“You deserve to die. You are guilty of the crime of assault with a weapon against infants. … I hope they burn you alive, literally burn you on a stake over a flaming heap.”
Sound like a threat from an anti-abortion extremist? Think again. This disturbing email was sent to a mohel who has performed thousands of brit milah ceremonies.
Although lacking the attention given to abortion, the debate over circumcision is no less controversial. Unfortunately, some circumcision opponents do not accept that reasonable people can disagree. They consider the procedure to be a violent assault, equating it with child abuse. They seek to end all underage circumcisions worldwide. Despite their efforts, thousands of Jewish parents choose brit milah for their sons, and more than a million babies are snipped in U.S. hospitals each year.
Unable to prevent circumcisions through persuasion, some opponents have responded by trying to shame parents. An army of keyboard activists constantly searches social media for any comments that mention “circumcision” or “brit milah.” They share these posts with groups that spring into action.
An unsuspecting parent will post a photo or comment about her son’s brit milah on her Facebook timeline. Within hours she receives dozens of responses from strangers vilifying her as a bad mother.
Physicians and mohels who promote circumcision are aggressively targeted. Activists routinely protest outside hospitals and medical conferences, photographing doctors without permission. Last year, protesters marched outside the home of the lead physician for the American Academy of Pediatrics circumcision task force. In May, the phone lines of a Utah pediatrics office were swamped after the doctor mentioned a circumcision study online.
Rabbi Michael Rovinsky of St. Louis is a national consultant for doctors, midwives and other mohels, and he has performed more than 10,000 circumcisions for Jewish and non-Jewish families. Shortly before he was to speak at a medical conference in 2012, he learned of growing pressure to cancel his appearance, including death threats against him. When he declined to cancel, the sponsor hired an armed bodyguard to escort him from the airport to the event.
Dr. Fred Kogen, an Orange County mohel, has performed 8,000 circumcisions throughout California. He includes Hollywood stars among his past clients. Kogen has received a few threats, including the aforementioned email three years ago. He immediately notified the FBI about the message, which warned:
“You are a violent criminal and you belong in jail. Cease and desist from all mohel training activities, all bris ceremonies, and kill yourself. … If there were no repercussions I would kill every mohel I could myself, but because the law forbids it, I will merely implore you to stop what you are doing. … There will be more and more people who grow up with a righteous vendetta against you and one day you will face the consequences of your actions at their hands. — Mr. Nat Taggart”
Kogen found the threat so unnerving that he applied for a concealed firearm carry license. Since his first meeting with clients is often in their homes, he worries that one day he might arrive at the home of an unknown client to find a “Nat Taggart” lying in wait.
To be sure, many circumcision opponents behave and converse in a civilized manner. Moreover, none of the doctors or mohels I contacted has been deterred by any hostility. Although some were reluctant to draw attention to the rabid fringe, that fringe has created a frenzied atmosphere that could lead to physical violence.
It’s time for action to curtail the bullying.
Medical and Jewish authorities must warn physicians, nurses and mohels about potential threats. Prenatal classes should advise expectant parents. Social media users should adjust privacy settings when posting personal information and family photos. And Facebook needs to crack down on groups that encourage cyberbullying. Individuals who feel threatened should notify law enforcement, which must investigate and prosecute crimes of intimidation.
Infant circumcision is a mitzvah for Jews and a legal medical procedure for all. The harassment of parents, mohels and doctors must stop.
Andrew Gross lives in Union City and is a member of Peninsula Sinai Congregation in Foster City.
The fact that their irrational protest against male circumcision has failed to result in a ban will only make them more aggressive toward individual parents and doctors on social media.
Such a shame people are so cruel to harass mothers who circumcised their boys, accepted hygiene benefits for generations for such a simple procedure, until some foreskin conspiracy theorists started attacking doctors and parents online!
How does amputation of a healthy and functional body part improve hygiene?
WASHING makes you clean.
Soap build up under the foreskin. You know – smegma. Or how about elderly men that cannot take proper care of themselves or teen boys who put up a fight when you tell them to shower.
But please do tell us about your super power that knows the bathing habits of all the men.
Let’s be clear here – I’m not saying all men don’t take care of themselves but it’s a proven fact that a lot have trouble in this department.
