He only cries because we strapped him down - VENT - Page 3

[Revamp]

Originally Posted by aira

Absolutely! Excellent point.

Thanks!

Originally Posted by QueenOfThePride

Do veterinary technicians get to refuse to participate in certain job activities on moral grounds? I don't want to participate in dewclaw removal or tail docking of puppies, but I don't think I would find a job if I said that right up front. And I could see getting fired for it too.

I am big into animal rights but even I feel an urge to point out the difference between puppies and infant human beings.

[Ruthla]

Um, so it's perfectly OK for a baby to scream because he's being strapped down?? Like that somehow makes it all better?

If that was the only issue, couldn't they have held him for the circ instead of strapping him down? Or had his parents hold him?

[Pandora114]

Originally Posted by Ruthla

Um, so it's perfectly OK for a baby to scream because he's being strapped down?? Like that somehow makes it all better?

If that was the only issue, couldn't they have held him for the circ instead of strapping him down? Or had his parents hold him?

Because Ruth, residents would have to practice too...

and well..that's not the most...wonderful thing to watch as described by a PP.

If a parent, TRULY KNEW what was going on during a medical circumcision, they'd grab their baby and run.

also, Dr's have been known to discourage momma and dad from being there.

Mabe it has to do with the fact that the Dr knows the parents would have an irrisistable urge to punch his/her lights out...

I dunno...

Medical RIC and Religious RIC = Two totally different beasts...same results, different modus operendi

[Ruthla]

What I'm saying is that the "He didn't cry from the circ, he only cried from being strapped down" line is meaningless to me. The baby shouldn't have been treated in a way that resulted in his screaming, period.

[Revamp]

Originally Posted by Ruthla

What I'm saying is that the "He didn't cry from the circ, he only cried from being strapped down" line is meaningless to me. The baby shouldn't have been treated in a way that resulted in his screaming, period.

They need something to sugar up the fact that they are unneccessarily slicing of a body part with a knife.

[Pandora114]

Originally Posted by Ruthla

What I'm saying is that the "He didn't cry from the circ, he only cried from being strapped down" line is meaningless to me. The baby shouldn't have been treated in a way that resulted in his screaming, period.

nope, but the medical community has long proven it's disdain for male infants by how they have been treating them.

You know, the whole pressuring to circ, no pain relief, assembly line circs...

[Revamp]

Originally Posted by Pandora114

nope, but the medical community has long proven it's disdain for male infants by how they have been treating them.

You know, the whole pressuring to circ, no pain relief, assembly line circs...

Personally I would see it more as a disregard. As I said before, it might be Feminism's fault it is continuing, I am not sure, but I know Puritanism started the whole damn mess.

[aira]

Feminism is such a strange beast.

I'll preface this post by telling that I doubt I will be able to finish my thoughts satisfactorily... DS will recruit me to play with trains in a few minutes.

I have yet to agree about anything regarding feminism with any feminist I've met, or with any feminist organization.

Does that mean I am pro- oppressive patriarchy? Not a chance.

I just don't understand why the need for the false dichotomy. But I see those everywhere, and I never understand the weird need for neat little black-and-white thinking.

I would consider myself a feminist. I'm very interested in seeing women live our fully realized potentials both as a whole and as individuals. But that means that to do that - to uphold my ideals - I will honor men as my counterpart, and love them for what they are and do. And that I not only want, but will work for men to have the same.

Our strengths are not the same, but we (and our potentials) are inextricably linked. Any "feminism" that misses that point is fundamentally doomed to harm everyone.

[Revamp]

Originally Posted by aira

Feminism is such a strange beast.

I'll preface this post by telling that I doubt I will be able to finish my thoughts satisfactorily... DS will recruit me to play with trains in a few minutes.

I have yet to agree about anything regarding feminism with any feminist I've met, or with any feminist organization.

Does that mean I am pro- oppressive patriarchy? Not a chance.

I just don't understand why the need for the false dichotomy. But I see those everywhere, and I never understand the weird need for neat little black-and-white thinking.

I could consider myself a feminist. I'm very interested in seeing women live our fully realized potentials both as a whole and as individuals. But that means that to do that - to uphold my ideals - I will honor men as my counterpart, and love them for what they are and do. And that I not only want, but will work for men to have the same.

