"Forced Genital Cutting," and Jewish circumcision

[dawny0826]

I wonder about Michael Angelo's "David" The statue is shown Uncircumcised.
I wonder why? when David was a Jew.

Thinking about it, I have never seen a ancient world circumcised statue or of Putti or painting. so it seems heavenly beings are not circumcised either.

Why would he? David was a Jew, but, Michael Angelo was not.

Christ has been depicted as a somewhat anglo-looking man in European art.

 

[Aquitaine]

Why would he? David was a Jew, but, Michael Angelo was not.

Christ has been depicted as a somewhat anglo-looking man in European art.

That's true. It seems that the physical properties of a historic/religious figure tend to vary, depending on the geographical location of the painter.

I'm sure there are depictions of a black Jesus, in some Christian communities in Africa, for example.

 

[dawny0826]

That's true. It seems that the physical properties of a historic/religious figure tend to vary, depending on the geographical location of the painter.

I'm sure there are depictions of a black Jesus, in some Christian communities in Africa, for example.

I've been to African American churches in the US where Jesus is depicted as a black man.

 

[Aquitaine]

I've been to African American churches in the US where Jesus is depicted as a black man.

Wow! Well there you go then - one does not even have to travel outside of a nation's borders to see this effect.

 

[dawny0826]

Ah... so the circumcision procedure is performed differently by American doctors than by doctors in the rest of the world?

I do think that physicians who have more experience with the procedure are subsequently, more skilled. If you're an American pediatrician and you are circumcising a sizeable percentage of your male, infant patients, surely, you are more skilled than a Canadian or Europeon counterpart who is performing far fewer circumcisions.

I'm curious if the frequency of procedure and subsequent skill has any weight on the statistics in your country.

I don't present this negately or arrogantly as I have no idea if this does translate to truth. I'm simply curious as to what this looks like in actuality.

 

[DallasApple]

Mutating what? I didnt get the last part.

I meant mutilating.

 

[DallasApple]

Try sandals, they wont deform feet. I know I ve run barefoot and spend all the time inside house barefoot and my feet feel all well.

5 Reasons Why Flip-Flops and Sandals are Bad for Your Feet | footorthotics.ie


Flip-Flops Bad For Feet | LiveScience

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I do think that physicians who have more experience with the procedure are subsequently, more skilled. If you're an American pediatrician and you are circumcising a sizeable percentage of your male, infant patients, surely, you are more skilled than a Canadian or Europeon counterpart who is performing far fewer circumcisions.

I'm curious if the frequency of procedure and subsequent skill has any weight on the statistics in your country.

I don't present this negately or arrogantly as I have no idea if this does translate to truth. I'm simply curious as to what this looks like in actuality.

I'm not sure why you would assume that Canadian doctors would have less experience with circumcision. Yes, we have fewer circumcisions overall, but many of our doctors refuse to do infant circumcision, too. From what I hear, the doctors who will do it can get pretty busy.

I may be wrong, but I'd guess that a fairly high proportion of Canadian circumcisions are done by circumcision "specialists" (or at least doctors who spend a significant amount of their time doing circumcisions), while American circumcisions are typically done by "generalist" pediatricians who perform circumcision as just a small part of a broader practice.

... at least for circumcision done by doctors. I would assume that the average mohel is about as busy on either side of the border.

 

[DallasApple]

Yep. and so are all of the men and women who are upset with parents for sending them to catholic school, or camp, or public schools, or for whatever else anyone is bitter at their parents. They are SOL because it is within the parents rights to make those decisions.

But they aren't talking about 'whatever reason."They are talking about an unnecessary surgery performed on them without their consent. That permanently altered their ability to perform normally /enjoy sex the way they were supposed to.

 

[DallasApple]

while American circumcisions are typically done by "generalist" pediatricians who perform circumcision as just a small part of a broader practice.

I don't know if its 'everywhere" here..but my boys were circumcised by the OB/GYN.Not a pediatrician.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I don't know if its 'everywhere" here..but my boys were circumcised by the OB/GYN.Not a pediatrician.

When my son was circumcised, we were lucky enough to have a specialist. I believe he was either a pediatric urologist or a urologist in general. But as good as he was, it was still quite unexpectedly traumatic for us as a family. The doctor put his arm around me and told me that my reaction was not uncommon (I was in tears saying that I felt like I butchered my son).

And yes, I've brought my kids to the dentist to have teeth pulled, cavities filled, and to the doctor for their scheduled immunizations. Yes, they had their moments of trepidation and tears, but it's not the same as circumcision. In our experience, not even close.

They also go barefoot much of the time like I do (except Tyler, who for some reason prefers having his shoes on all day).