Dirt builds up under the labia folds/clitoral hood. You know – smegma, something women get too. Elderly men can have difficulty taking care of themselves with lots of things, but having body parts removed in infancy to prevent issues many decades later usually isn’t a consideration, especially in other countries. I wasn’t aware there were many teenage boys who fight to take showers, I think you’re thinking of little boys. And they do, but they also fight brushing their teeth and like to eat junk food even when they’re told not to, and proper dental care is a lot harder than keeping the foreskin clean.
“Let’s be clear here – I’m not saying all men don’t take care of themselves but it’s a proven fact that a lot have trouble in this department.”
Oh I know, you’re just fishing for some of the most feeble, pathetic reasons imaginable to justify circumcision, reasons that never pass the minds of people in most of the world, especially other developed countries, and only really fly here because of how ingrained it is, oblivious to how crazy they look to other countries. And of course, would never dare extend these justifications to females.
“But please do tell us about your super power that knows the bathing habits of all the men.” – and please do tell us what gives you the right, as a woman, to justify removal of part of the genitals in the opposite sex when they’re babies based upon hygiene issues that SOME men have, and not for women. And why you’re so deeply committed to defending circumcision.
Really? How’s about you open up your browser, head on over to google and do a search for “why does my uncircumcised penis smell” and you’ll find over 1million hits.
We aren’t talking about female genitals. We are talking about male genitals. I know that’s hard for you to comprehend but they aren’t the same and they don’t function the same.
Got 62 results for that. Tried “foreskin” instead of “uncircumcised penis” and got 56. Tried your suggestions without quotes and it gave about 275k results, but it tended to be much more mixed and often didn’t readily involve the foreskin beyond the first several pages.
Now if you try “why does my vagina smell”, you’ll get nearly 30k results. Try that without quotes and it’s over 2 million.
How did you get over 1 million on that first one?
It’s relevant talking about female genitals if you’re going to talk about intact men having hygiene issues and taking seriously the idea of undergoing penile at birth to prevent them. You mention smegma, something women get too, but I know it’s hard for many Americans to imagine that, or that women suffer from any of the issues you described.
Opposition to circumcision has been around for millenia, the US is the only developed country where it’s still the norm (as performed on infants) and it was dropped by Britain and New Zealand because it was no longer seen as being medically necessary.
Going through your comments I noticed you make the “benefits of circumcision outweigh the risks 100 to 1” argument, a claim originating with Brian J. Morris, who also usually claims over half of all uncircumcised men will develop serious health problems and many will die. He has a documented fetishistic interest in circumcision and is seen as a deranged quack by most of Australian society (because he is). In fact, here’s some other comments of yours:
“Boys should be clipped when they are young regardless of the parents views,”
“I have made sure my boys benefitted from a tight circ when where babies and have had no issues since.”
“Circumcision should be mandatory, a tight cut with frenulum completely
excised it is the only way to ensure little boys keep healthy and clean”
“ue to the frenulum being a issue it is commonly removed during the circ
but I recommend you request it be removed and done tightly as possible.”
“I support Jane and her campaigning in Uganda for the compulsory
circumcision of all boys, I beleive a woman shouldn’t have to risk her
health when having sex because a selfish boy wants to avoid the
procedure.”
“Getting it done in infancy delivers a good asthetic result and allows a
good amount of skin to be taken off keeping the shaft tight and away
from the glans.”
“Getting boys snipped is common sense I don’t know why some people think
they should be left to choose, if we did that with everything we would
never make a choice for our kids…”
“The inner foreskin is actually the area where HIV can enter most easily,
having this area excised radically reduces the chance of infection
which is what this article is trying to inform you on.”
“I know having it done with the plastibel can result in quite a loose cut which is a problem.”
“I requested a low and tight cut for my boys, frenulum taken off.”
I don’t think you’re a woman at all. You’re clearly a man with a circumcision fetish, and likely a pedophile given how much you fixate on alls boys being circumcised with tight cuts, and all of the inner tissue and frenulum removed, which would mean the removal of nearly all erogenous tissue and making restoration close to useless. Do us all a favor and swallow a bullet sadistic monster.
Opposition to circumcision has been around for millenia, the US is the only developed country where it’s still the norm (as performed on infants) and it was dropped by Britain and New Zealand because it was no longer seen as being medically necessary.
Going through your comments I noticed you make the “benefits of circumcision outweigh the risks 100 to 1” argument, a claim originating with Brian J. Morris, who also usually claims over half of all uncircumcised men will develop serious health problems and many will die. He has a documented fetishistic interest in circumcision and is seen as a deranged quack by most of Australian society (because he is). In fact, here’s some other comments of yours:
“Boys should be clipped when they are young regardless of the parents views,”
“I have made sure my boys benefitted from a tight circ when where babies and have had no issues since.”
