Quote:
Originally Posted by Haselnuss  Hm, I suppose that makes sense. I wonder, then, how female circ managed to die out...
|
I suspect there were several reasons. First, female circumcision had no previous history and thus no advocates. It also has to be taken into account that a female who was circumcised would not be obvious so there would be no awareness of it.
Quote:
| surely it could have been justified by absurd medical reasons, just as male circ was, |
It was justified by the exact same bogus medical reasons and in countries where it is still practiced, the justifications are the exact same as for male circumcision. It's interesting that every area that practices female circumcision also practices male circumcision.
Quote:
| would have made the doctors a few bucks, |
There is little doubt this is one of the driving forces in both.
Quote:
| and would have had the same momentum at a certain point (mothers insisting daughters have it done because they did, etc). |
The problem with this is that many women who have been circumcised do not know that they have been circumcised. This is the case when they have been circumcised as infants or very young children. There is a woman who is very active in the intactivist movement who only discovered her circumcision as an adult as a result of her involvement in the intactivist movement. Imagine her surprise!
Quote:
| Then again, although male circ here has its roots in the victorian era, it doesn't really take off until the 20th century, IIRC... so the real trigger for its popularity has to be later. |
Actually, it grew relatively quickly from the begining for such a thing. The reason for its popularity appears to be a version of "keeping up with the Joneses." During the 19th century and early 20th century, there were very few hospitals and the few that did exist were in large cities. Only upwardly mobile parents in cities gave birth in hospitals. The rest birthed at home with midwives in attendance if anyone at all. Most of these children were not exposed to doctors for years if they were born healthy.
Because of this, the perception became that if a male was not circumcised, he was born to poor redneck country parents. If he was circumcised, it was assumed he was born to prosperous urban parents. Also during this time, African American males typically were not circumcised because the doctors doubted they would be paid for the circumcision or the birth costs. Medicaid did away with this in the mid 1960's and made circumcision available to both poor parents and African American parents so the distinction disappeared. In fact, by the mid 1980's, African American circumcisions surpassed circumcision in other groups as a percentage and still exceeds the circumcision rates of European Americans. The perception is begining to change to one that circumcision is something that poorer uneducated parents do.
Frank