Our strengths are not the same, but we (and our potentials) are inextricably linked. Any "feminism" that misses that point is fundamentally doomed to harm everyone.

I agree, although I agree with plenty of feminist though.

I just wish that there had been a movement called something like "Equalism", although I am aware that in some ways they needed to be the way they were, if only to make any headway. The Equalists would probably just have been ignored.

All the same I do blame that large spout of phallus-bashing that occured (and still seems to occur) towards the more radical edges of the movement for the current situation, at least partially. Although the real blame lies with those who did not hate just men, or even the penis but all form of pleasure. Puritanism is a far from benign force, at least feminism had the right motivation, just with somewhat lacking methodology.

I could be wrong.

Actually I do not know if I even have a clue what I am talking about. All I know is that if you suggest slicing parts of the vagina people invariably tighten right up, but the male genitals are somehow seen as less valuable and their mutilation less worthy of horror.

Can you imagine the same amount of jokes that are made in the pop culture about circumcision being made about FGM?

[pdx.mothernurture]

Originally Posted by Ruthla

If that was the only issue, couldn't they have held him for the circ instead of strapping him down? Or had his parents hold him?

With all due respect Ruthla, I don't think that pinning a baby down with your hands while he's cut much kindler/gentler. I think the whole point is, he wasn't just crying because he was strapped down. IMO, having the parents do it would just make the betrayal all the more intimate.

Jen

[Revamp]

Originally Posted by pdx.mothernurture

With all due respect Ruthla, I don't think that pinning a baby down with your hands while he's cut much kindler/gentler. I think the whole point is, he wasn't just crying because he was strapped down. IMO, having the parents do it would just make the betrayal all the more intimate.

It would make them realise how extreme their actions are though.

I doubt that that many would go through with it: just look at all the cultural pressure required to make many Jewish women go through with a Bris. I expect circ rates would plummet even faster than they already are...

[Sijae]

Originally Posted by Ruthla

What I'm saying is that the "He didn't cry from the circ, he only cried from being strapped down" line is meaningless to me. The baby shouldn't have been treated in a way that resulted in his screaming, period.

Kind of funny to be so compassionate about a few minutes of being restrained and yet be unapologetic about circumcising your son. Seems kind of hypocritical to speak up about the rights of an infant to not be scared or uncomfortable for a few transitory minutes and then do something that effects the rest of the childs life in a negative way.

[aira]

Revamp, I agree with your take.

I live in the hotseat for radical feminism, and debate women I know on a fairly regular basis about the really fringe (sometimes dangerous) things they do in the name of sufferage - lapses in judgement for the sake of making a point...

So the issue is near and dear to me.

[Revamp]

Originally Posted by aira

Revamp, I agree with your take.

I live in the hotseat for radical feminism, and debate women I know on a fairly regular basis about the really fringe (sometimes dangerous) things they do in the name of sufferage - lapses in judgement for the sake of making a point...

So the issue is near and dear to me.

Like circumcision?

[aira]

Mai, oui!

[Revamp]

It was a pity really, they did gain a lot of ground but at such cost...

[Velvet005]

Originally Posted by gabysmom617

oh gawd.

i've just given my precious intact baby boy a hug. so glad that i educated myself enough to keep him away from such torture.

me too. I feel like crying. I'm sorry you had to listen to that. How sad. I'm glad to told them you weren't having any part of it. Good for you.

[Islay]

I won't press this again, but for the moment I must refer back to my earlier post (36) and add a little more.

Normalcy breeds acceptance, even in the face of injustice. Acceptance desensitises. If governments allow immoral/unethical practices, those who perform them are persuaded that what they do is at best acceptable and at worst of no consequence. This is embodied in the very phrase: Routine Infant Circumcision.

There will be those who will reach the end of their lives persuading themselves that what they did was right. But I do believe that many (perhaps most) will eventually deeply regret their participation and even become active opponents. Their intial involvment may well have been something as straightforward as 'keeping their jobs'; yet, without the numbing effect of frequent exposure and participation, their very humanity would not allow them to continue.

If we can accept (as I believe we should) that loving parents will nonetheless circumcise their male infants - albeit misguidedly, then surely we can give the same consideration to those who perform or assist in the act itself?

"There, but for the grace of God, go I."

Christopher