“Circumcision should be mandatory, a tight cut with frenulum completely
excised it is the only way to ensure little boys keep healthy and clean”
“ue to the frenulum being a issue it is commonly removed during the circ
but I recommend you request it be removed and done tightly as possible.”
“I support Jane and her campaigning in Uganda for the compulsory
circumcision of all boys, I beleive a woman shouldn’t have to risk her
health when having sex because a selfish boy wants to avoid the
procedure.”
“Getting it done in infancy delivers a good asthetic result and allows a
good amount of skin to be taken off keeping the shaft tight and away
from the glans.”
“Getting boys snipped is common sense I don’t know why some people think
they should be left to choose, if we did that with everything we would
never make a choice for our kids…”
“The inner foreskin is actually the area where HIV can enter most easily,
having this area excised radically reduces the chance of infection
which is what this article is trying to inform you on.”
“I know having it done with the plastibel can result in quite a loose cut which is a problem.”
“I requested a low and tight cut for my boys, frenulum taken off.”
I don’t think you’re a woman at all. You’re clearly a man with a circumcision fetish, and likely a pedophile given how much you fixate on all boys being circumcised with tight cuts, and all of the inner tissue and frenulum removed, which would mean the removal of nearly all erogenous tissue and making restoration close to useless. Do us all a favor and end your life you sadistic monster.
What’s stunning is how they also rabidly defend abortion, the actual murder of an infant in the womb, while they screech about a legitimate procedure on a newborn.
Yeah, abortion is not murder. It’s removing a clump of cells called a zygote – not an infant.
Weird, I’ve usually seen people against circumcision accused of being pro-abortion, or that they have to be against abortion to be reasonably against circumcision.
What’s really stunning is how people like you will rabidly defend infant circumcision as a “legitimate medical procedure” when it was never in all of human history ever truly seen as such until about 150 years ago, where it was promoted to prevent things nobody takes seriously now (masturbation preventative, because masturbation was thought to be the cause of anything you can think of), and the bulk of the modern medical justifications came years after this, with only a handful of countries at this point still taking it seriously as a medical procedure (outside of Africa, where it’s overwhelmingly to prevent one thing, AIDS)- while they screen/express deep outrage at anyone who dares compare it to female circumcision, which is almost always explicitly referred to as “female genital mutilation”, even though prominent FGM survivors and campaigners have openly compared the two.
Look, you need to relax. You and Amoreena seem to be arguing with all sides of this discussion, which tells me you want a fight, not a rational, scientific and philosophical discussion. There is nothing rabid about what I said, I’m quite calm. It’s a personal decision to circumcise or not, and those who abuse the concept through FGM and other barbaric misogynists procedures are apples and oranges to orthodox Jews and Christians circumcizing their infants. My three sons didn’t have any ill effects whatsoever, because I took care of them afterwards so they would have none. Being of Jewish descent, I have my reasons for believing it to be legitimate, and you can certainly offer the same objective respect for that decision as I do for those who are against it. Same for vaccination of infants, whatever. Under the care of a qualified doctor or medically trained rabbi, that’s my qualification on the issue. I don’t believe in it in older children, at all. There is also no comparison in my mind between infant circumcision and female genital mutilation of a pubescent or adolescent or grown female….apples and oranges. I will also never compare the murder of an unborn child to infant circumcision that is done conscientiously and hygienically. Again, relax, and ask yourself if you really possess mercy for children, because if you believe it’s okay to snuff out one in the womb (the words “zygote” and “fetus” and “clump of cells” are propagandist terms justifying the killing of the ultimate subaltern in the world, the unborn child. I’m done with this conversation, because you are not interested in the introspection and self-accountability necessary to have a truly rational discussion. God bless you and I pray your mind and heart open to the genuine schism afflicting you, such that you view one innocent life as worthy of concern, but not another because you don’t have to look it in the eyes. I’m not spending any more energy on crude, belligerent individuals who lack objectivity and genuine tolerance for disagreement with good people. Shalom.
