Zen Fascist Gov. Jerry Brown Smacks Down San Fran Circumcision Ban
Remember back when male political candidates were simply asked about boxers and briefs? A simpler America, yes, though also one in which Arsenio Hall ruled the airwaves….
Bay Area "intactivists" agitating for a ban on male infant circumcision have been brought up short (god, make it stop):
Religious groups applauded Governor Jerry Brown's signature Sunday of a bill which prevents cities and counties from interfering with parents wishing to circumcise their sons.
The move comes amid renewed debate over the ritual, which is a cornerstone of the Jewish and Muslim faiths.
Earlier this year, a group of San Francisco "intactivists" gathered the 7,000 signatures required to put before voters a ban on young male circumcision….
Proponents of the ban drew widespread criticism this summer with their "Foreskin Man" comic book series, which featured a blond, blue-eyed superhero fighting caricatured Jewish villains.
Despite the backlash, intactivists said Monday that they are undeterred.
"Human rights takes a long time for people to understand," said Lloyd Schofield, the retired hotel worker who has been at the helm of the San Francisco campaign.
"When you have a collusion of religious and politics it's a hard thing to overcome," he said. "There are always roadblocks along the way."
Reason Science Correspondent Ron Bailey previously noted that the circumcised boys have lower chances of various infections but perhaps less feeling down there.
Tim Cavanaugh noted that the Foreskin Man comic seemed more like Ernst Rohm fan fiction than something Stan Lee (nee Leiber…hmm…) would get all "Excelsior" about.
And I've written about a Filipino attempt to set a Guiness World Record in mass circumcisions (reach for the stars!) and Reason Contributing Editor and critic of the "therapeutic state" Thomas Szasz's analysis of secular circumcision as a misguided attempt to reduce masturbation (as if!).
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
There's also a federal bill - H.R. 2400, the Religious and Parental Rights Defense Act of 2011.
http://thomas.loc.gov/home/thomas.php
It'll never stand up in court!
We rightfully are outraged by female genital mutilation, yet look the other way as millions of boys are circumcized for very specious reasons. (the biggest reason why the US circumcizes far more than say, Europe, which has lower rates of cancer and other genital disease, is that doctors can charge insurance companies up to $700 for a 1 minute procedure, and since the "customer" or their parents never pay this money directly, they can be easily convinced by a doctor that it is necessary.
Also, the study people cite about STD and AIDS transmission rates among circumcized and non-circumsized men was conducted in AIDS ravaged Uganda- not exactly generalizable.
Do you apply your "direct medical cost" theory more generally or only when if supports your current argument?
I apply it generally
ScottyB, so why didn't you object to pediatric psychiatry in the recent Reason review by Sullum about books that criticize psychiatry. Brain tissue is much more important that a foreskin, but the inactivists aren't trying to ban pediatric psychiatry.
It may just be a difference in degree, but male circumcision is far less drastic and things still pretty much work as they are supposed to.
SO! It's NOT ok to mutilate someone's body without their consent. Full stop.
I overstated for effect- the nuance didn't come through. There are really no health benefits to circumcision (while there is the potential for complications), docs get extra cash for doing them, and it's an irreversable procedure performed on an infant. So, I'm against it. And, no, my opinion has nothing to do with Jewish tradition.
Now the question of a ban is a whole other argument, I never even engaged in that
You're comparing apples with oranges. Male circumcision destroys nothing. Female circumcision destroys everything.
If it weren't a Jewish ritual, my guess is you wouldn't have any problem with it.
Male circumcision is body modification without consent. Isn't it? At it's core? you know, the percentage of people who get aids vs the percentage of people who have problems with the circumcision? 583,298 people in the US in 2007 were estimated to be HIV+. That's almost .2% of the whole pop. Studies have shown 2-6% of circumcisions have complications.
So, to save your kid from potentially getting a disease .2% of the pop has (that is mostly brought on by behaviors under their control) you are going to risk them to 2-6% chance of pain and suffering- and potential real genital mutilation?