I believe circumcision is a cultural practice that is supported as an option by the AAP. Personally I think it should be treated as a cosmetic expense, and not as a routine procedure that parents would consider opting in or out. I don't know, but in the U.S., if parents choose not to circumcise their infant sons, do they sign a waiver stating they understand the risks of opting out?

 

[DallasApple]

I don't know, but in the U.S., if parents choose not to circumcise their infant sons, do they sign a waiver stating they understand the risks of opting out?

I don't see why...Leaving a normal healthy body part in tact should not be something that you should even have to "consent" to in the first place.Not requesting an elective cosmetic surgery for my child should not be viewed as me "consenting" to leaving them the way they are supposed to be.If that makes sense.

And with the shoe thing???I personally love to go barefoot..but i would have thought my parents uh....neglectful had they not put shoes on me and later providing me shoes to keep my feet warm and to protect my feet walking in certain environments.

Going barefoot is a "preference" but as children our parents should "insist" we wear shoes in certain climates and to walk in certain environments.Otherwise when it seems safe and lower 'risk" I say let them choose.I drive barefoot! LOL>>When I go pick up my son from school and I know Im not going to need to get out of the car../..I walk around my back yard and front barefoot...when I go to a family members if Im there for a while I remove my shoes ..I love the feeling of walking barefoot in the sand .etc...But I certainly again would have thought my parents not too smart..if they had let me go barefoot at all times.I'm sure my feet would have suffered much more trauma than any shoe they ever provided me.

 

[DallasApple]

And yes, I've brought my kids to the dentist to have teeth pulled, cavities filled, and to the doctor for their scheduled immunizations. Yes, they had their moments of trepidation and tears, but it's not the same as circumcision. In our experience, not even close.

I agree with this too.A cavity is an infection in a tooth.It has no purpose other than to destroy your tooth..Left untreated will spread and end up an emergency eventually .Immunizations have wiped out deadly and crippling diseases that would have otherwise killed or maimed millions and millions of people over the years.

Foreskin is not an "infection" that's only purpose is to destroy healthy tissue that left "untreated" will spread and become an emergency.

Foreskin is also not the "cause" of any diseases that kill or main therefore needs to be removed to eradicate any disease..Unsafe sexual practices are how STD's are passed by a penis.Including those penises that have been circumcised.

 

[DallasApple]

Personally I think it should be treated as a cosmetic expense, and not as a routine procedure that parents would consider opting in or out.

Exactly to me it would be like saying I had to "opt in or out" of breast augmentation as some sort of routine medical procedure.

My main issue with this now is foreskin is treated as somehow a useless piece of flesh...only there to spread disease.The healthy function it serves is minimized at best ignored or scoffed off at worst.

 

[BlandOatmeal]

Yeesh not this nonsense again.

Yes, that again. Same old antiSemitism, and a rather limited menu of varieties at that.

 

[DallasApple]

Same old antiSemitism, and a rather limited menu of varieties at that.

For the record I am not anti Semite...I have a problem with circumcision period I don't care who does it.I'm a Christian and I had all 3 of my boys circumcised and I believe it was not the right thing to do by them.Even though my intentions were loving.

 

[BlandOatmeal]

For the record I am not anti Semite...I have a problem with circumcision period I don't care who does it.I'm a Christian and I had all 3 of my boys circumcised and I believe it was not the right thing to do by them.Even though my intentions were loving.

Nobody claims to be an AntiSemite.

 

[DallasApple]

Nobody claims to be an AntiSemite.

That does not make my claim that I'm not a false claim.I resent the implication.

 

[mycorrhiza]

Yes, that again. Same old antiSemitism, and a rather limited menu of varieties at that.

So being against permanent, unnecessary body modification on non-consenting individuals makes one anti-semitic?

I don't care if adults get circumcised because of their religion, aesthetic preference, or whatever other reason, but I don't see why it should be allowed on small children. The same goes for tattoos, earlobe stretching, scarification, non-reconstructive plastic surgery, etc.

 

[Curious George]

So being against permanent, unnecessary body modification on non-consenting individuals makes one anti-semitic?

I don't care if adults get circumcised because of their religion, aesthetic preference, or whatever other reason, but I don't see why it should be allowed on small children. The same goes for tattoos, earlobe stretching, scarification, non-reconstructive plastic surgery, etc.

I think the thought process is that attacking religious exercise without a rational basis makes one anti-semetic. I don't agree of course. But, I do find it interesting how many think they have valid reasoning for telling another parent whether they can make a risk neutral decision.

The most humorous part to me is that I don't favor circumcision. But, I cannot support the unreasonable infringement on a parents rights or religious rights. While I think people who feel strongly about the issue should make websites and reach out to talk with parents, they have no business trying to legislate their unfounded feelings on morality.