I know you express no real evidence of “rabidly” defending the procedure. I was merely turning around what you said, which struck me as genuinely hypocritical, and the whole “support male circumcision, be vehemently against FGM and express incredulity/outrage at people who make the comparison” is something I’ve seen many times. But unsurprisingly, you think it’s completely invalid to compare male circumcision to female circumcision because it’s a “barbaric misogynist procedure”- in my other comment, I detailed how this is not the case and how prominent anti-FGM campaigners and survivors openly compare the two, and how in many places, female circumcision is upheld and enforced by the women, and of course how in almost all societies where female cutting exists, so does male cutting. That, and it has been promoted variously in Abrahamic religions by men to control male sexuality, whether Moses Maimonides in Judaism or John Kellogg in US Christianity.
I made no actual pronouncement on whether I believe in abortion or not. When you get down to it, I don’t. I have nonetheless seen people argue many times that people who are against circumcision must be pro-abortion, or have to be against both for their views on circumcision to be valid- your comment was a first in that regard. But I myself find it striking how someone can profess to be against abortion and believe it to be the killing of the ultimate subaltern, while they’ll defend having a boy, almost as soon as they’re born, strapped down and have part of the most sensitive and personal part of their body surgically removed while they’re still conscious (it’s usually done with anesthesia now, but it’s not 100% effective, they’re still conscious and they’ll still feel some of it) because of millenia of ingrained religious belief, or when it comes to non-Jewish Americans, any reason at all, even just because it’s the thing to do.
Likewise, what does that tell you about the people who perform circumcisions vs. those who perform abortions? When you abort a baby you don’t really see them, or atleast much of any visible activity from them. There’s a clear disconnect and it’s easy to see it as non-living (I don’t really believe this). When you’re circumcising a baby though, well, there’s no shortage of footage of infant circumcisions where the baby is really obviously in unspeakable agony over what’s being done, but the doctors who perform it seem to thinking nothing of it. They’ll subject a child to what’s perhaps the worst pain they’ll ever experience and do this even when they believe there’s no medical reason, or turn around and claim they’ll cry the same if their diaper is dirty.
If you really want to talk about a lack of mercy for children, look at “people” like that.
I sent you a reply clarifying things, but it got “detected as spam.” If you got it via email or whatever, then no point in reposting it again, but I’m happy to reclarify it.
Zygote & fetus are scientific terms.
Also, correcting misinformation is not looking for a fight. It’s making sure people who come across these comments are getting facts.
There is no comparison. Engage your intellect, take a deep breath, read the article.
A legal medical procedure done by a professional in a sterile environment is not child abuse and it certainly cannot be compared to FGM which is not done by a medical professional or in a sterile environment.
Penis’ and vaginas are not the the same thing – they are 2 completely different machines that operate in their very own way.
While FGM only causes harm and is done to control women – male infant circumcision has some benefits and very few risks.
FGM is legal in most of the world’s countries, nearly all of the countries that have banned it have done so within only the past 24 years and most of the ones that have banned are African ones, where it’s a common occurrence and have done so solely out of international pressure. FGM is frequently performed in sterile medical environments- clinics, hospitals, etc., by trained medical professionals- in many countries, such as Egypt, Malaysia, Indonesia, Singapore and more. The WHO recognizes there are several broad categories of FGM varying greatly in severity, and altogether many different forms.
You’re right that penises and vaginas are different, but it’s a really incredible leap of reason to argue that removing part of one sex’s genitals is harmful, while for another, it isn’t at all.
“FGM is done to control women”- this is absolutely fallacious, or atleast, as a form of patriarchal control, when it is often the women in societies where FGM is practiced that women enforce and promote it. Likewise, male circumcision has often been promoted and enforced as a way of controlling male sexuality by men, as Moses Maimonides argued, or the Victorian doctors who promoted circumcision to begin with, which they did for both males and females. FGM has even branched from male circumcision in multiple regions, such as in Egypt. And in nearly all known cultures where FGM exists, so does male circumcision. The article “Why Some Women Choose to Get Circumcised”, published in The Atlantic, details how FGM in many parts of Africa is seen as and celebrated as a rite of passage among women, as it is among the men. Fuambai Sia Ahmadu, a female anthropologist from Sierra Leone, has argued this as well, and underwent a voluntary circumcision as an adult, and has repeatedly argued that westerners constantly misunderstand African culture in this regard. The article “Seven Things to Know about Female Genital Surgeries in Africa”, put out by the “The Public Policy Advisory Network on Female Genital Surgeries”, has argued these things as well and more.
This is not at all an endorsement of FGM- but to clarify it is frequently enforced and upheld by women themselves, that this parallels what has been the case with circumcision among males, and that women, like the men in many of these societies, claim it does not adversely effect sexual functioning.