THAT MAKES NO SENSE. It's not foreskin warfare- it's math.
So are you an uncut barbarian with an inferiority complex because of your hideous worm-like genitalia? Or are you a self-loathing victim of circumcision whose dick has been FUBAR'd?
Usually the outrageously outraged anti-circumcision crusaders are the former.
Why do you care about other dudes' cocks so much?
Do you post these same comments on threads about ear piercings?
I do feel the same about ear piercing, actually. I don't think there should be a law- but I do think people should really think about it more.
Also, I'm neither. I'm half jewish, so they just took the left side of the foreskin.
Of course, the left side was the Jewish half. lol
That's what they told me. They didn't bother asking though. It was actually only the top half.
speaking of body modification, it's kind of wierd that lots of men think it's cool to get a prince albert or put giant plugs in their ears, but have a problem with circumcision.
Maybe in 100 years, circumcision will be banned, but all the hipsters will be getting their foreskins cut off to be rebellious and appeal more to women.
If it weren't a Jewish(and Muslim) ritual, my guess is that it would already be banned.
Personally, I agree that it's not that big a deal, and I prefer circumcised men (for aesthetic reasons), but I really don't see how you get around the fact that a baby is incapable of consenting, let alone to modification of one of the most intimate parts of his body.
Scott J. Behson
Associate Professor of Management; Chair of Management Department
B.S., Cornell University; Ph.D., State University of New York at Albany
LOL, how did this quack get a degree? If you don't understand why female and male circumcision are not analogous, you're just too fucking stoooooopid to be taken seriously. Go back to managing, dick.
Is Cornell still accredited?
Management was what the lacrosse players majored in. It wasn't exactly the "real" Cornell.
Actually, when I was there it was "Communications". All the jocks majored in communications cause it was a joke major.
Go back to managing, dick.
I thought your problem was that he's attempting to manage dicks. *cymbal crash*
Disagree all you want and call me what you will. Please do not take it outside the bounds of this discussion board.
I'm not an expert on the process, but it seems that comparing female genital mutilation to circumcision is like comparing a beheading to a haircut.
Damn rabble-rousers always trying to steal my foreskins.
Ahh, so circumcision's a gross violation of that kid's civil rights but tearing it to pieces with a vacuum or killing it with salt poisoning three months earlier is totally cool. Now I see.
+ 5
Soon the Denim Suede Secret Police won't just be snatching your uncool niece, but your uncut son as well!
Nice.
Suede Denim. Order is important.
I'll trade a little less feeling for a decreased risk of disease any day of the week. And the slightly reduced feeling means I can last longer than those disgusting aardvarks.
True. Although sometimes I wonder what life would be like with a foreskin. Then I get all angsty and stuff.
Walk around with a turtleneck pulled up around your forehead and see what looks you get. Now imagine if you tried to stick something that silly looking into a woman.
That's what life with a foreskin would be like.
Snake in a sweater is not an attractive look, I'm told.
Walk around with your dick hanging out and see what looks you get.
How would you know what, "life with a foreskin is like" since you were apparently mutilated as an infant.
That women want men who last a long time is a myth. 5-10 minutes is ideal. Any longer and it's just chafing.
BTW, think closer to 5 than 10
In that case, I'm your guy!
Speak for yourself.
Pssssht. I'm in and out in a minute and a half. Not my fault if the ladies can't keep up.
You can always stop for a 10 minute cunnilingus break.
As a 41 year old man who was circumcised last year for medical reasons I can say that it certainly reduces friction and therefore arousal...avoid if possible if you want a good sex life.
The average male lasts about 5 minutes. Think about that.
Then I'm twice the average man because I can go 10 minutes!
Actually I remembered incorrectly. The average time is only 2.4 minutes!
Is this the average from your own experience? Small sample size might impact the results.
Nonsense, there are people who have been circumcised and last longer because of it.
Again, not a selling point!
All any man needs to do is last long enough for the female to get off. Which, if she and you are doin it right, shouldn't be more than a few minutes.
