Letters to the Editor
Gams on Glass
Published Letters: 279 Editor's Choice: 6
-
Ms whoever
[Read the article: Male circumcision no help to women?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"Are you seriously comparing ear piercing with amputation of part of the genitals? " - No, as I explained very clearly, both are voluntary procedures that may result in ill effect.
"Besides your example is an excellent argument for letting children decide for themselves whether to pierce their ears. Are you really that dismissive of children's rights and people who actually have the courage to stand up for what they believe in?" - Not as such. I can just put it in perspective.
"Besides if he is "pathological" as you unkindly put it, then you contradict your own claim, since a pathology is a state of unhealth." - This is semantic parsing of the most silly kind. I assume you can read for context that he was physically healthy. As for saying. Your statement that if he had part of his genitalia removed, he was unhealthy, well, you are 'begging the question' with the a priori assumption you are correct.
"Again you show what an ignorant person you are. If the problem is psychological as you suggest yourself then an MD is not the proper person to consult, but rather a psychologist. Moreover is being circumcised is so obviously being "perfectly healthy" then why would the reassurance of an MD be needed? Oh and what if the MD like many opposes circumcision?" -- Actually, you display your own ignorance. People suffering from body dysmorphia of body integrity disorder of the kind in which they might be harm to themselves would almost certainly be treated by a psychiatrist, which, if you are not aware, is an MD. Further showing you are nuts is that the MD would not be treating the circumcision, but rather the body issues, so the MD's personal take of circumcision hardly matters...
"Finally are you actually encouraging people to not be informed about a subject which affects them? Really, that takes a willful ignorance that usually only small-minded religious conservatives can manifest. Or did I just peg you?" - No, I am encouraging people to inform themselves NOT based upon the insane rantings of a cult-like fanaticism. In fact, it is your own radical self-assuredness that likens to religious freaks.
How has the anti-circumcision movement arisen if "hardly any men find themselves even thinking twice about [it]"? - Radical extremism exists in even the most educated of people.
"Do you really lack so terribly in basic empathy that you cannot see how missing part of your natural body is considered an affliction by those sensitive enough to contemplate it?" - I would suggest that 'missing' a body part you have no recollection of having and which has no impact on sexual health , to the point of obsession is of questionable logical merit and in fact may show deeper emotional issues, which had been projected to this particular matter.
"So you attack men who want to restore their natural bodily function by comparing them to those who want to destroy it??? You really a picture perfect idiot." - I think your the idiot. Going through an unnecessary procedure such as this one may fine, I suppose, except that the obsession is clearly indicative of body issues that need be removed. but just as I don't deny the right to someone to have a sex change, nor would I want to denythe man who wishes to go through a painful procedure to restore a think sheath of skin of minimal, if any, biological need. But the underlying issues and causes for this obsessive attitude are what they are.
"Thank you for proving the apotheosis of the shallow-thinking pro-circumcision crowd." -- I probably would not have my son circumcised, frankly. You people can't see how crazy you act, nor how deterministic and fascistic you are.
-
Pan and Durian
[Read the article: Male circumcision no help to women?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I'm sorry to hear about your tragedy. If you'd read my points I stated a difference between those who have suffered serious medical damage as a result and those who fixate.
However, I addressed the point: any procedure carries its risks, and there are hundreds if not thousands of such procedures that may be carried out on a child in infancy.
On you suggestion that I not have a son: I had already stated that I doubted I would have my son circumcised, as it really doesn't strike me as essentially necessary.
--
It is frankly offensive to equate this to slavery as a social movement.
In addition, your parallel of FGM and circumcision ('female circumcision') makes no sense whatsoever. There is NO medical similarity between the two, whatsoever. Most FGM directly removes clitoral flesh. The only similarity is in the original misnomer (hence the change to the term FGM), and the general 'neighborhood' of the incision.