There is also the fact prominent anti-FGM researchers- such as Hanny Lightfoot-Klein- have openly compared FGM to male circumcision. Even survivors- like Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Soraya Mire- have done this as well.
It’s of course incredibly typical for Westerners (even feminists) to decry FGM but express indifference to or even defend male circumcision, which is never regarded as a mutilation, and comparing the two is often seen as blasphemous. There has been a highly disproportionate focus on the worst forms of FGM (which are among the least common) and treatment of these forms as representative, to the point FGM is always associated in many, many people’s minds with the worst forms, performed in the worst conditions, with the worst intents. Female also circumcision never caught on like it did in Western countries, and it has persisted to remarkable degrees in America, the most powerful country on the planet. America medicine sees the foreskin and associated structures as completely irrelevant for functioning, with only the glans and shaft as relevant, and for the latter, it doesn’t really matter what state it’s in. America’s primitive knowledge of penile anatomy helps to reinforce the idea that cutting a female is harmful but cutting a male isn’t, that clitoridectomy destroys female sexual functioning (the vast majority of the clitoris is internal and no recorded form of FGM touches the internal parts), or things like the male equivalent of FGM being glans amputation/penis removal/castration- all garbage, scientifically illiterate ideas.
But you’re pretty different- you not only express the typical Western comprehension of FGM, you’re *really* committed to defending male circumcision. You are one of about a dozen admins- nearly all female, no less- of “Pro Circumcision Parents & Supporters”, the largest pro-circumcision group on Facebook, with thousands of members. Your group likewise has many African members, a place where there is international effort to stop FGM, but promote MGM because of the belief it prevents AIDS, where men are almost never informed of the idea it will harm sexual functioning, where many dangerous, deadly tribal circumcision practices are overlooked (“The death and deformity caused by male circumcision in Africa can’t be ignored”, published in the Guardian), and other human rights abuses, as documented on “vmmcproject (dot) org.)
I’m sure the anti-FGM campaigners and survivors I described are disgusted by this double-standard, particularly on the part of Americans. But to say they’d be disgusted at you would be an understatement.
Why is it that Intactivists cannot tell the difference between a penis and a vagina? They don’t even look the same, they have completely different functions.
And they wonder why no one takes them seriously.
You sure it’s “intactivists” that have this issue? I’ve lost track of the number of times I’ve seen people who, when discussing FGM, say things like “the male equivalent of FGM would be cutting off the head of the penis/cutting off the entire penis/castration” and other similar claims, often revolving around basically treating the clitoris as the literal female equivalent of the penis. They’re anatomically and scientifically illiterate in the extreme, especially the “castration” one.
When “intactivists” compare the penis and vagina in this way, it’s more than anything to highlight the double standard that exists on female vs. male circumcision. Which, beyond the moronic comparisons anti-FGM activism has given us, amounts to “Every part of a girl’s genitals is essential and has absolutely no medical benefit when removed. Boys on the other hand have a piece of their genitals- the foreskin- that’s beyond useless and it’s ok to remove it as soon as they’re born on the basis of minor medical benefits.” That’s what you mean, right?
Most of the world doesn’t circumcise and the US stands close to alone in the developed world in it’s practice of circumcision. Throughout this decade, there’s been heavy legal, public and medical opposition to circumcision in northern european countries, and calls to ban it, which have only really been stopped by religious outcry. There’s growing pressure and opposition to the AIDS programs in Africa, which is the only health measure circumcision has serious international support for. But nobody takes them seriously. Right.
So what about pro-circumcision fanatics like Brian Morris, who regularly proclaims the benefits of circumcision are “100 to 1” and over half of all men who aren’t circumcised will suffer inevitable health problems/death. His home country of Australia has banned circumcision in public hospitals and the infant circumcision rate hovers around 10%, of which many are from muslims and other minorities. A poll in 2012 found half of all Australian doctors found circumcision to be “abuse.” I’d bet most of them would also consider him a deranged lunatic.
And he’s a member of your group. You can go on his Facebook profile right now and see he likes a page entitled “Circumsexual Pride”, a term used by actual circumcision fetishists. It’s been up there since 2014. Do the parents in your group know about this? Or all of the other evidence of his fetishistic interest in circumcision?