(this presupposes we're talking about hetero sex - no idea what the homo preference is)
Geez, Kristen...don't you believe in foreplay?
Tim Cavanaugh noted that the Foreskin Man comic seemed more like Ernst Rohm fan fiction...
Needs more umlaut, where's Underzog when you need him?
Quiet, underzog would have a stroke if he saw those comics. We don't want to hurt the poor senile guy do we?
Stroke!
I ... got a fever. And the only prescription is ... more umlaut.
Thank God I have less feeling down there. Any more feeling and that's all I'd think about, all day long.
Perhaps this is why Jews have generally succeeded more than other ethnic groups. They have other things on their minds.
The "be fruitful and multiply" people? You must be joking. Interesting that circumcision was Abraham's part of the deal with God's promise to make the Israelites as numerous as stars in the sky.
Because chicks don't like the look of the uncut unit. Therefore, people multiplication is easier with a prettier penis.
My god, this thread MUST stop now.
Otherwise we'll all read more phrases like "prettier penis."
Bay Area "intactivists" agitating for a ban on male infant circumcision have been brought up cut short
Edited for additional lulz.
That women want men who last a long time is a myth. 5-10 minutes is ideal.
Isn't 5 - 10 minutes already a long time? Err, for most men, I mean?
The first time, sure.
Can we just cut the nonsense and get to the point.
Nick, nice allusion to latter Dune with "Zen Fascist".
I guess I'll just have my breasts and ovaries removed now, since that will reduce my risk of cancer in those areas.
Also, not all female circumcision is a total removal of everything and a tight sewing job so the woman never experiences pleasure again. If it's okay to just take a small piece of the boy's foreskin, then is it okay to take just a little bit of a girl's labia? (Keeping in mind, also, that no medical procedure is without risks, and several boys die every year in the US from circumcision.)
In introductory anthropology, I learned about a Kenyan tribe that circumcised the boys and cut just the tip off the clitoris of the girls when they hit puberty as a coming of age ritual. The assigned text said that the procedure hurt, but didn't mention any other problems with it.
Cutting off a piece of an infant boy's normal functional tissue for cosmetic reasons is folly. It is illegal to do a similar procedure on an infant girl.
When you are an adult, if you want to be circumcised, whether you are male or female, then by all means go ahead.
If infant girls are protected by law from genital mutilation, then I see no reason that infant boys should not receive equal protection under law.
This actually works, but you have to interrupt the masturbation and do the circumcision right away. Nobody comes back for seconds after that.
I don't oppose religious circumcision, although I find it a bit outdated, but whatever, so are a lot of things.
What I don't get is cosmetic circumcision. I get the whole, "look like daddy" thing... but how often is your son going to get a look at your dick after the kid can start bathing alone at...what? 6? 7?
And yes, I get the, "But some women/men will be repulsed!" Two responses:
1)If your son is having sex with a partner who cares only about whether he has a foreskin... he shouldn't be having sex. Also, just personally, never had a problem with it.
2) The rate is down to like 50% of newborn boys in the US, and may decline further still, so your kid's sexual partners have probably seen it before.
I mean, historically, mastrubation stopped being a Jewish thing in America because of people who wanted to stop self-abuse (jacking it) namely Kellogg ( Seriously, I am not making that up).
But hey... if you insist, I won;t stop you. Just remember, if your guy hooks up with a foreigner, they may look at him funny (seriously, that has to be one of the key draws of not doing- Aussie chicks are hot and go, "Oh, your junk is normal! I meet all these yanks...")
+ 3 to Au H2O
Personally, I think the recent focus on this (dumbass non-)issue is a sign that America has pretty much solved everything else we might have to worry about...
1) Parents should be able to decide on circumcision from their sons.
2) Pediatric psychiatric drugs do much more damage than any circumcision.
Your essay is good, I like it very much. Here I would like to share with you some things :
Ugg Boots On Sale http://www.uggsukmall.com. ---- dongqilai
Disagree all you want and call me what you will. Please do not take it outside the bounds of this discussion board.