Letters to the Editor
-
BAILEY
no! whatever YOU want, honeychumps.
-
Unless the mother/wife really is ok with this, which may not be the case
it seems like a better solution would be for the mother to stand on her legal rights and block it and the the father can say to his parents "what can I do, I can't force it" and he's off the hook with them, sort of. It seems like a rift between the son and parents is better than between husband and wife. It seems to me the mother may be very mad about this and not really get over it, and if that is the case the husband may regret not finding a way around his parents.
-
Lousy Husband
The letter writer is a LOUSY husband. His wife felt adamant that she didn't want to circumcise, but he gives into the crazy, hysterical, demanding parents?? What, his wife's opinion doesn't count for anything??
-
Happy anteater here again
Invisible Pink Unicorn on a Dayglo pogo stick...
Some of you folks really, really, really need to get a life.
Three hundred plus freaking letters about circumcision?
Yes it's mutilation, live with it.
Apparently many men with circumcised penises are quite happy with it.
I'm happy with my uncircumcised penis. So is my wife and so were all the women I ever had sex with.
If you wanna do it for religious reasons or whatever, go ahead and do it.
If you don't wanna do it for whatever reason, then don't do it.
I can't believe what a vicious flame war is going on over such a trivial subject. Iraq is descending into the outer ring of the seventh circle of hell, hundreds of thousands are dead and y'all want to flame over circumcision.
It's things like this that make me glad I'm an atheist.
-
A shameful choice
The author's inability to protect his son (and wife) from a meaningless procedure based on a meaningless tradition is appalling. In my view, every grown up child's responsibility is to make it completely clear to his or her parents that their opinions no longer hold a veto power. Instead the author, sadly still a child in his decision making, confirms his senseless compliance at the expense of his own son. This boy deserved a better treatment! And if I were the wife, I would file for divorce.
-
uncut
I prefer the uncut, unmutilated penis. Not as pretty but certainly more pleasurable. I agree that circumcision is barbaric. I dated a man who was uncircumcised because his father feared another holocaust ... .
Men? What do you think?
-
Stupid man
What an ineffectual boob this husband is. The wife is sure to have many other situations in her marriage where this "man" cannot stand up to his own mother. His writing style comes off as arrogant as well and I hope Salon doesn't publish anymore of him.
-
lay off of brightstar
brightstar65:
I'm glad you shared your story. My heart goes out to you and the senseless problems forced on you by your parents. Please don't generalize about women, however.
I'm a woman. I'm utterly opposed to circumcision except for serious medical conditions where no other solution is practical. I also would never reject a man for the nature of his penis, even if he were completely unable to penetrate me.
The most thoughtless pro-circumcision people here are sadly women bleating about their cultural traditions or how they prefer a circumcised penis. The mothers here gushing about how their son is doing just fine after being cut which have merely constructed a means of ignoring uncomfortable and incontrovertible examples like your own. To oppose circumcision after having their own children cut would induce crippling cognitive dissonance.
Yet the strongest opponents are women too from what I've seen. I sincerely believe that no mother with an unprejudiced and compassionate heart could choose routine infant circumcision. The author's wife knew circumcision was wrong but sadly capitualted to ironically the tradition of the world's mosy misogynistic religion. To bear a child and then introduce it to the world by cutting part of its body off is the very essence of how we traumatize children in the name of religion and culture.
-
One of a select few Salon articles that made me want to vomit.
My heart goes out to Elijah's parents. Whether or not one circumcises is one's own business, of course. I'd lean towards not doing it, and that's the choice I made for my own kid. I suspect the case against circumcision is often overstated, but the case for circumcision is almost zero if you're not having unprotected sex in subsaharan africa. Still, I don't judge those who chose otherwise.
However, the downright sociopathic manipulation on the part Mr. Pollack's parents subjected him to is utterly unconscionable. I must call it sociopathic, because they apparently had no idea they were doing anything wrong. His father's words shouldn't have been 'touching,' they were the gloat of an evil manipulator who has managed to get his way by whatever means were at his disposal, and never showed a glimmer of compassion. Going so far as to call their grandson's name stupid? Frankly, "fuck you Bernard" should've been the last thing Neal said to them until "I accept your apology."
If they were willing to disown their son and grandson over this, then it would be their loss, not Neal's. No one needs people like this in their lives. Elijah certainly doesn't need the influence of people presenting this as acceptable, even rewarding behavior.
-
hi
Bill,
Infant circumcision is considered mutilation because a normal and healthy body part is amputated from a person who is unable to consent or dissent to the surgery.
Men have as much right to their bodies as women. It's time our society accepted that fact.
-
HIV protection
the case for circumcision is almost zero if you're not having unprotected sex in subsaharan africa.
I think the argument being made is that condom use is high and HIV infection rates are low so circumcision is not needed. But studies show that half the pregnancies in the United States are unplanned, which means there is a whole lot of unprotected sex going on. More here:
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5406a1.htm
Regarding HIV, the CDC estimates that 1,039,000—1,185,000 people were living with HIV or AIDS in the U.S. in 2003. More than 43,000 new cases are diagnosed each year. While it used to be that heterosexual transmission accounted for only 3% of new cases, that has risen to 31%. The share of new AIDS diagnoses due to sex between men has fallen from 65% to 42%.
http://www.kff.org/hivaids/upload/Fact-Sheet-The-HIV-AIDS-Epidemic-in-the-United-States-2005-Update.pdf
Though the risk of contracting AIDS in the U.S. is far lower than in sub-Saharan Africa, it's still a significant problem. I'm not advocating circumcision but the health argument does have validity even in the U.S.