Originally Posted by Houdini
I am still grappling with the idea that a person can know all the reasons not to circ and then still decide to circ. Maybe in their inner circle there are several males who have had complications from being left intact. Maybe....they only know one. That is their reference point and I can't make the jump the they aren't doing what they believe to be in the best interest of their child. It doesn't make them ignorant to the information....just going off their own experiences. It doesn't make their experiences any less real to them. I get that it isn't necessary the right decision, but from their vantage point it is for them.
I can't even blame society or anything else really for my boys being circ'd. I just went with what was done. I never even thought to question it. I know that gives me the lack of information excuse, but I don't think that really matters.
Can a person really know all the reasons not to circ and still find a reason to do so? ITA that parents who circ typically do think they are doing what is best for their children, but there is some ignorance involved in making a decision like this based on anecdotes (whether a circ horror story or a foreskin horror story!).
I don't know if you are trying to decide whether to condemn the parents making that choice because they have had an experience that: made them NOT really believe the information on the health and cleanliness of an intact penis (properly cared for) -OR- Or they didn't REALLY have that much info, and the hearsay or anecdote filled in the gaps -OR- they think it is a two-sided issue and both sides can be right so they just go with their feelings. These situations are plenty common. What you describe, about one man having complications "because he was left intact" is probably a misinterpretation because the complications were most likely not "caused" by having a foreskin--therefore it is ignorance. Are you trying to decide whether those who have some access to info but choose to rely on less valid or less definitive info are committing abuse in a criminal sense or near criminal sense? I don't think they need to be condemend for what they think, though their thinking is definitely flawed and unfortunately the childern pay dearly while the adults just think they are having "differences of opinion".
So if circ is described as abuse, I definitely agree and have called it that myself. The society unfortunately does bear the blame, as a whole we are letting all these boys down because we
can't get it together enough to take this damage seriously and to protect them. Calling it abuse doesn't mean we have to point fingers and figure out which people are more guilty than others of doing it on purpose. As a whole we should know better because we DO know better, but how does a whole society really learn something like this? Too slowly... SIGH And how to learn it as a society without being perceived as massively anti-semitic?
There are a lot of people going around thinking circ is "doing the right thing" for so many reasons and their intentions are of course good, yet I believe it is ultimately a one-sided issue without any valid "pro-RIC" arguments in existence. The majority of folks haven't even begun to believe this is a serious issue--it is treated very casually by most. That still shocks me. And that casualness is why a little bit of hearsay can seal a decision. Or an uncertain parent just goes along with a perceived norm, without much worrying about it:
"Hi I'm your nurse for today, your baby's doing great, we can cut off a bit of his penis now if you like-- whadda you say?"