soo why is Male Circumcision seemingly so ‘routine’ an commonplace? Is there a Female equivalent and if so why isn’t it seen anywhere near as much as its male counterpart??
In: 4
It was initially a religious practice of Jewish origin. Some judeo-Christian faiths also a scribe to the practice and have it done for religious reasons.
Then came John Kellogg, yes [that Kellogg.](https://www.circumcisionchoice.com/single-post/Kellogg)
He was a physician and held the personal belief that masturbation was so foul, boys should not just be circumcised to prevent it, but as punishment for doing it as well.
A quote from the Cereal man himself.
> A remedy which is almost always successful in small boys is circumcision, especially when there is any degree of phimosis. The operation should be performed by a surgeon **without administering an anesthetic, ** as the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment, as it may well be in some cases. The soreness which continues for several weeks interrupts the practice, and if it had not previously become too firmly fixed, it may be forgotten and not resumed. [4]
As for women, there are a few equivalents. One is essentially a labial circumcision where the extra external folds of the labor are removed. There is also a clitoridectomy which is the removal of the clitoris. Literally, one to one, this would be like recommending removing the head of the penis entirely to prevent masterbation, not even just circumcision.
A quote from the article linked which also quotes him:
> Kellogg also promoted the infliction of genital pain on girls, believing it could deter female masturbation. He wrote that he “found the application of pure carbolic acid (phenol) to the clitoris an excellent means of allaying the abnormal excitement.” In some cases he recommended clitoridectomies to stop the behavior. [3]
His was the initial crusade, but largely ignored by medicine. He is merely responsible for this usually extremist view because “he was a doctor.”
The popularization in medicine came later when it became believed to be beneficial as a preventative. A sort of “it isn’t needed, so why not?” As mostly written by a doctor by the name of Remondino.
The cultural impact and popularization? War, as is often the case. Men in the trenches who couldn’t wash themselves properly got infections and had to be circumcised. After having those experiences, they got their kids circumcised as a needless preventative measure. So it went as time went on and now there are three major focuses and myths.
1) It is ordained by a diety. This justifies needless infantile surgery.
2) It is cleaner and prevents problems. This is half true, as the caveat is “for some.” *some* may develop phimosis. *some* may experience infections. Some may experience infections in their eyelids too.
3) It’s just “how it is.” One man did it to their kid, now that’s how they are. That’s how they were all their life. They have a son, see a foreskin, see them cut a whole dang umbilical off and go “Yeah, that too. Like mine, please?” Because ot’s just “normal.”
Until fewer anecdotes like mine and those of other uncut folks permeate things (people research and solve problems, not things working as intended most oft, after all.) And even more research and chatter and info gets out to the public more than doctors even, it’ll just… Keep being routine because that’s how it is. Cultural inertia.
Latest Answers