You sure it’s “intactivists” that have this issue? I’ve lost track of the number of times I’ve seen people who, when discussing FGM, say things like “the male equivalent of FGM would be cutting off the head of the penis/cutting off the entire penis/castration” and other similar claims, often revolving around basically treating the clitoris as the literal female equivalent of the penis. They’re anatomically and scientifically illiterate in the extreme, especially the “castration” one. But people- including lawmakers and politicians- have taken these inane comparisons seriously for years now. Along with all sorts of other extreme claims about the damage caused by FGM that put the “117 deaths per year” figure to shame.
When “intactivists” compare the penis and vagina in this way, it’s more than anything to highlight the double standard that exists on female vs. male circumcision. Which, beyond the moronic comparisons anti-FGM activism has given us, amounts to “Every part of a girl’s genitals is essential and has absolutely no medical benefit when removed. Boys on the other hand have a piece of their genitals- the foreskin- that’s beyond useless and it’s ok to remove it as soon as they’re born on the basis of minor medical benefits.” That’s what you mean, right?
Most of the world doesn’t circumcise and the US stands close to alone in the developed world in it’s practice of circumcision. Throughout this decade, there’s been heavy legal, public and medical opposition to circumcision in northern european countries, and calls to ban it, which have only really been stopped by religious outcry. There’s growing pressure and opposition to the AIDS programs in Africa, which is the only health measure circumcision has serious international support for. But nobody takes them seriously. Right.
So what about pro-circumcision fanatics like Brian Morris, who regularly proclaims the benefits of circumcision are “100 to 1” and over half of all men who aren’t circumcised will suffer inevitable health problems/death. His home country of Australia has banned circumcision in public hospitals and the infant circumcision rate hovers around 10%, of which many are from muslims and other minorities. A poll in 2012 found half of all Australian doctors found circumcision to be “abuse.” I’d bet most of them would also consider him a deranged lunatic.
And he’s a member of your group. You can go on his Facebook profile right now and see he likes a page entitled “Circumsexual Pride”, a term used by actual circumcision f*tishists. It’s been up there since 2014. Do the parents in your group know about this? Or all of the other evidence of his f*tishistic interest in circumcision?
You sure it’s “intactivists” that have this issue? I’ve lost track of the number of times I’ve seen people who, when discussing FGM, say things like “the male equivalent of FGM would be cutting off the head of the p*nis/cutting off the entire p*nis/castration” and other similar claims, often revolving around basically treating the clitoris as the literal female equivalent of the penis. They’re anatomically and scientifically illiterate in the extreme, especially the “castration” one. But people- including lawmakers and politicians- have taken these inane comparisons seriously for years now. Along with all sorts of other extreme claims about the damage caused by FGM that put the “117 deaths per year” figure to shame.
When “intactivists” compare the penis and vagina in this way, it’s more than anything to highlight the double standard that exists on female vs. male circumcision. Which, beyond the moronic comparisons anti-FGM activism has given us, amounts to “Every part of a girl’s genitals is essential and has absolutely no medical benefit when removed. Boys on the other hand have a piece of their genitals- the foreskin- that’s beyond useless and it’s ok to remove it as soon as they’re born on the basis of minor medical benefits.” That’s what you mean, right?
Most of the world doesn’t circumcise and the US stands close to alone in the developed world in it’s practice of circumcision. Throughout this decade, there’s been heavy legal, public and medical opposition to circumcision in northern european countries, and calls to ban it, which have only really been stopped by religious outcry. There’s growing pressure and opposition to the AIDS programs in Africa, which is the only health measure circumcision has serious international support for. But nobody takes them seriously. Right.
So what about pro-circumcision fanatics like Brian Morris, who regularly proclaims the benefits of circumcision are “100 to 1” and over half of all men who aren’t circumcised will suffer inevitable health problems/death. His home country of Australia has banned circumcision in public hospitals and the infant circumcision rate hovers around 10%, of which many are from muslims and other minorities. A poll in 2012 found half of all Australian doctors found circumcision to be “abuse.” I’d bet most of them would also consider him a deranged lunatic.
And he’s a member of your group. You can go on his Facebook profile right now and see he likes a page entitled “Circumsexual Pride”, a term used by actual circumcision f*tishists. It’s been up there since 2014. Do the parents in your group know about this? Or all of the other evidence of his f*tishistic interest in circumcision?
Exactly.
What’s extreme is thinking it’s OK to routinely mutilate the genitalia of non-consenting people.
Boo hop.
Boo hoo. The child abusers are getting death threats. Imagine my shock.