3 ms·

There is also the aspect of who has a dog in the fight and skin in the game. When you have Americans telling Africans to get themselves circumcised you do have

There is also the aspect of who has a dog in the fight and skin in the game. When you have Americans telling Africans to get themselves circumcised you do have to wonder what is really going on, particularly when there is this dubious level of 'science'. In the U.S. there is always the profit motive. Hence male circumcision is sold to parents as hygienic and beneficial, they go along with it and the hospital makes some money, everyone getting bonuses except for the baby boy. To contrast with this profit-motive-situation you have places like the UK where healthcare is provided by the government - e.g. the NHS. The hospital has no financial incentive to circumcise as many boys as possible, doing so would be a cost, not a profitable thing, so it doesn't happen. Therefore the population ends up being un-circumcised as a general rule. By adulthood men have had long enough to rationalise with what happened to their foreskin. If it has been removed then they tend to want this for others including their own boys. Meanwhile, those with intact foreskin don't talk about such matters in public as they know that open discussion will deeply hurt someone in the room who has been circumcised. I think that this experiment to circumcise millions of African men for their own good would have been easier to get to the bottom of if everyone involved had to explain their viewpoint in just their 'birthday suit'.

dane-pgp 8y ago
> everyone getting bonuses except for the baby boy. The baby boy may not get a bonus, but he does leave a tip.
isomorph 8y ago
True, regarding the UK. There are some complex dynamics at work 1. a conflict of interest when there is a financial incentive to do a surgery 2. a pattern of doctors / father who are circumcised feeling the need to promote it to others 3. an issue where men circumcised as infants are never approached for follow-up consent by healthcare professionals, so never know what happened 4. an issue where men circumcised as infants know what happened but rationalise it
telchar 8y ago
You can add to that a large part of why circumcision was promoted in the US originally was to control men's sexuality (see: Dr. Kellogg[1] - incidentally he also promoted using acid to circumcise girls). You can bet that the idea of desexualizing African men appeals to a certain subset of fearful white Americans. That may be an inflammatory statement but if one looks at some of the more extreme corners of internet opinion it's not hard to believe. That said I wouldn't expect most people who the idea appeals to to admit it, but given that science is obviously not on the side of those promoting circumcision one has to look for possible motivation elsewhere. [1] https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/moral-landscapes/201109/circumcision-social-sexual-psychological-realities https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/moral-landscapes/201...
- Retra 8y ago
  You are attributing to malice what could easily be attributed to stupidity.
  - telchar 8y ago
    It's entirely fair to consider the possibility of malice as a subconscious motivation among some people. The very frequent blind application of Hanlon's razor seems to me to be almost worse than ignoring it entirely.
    - Retra 8y ago
      Yes, but what motivates those people isn't relevant unless they're the ones making the decisions.
spamizbad 8y ago
For what it's worth, circumcision is slowly declining in the US[1]. We did not circumcise our son when he was born. The hospital asked us, we said no. No questions asked. We came fully prepared to justify our decision, worried that doctors would perform it by default or try to guilt us into it to avoid the spread of STDs. [1] https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/08/22/circumcision-infants-hospitals/2681253/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/08/22/circum...
- Theodores 8y ago
  Well that is terrifying, the fact you have to think ahead like that, fearing what you might have to say, assuming a default. Since it is a binary option with moral overtones and since your boy will eventually compare notes with his contemporaries you could gift him a story that sidesteps the matter. The story might not be grounded in truth any more than Santa Claus is. The mythical backstory could be that it was decided on a coin toss, heads it stayed on, tails it came off. Maybe embellish it so that the doctor, his mum and yourself all had coins, it being a 'best of three' with the doctor calling 'tails', you calling 'heads' and his mum having the deciding coin. Such a white lie can be useful for him when he needs to dig himself out of a conversational hole when he gets older so as to not have that awkward moment with a religious workmate/sister's boyfriend etc., even if by then he knows the story is a myth.

dane-pgp 8y ago

> everyone getting bonuses except for the baby boy. The baby boy may not get a bonus, but he does leave a tip.

isomorph 8y ago

True, regarding the UK. There are some complex dynamics at work 1. a conflict of interest when there is a financial incentive to do a surgery 2. a pattern of doctors / father who are circumcised feeling the need to promote it to others 3. an issue where men circumcised as infants are never approached for follow-up consent by healthcare professionals, so never know what happened 4. an issue where men circumcised as infants know what happened but rationalise it

telchar 8y ago

You can add to that a large part of why circumcision was promoted in the US originally was to control men's sexuality (see: Dr. Kellogg[1] - incidentally he also promoted using acid to circumcise girls). You can bet that the idea of desexualizing African men appeals to a certain subset of fearful white Americans. That may be an inflammatory statement but if one looks at some of the more extreme corners of internet opinion it's not hard to believe. That said I wouldn't expect most people who the idea appeals to to admit it, but given that science is obviously not on the side of those promoting circumcision one has to look for possible motivation elsewhere. [1] https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/moral-landscapes/201109/circumcision-social-sexual-psychological-realities https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/moral-landscapes/201...

Retra 8y ago
You are attributing to malice what could easily be attributed to stupidity.
- telchar 8y ago
  It's entirely fair to consider the possibility of malice as a subconscious motivation among some people. The very frequent blind application of Hanlon's razor seems to me to be almost worse than ignoring it entirely.
  - Retra 8y ago
    Yes, but what motivates those people isn't relevant unless they're the ones making the decisions.

spamizbad 8y ago

For what it's worth, circumcision is slowly declining in the US[1]. We did not circumcise our son when he was born. The hospital asked us, we said no. No questions asked. We came fully prepared to justify our decision, worried that doctors would perform it by default or try to guilt us into it to avoid the spread of STDs. [1] https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/08/22/circumcision-infants-hospitals/2681253/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/08/22/circum...

Theodores 8y ago
Well that is terrifying, the fact you have to think ahead like that, fearing what you might have to say, assuming a default. Since it is a binary option with moral overtones and since your boy will eventually compare notes with his contemporaries you could gift him a story that sidesteps the matter. The story might not be grounded in truth any more than Santa Claus is. The mythical backstory could be that it was decided on a coin toss, heads it stayed on, tails it came off. Maybe embellish it so that the doctor, his mum and yourself all had coins, it being a 'best of three' with the doctor calling 'tails', you calling 'heads' and his mum having the deciding coin. Such a white lie can be useful for him when he needs to dig himself out of a conversational hole when he gets older so as to not have that awkward moment with a religious workmate/sister's boyfriend etc., even if by then he knows the story is a myth.