"Routine Circumcision of the Newborn Infant; A Reappraisal"
American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vol. 130, No. 2,
Jan. 15, 1978, p. 125-129.
12. Kaplan, George W., M.D.
"Circumcision - An Overview"
Current Problems in Pediatrics, Year Book Medical Publishers, Inc.,
Chicago, IL.,
Vol. 7, No. 5, March 1977.13. Limaye, Ramesh D., M.D. & Hancock, Reginald A., M .D.
"Penile Urethral Fistula as a Complication of Circumcision "
The Journal of Pediatrics, Vol. 72, No. 1, Jan. 1968, p. 105-106.
14. Shulman, J., M.D., Ben-Hur, N., M.D.; & Neuman, Z., M.D. (Israel)
"Surgical Complications of Circumcision"
American Journal of Diseases of Children, Vol. 107,
Feb. 1961, p. 149-154.
15. Money, John, Ph.D.
"Ablatio Penis, Normal Male Infant Sex-Reassigned as a Girl" *Archives of Sexual Behavior, Vol. 4, No. 1, 1975, p. 65-71 .
(*The full story of this experience is related in detail in the recently published book:
Colapinto, John
As Nature Made Him
HarperCollins Publishers, NY., c. 2000.)
16. Mackenzie, A. Ranald, M.D.
"Meatal Ulceration Following Neonatal Circumcision"
Obstetrics and Gynecology, Vol. 28, No. 2, August 1966, p. 221-223.
17. Freud, Paul, M.D.
The Ulcerated Urethral Meatus in Male Children"The Journal of Pediatrics, Vol. 31, No. 2, August 1947, p.131-141.
18. Brennemann, Joseph, M.D.
"The Ulcerated Meatus in the Circumcised Child"
American Journal of Diseases of Children, Vol. 21, l920, p. 38-47.
19 . DeLee, Joseph B., A.M ., M.D .
Obstetrics for Nurses
W.B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia, PA., 7th ed. 1924, (1st ed. 1901 )
p. 436-440.20. Valentine, Ferd C., M.D.
"Surgical Circumcision"
Journal A.M.A., March 16, 1901, p. 712-713.
21. Emde, Robert N., M.D.; Harmon, Robert J., M.D.; Metcalf,
David, M.D.; Koenig, Kenneth L., M.D.; & Wagonfield, Samuel, M.D.
"Stress and Neonatal Sleep"
Psychosomatic Medicine, Vol. 33, No. 6, Nov.-Dec. 1971, p. 491-497.
22. Richards, M.P.M.; Bernal, J.F.; & Brackbill, Yvonne
"Early Behavioral Differences: Gender or Circumcision?"
Developmental Psychobiology, Vol. 9, No. 1, 1976, p. 89-95 .23. Gairdner, Douglas, M.D.
"The Fate of the Foreskin - A Study of Circumcision"
British Medical Journal, Dec. 24, 1949, p. 1433-1437.
24. Reichelderfer, Thomas E., M.D. & Fraga, Juan R., M.D.
reprint from Care of the Well Baby
by Shepard, Kenneth S., M.D. (ed.)
J.B. Lippencott Co., 1968, p. 10.