Joined
·
68 Posts
Once in a while I'll surf the net with the word 'circumcision' typed into my browser, just to see if anything new has come along worth noting as an intactivist.
On my most recent foray into this topic, I came across a site in which an obviously loving father talks of his son's birth, and relates how his baby was born lacking the little dent under his nose. It was a rare genetic omission, new in the personal experiences of the hospital delivery staff, and much was made of him having a birth defect.
The father then went on to write about the infant's circumcision occurring soon after, and my biggest thought was, "OK, so you comment on your son's 'birth defect' of lacking the dent under his nose, something he 'should' have been born with, something he lacked strictly by chance of nature, but then you choose to have another totally normal bodily part, his foreskin, sliced away, to create in effect the condition of having no foreskin, which if it had been absent at his birth, would in itself have been a birth defect."
It led to me thinking not only about how asinine circumcision is, but of the nature of "defects" in the human body, those that are accidental and those which humans create. This father, no doubt a good man, instructed a doctor to remove a normal anatomical feature, yet considered the absence of another a "defect."
It left me shaking my head.
On my most recent foray into this topic, I came across a site in which an obviously loving father talks of his son's birth, and relates how his baby was born lacking the little dent under his nose. It was a rare genetic omission, new in the personal experiences of the hospital delivery staff, and much was made of him having a birth defect.
The father then went on to write about the infant's circumcision occurring soon after, and my biggest thought was, "OK, so you comment on your son's 'birth defect' of lacking the dent under his nose, something he 'should' have been born with, something he lacked strictly by chance of nature, but then you choose to have another totally normal bodily part, his foreskin, sliced away, to create in effect the condition of having no foreskin, which if it had been absent at his birth, would in itself have been a birth defect."
It led to me thinking not only about how asinine circumcision is, but of the nature of "defects" in the human body, those that are accidental and those which humans create. This father, no doubt a good man, instructed a doctor to remove a normal anatomical feature, yet considered the absence of another a "defect."
It left me shaking my head.
