The justification rotates. The surgery stays the same. If that single pattern is what you take from this essay, it's enough. It applies far beyond circumcision.
One commenter tried discussing male genital cutting with a researcher studying FGM. She kept changing the subject. That deflection *is* the subject. The moral clarity we bring to cutting girls disappears the moment the same question is asked about boys. Not because the anatomy is identical—but because the ethical principle is. You don't remove healthy tissue from someone who can't consent. That holds regardless of sex, or it holds for neither.
A 68-year-old man writes that he remains incredibly angry about what was stolen from him. Another writes "Whatever!?" Both circumcised. The distance between those two responses is not evidence that the procedure is harmless. It's evidence that people process violation differently—and that some never examine what was done to them because the cost of examining it is too high.
The simplest question nobody in the medical literature bothers to ask: Nordic countries never adopted routine circumcision. Their health outcomes are equivalent or better. End of discussion, really. The fact that this comparison doesn't appear on page one of every policy review tells you the policy isn't being driven by health outcomes.
Several comments moved into religious origins, ancient history, tantra. The origins matter to some. But the present reality needs no historical framework to evaluate. Healthy tissue. No consent. No medical necessity. A fee collected. That sequence is sufficient.
Someone asked me to name one risk. Babies do die from circumcision. The number is imprecise because the deaths get attributed to other causes—a pattern that will be familiar to anyone who has looked closely at how infant vaccine deaths get classified. Different practice, same accounting trick. When the institution performing the procedure is also the institution recording the cause of death, the numbers will always look reassuring.
Home birth came up. It deserves more than a passing mention. The most reliable way to protect a newborn from unnecessary procedures is to not deliver them inside the institution that profits from those procedures. This isn't anti-medicine. It's recognizing that incentive structures produce predictable outcomes.
The conformity point is the one that extends furthest. Circumcision became unquestionable not because the evidence was overwhelming, but because questioning it threatened revenue, professional identity, and the psychological comfort of parents who'd already made the decision. That mechanism—where a practice becomes its own justification—is the engine running most of what I write about.
Thank you so much for writing this. The slicing off of the most sensitive area of the baby has effects and they are not uniform or predictable. For myself it has caused confusion as a boy (why is mine different to theirs?), concern as I got older? - why would they do this? And many other feelings from resentment, ambiguity to outrage. I honestly think that it has just been allowed with zero pushback reminds me of how messed up our culture is. That women, men and SJW's everywhere don't acknowledge it is very telling.
I personally have been mocked when mentioning it even in very neutral language and tone and I ain't no fragile male. I'm a very physical and capable kinda dude. I'm not looking to play alpha victim but if we can't even discuss it then what the fuck?
Male genital mutilation at birth is the first and most profound submission to state authority. Aside from all the medical claptrap and justifications, it is psychological damage and social damage in terms of healthy sexuality and manhood. I tried discussing this with a woman who was making a study of FGM in the Middle East, telling her that circumcision was MGM. She kept changing the subject or dismissing my points entirely. I suspect this attitude is widespread.
I beg to differ about psychological and damage. This is imaginary on your part, a prejudice. If you don’t like the idea, fine. That is your right. But don’t presume to tell people what their reality is. Also, “mutilation” is a biased term. Is tattooing muiltation? Are pierced ears or other piercings mutilation? Are tribal marks? Plastic surgery? Removal or insertion of hair follicles? Surgical removal of fat? In the US circumcision is most definitely not state authority. I have no idea where you are talking about.
Agreed! No way should it be imposed on an adult, the same as for any medical procedure. For babies it is the parents' decision, as with all medical decisions.
Would you give a tattoo to an infant? The point is babies can’t consent to body parts being removed for no reason. If you want to get yourself circumcised at the same age that you can get a tattoo, then go ahead and fuck it up. Doing that to a brand new infant is psychologically damaging, whether you recognize an infant’s right to its own entire body or not.
Your defensiveness comes from your own brain recognizing that you have no choice but to accept the fact that your genitals were permanently changed before you ever got the chance to experience what they naturally felt like. There’s nothing you can do to undo the choice you didn’t get to make for your penis, and that must be a devastating feeling. I would be in denial too, if i found out something like that!
The mutilation which we call “circumcision” was first adopted by a Roman general.
The practice was sold to the slaves, on the pretense of hygiene.
On the other hand, the General wrote that the true reason was to make the mutilated “semi” or “not complete ” or “not full” and of no interest for the gods, which supposedly, would look away from the suffering of the slaves.
Following the General’s declaration, the General was demoted and the practice outlawed, as the Roman motto became ” mens sana in corpore sano” “a sane mind in a sane body”.
The trauma bonding practice was later adopted by the infanticide cult of the jews, which stoped demanding the murder of the first born, and begun to force parents to mutilate their children.
The so called “medical science” behind the mutilation practice, was and is used to justify the immoral religious practice.
Circumcision is a crime against humanity because beside mutilating its direct subjects, it divides humanity into sane, and trauma bonded individuals which will consequently feel and be different from the natural people.
Here a story which precedes the invention of the trauma bonding religions and which provides the original meaning of words used by religions to frighten their subjects and to demonize the ancient cults of veneration of life. “Sex”
Sol Sön: I'm moved to apologize – once removed – for the previous reply I see to your comment.
I know how 110th feels, have felt somewhat the same myself, in the 30+ years since the trauma of my circumcision (at birth in 1943) rose to the surface of my mind and devastated my life – resulting in chronic illnesses of both body and mind (including a lot of work to avoid suiciding) that have occupied most of my life energy to this day.
However, it is my understanding that giving oneself over to raging anger is not healthy either. I've been exploring the subject of circumcision in depth since 1993, have learned a lot, have written a lot, have been ridiculed, abused, ignored.
But as the Buddha says, that's the nature of this world; such things happen. Having chosen to take birth here, this is part of the deal. (As a teacher I follow says, our problem is that we don't read the fine print.) My first job is to keep myself on an even keel.
But your comment includes a number of assertions I've never heard before. Who was this "Roman general" who you claim initiated the practice of male genital mutilation in the Empire – and when?
From my (so far preliminary) studies, it seems the practice first appeared in ancient Egypt (don't know when), but was then adopted by the Levite tribe (the only "Jewish" tribe that was "bound in Egypt"), which then conquered the Israelite tribes in Canaan, and forced on them the worship of their G-d יהוה (YHVH, whom Christians worship as "Yahweh"), including the "sacrament" of circumcision – which as you say was the "kinder, gentler" form of Yahweh's original demand of sacrifice of first born sons.
All of which happened ca. 1000 BCE, long before Rome was an empire, or even a republic.
My primary source for the history has been the work of Laurent Guyénot on the history of Christianity and Judaism, which can be found both here at Substack and at Unz.com.
At this point I regard the circumcision rite as a Satanic ritual, and its adoption by the American people perhaps the most stark evidence of our apparently voluntary subjection to "our elder brothers in the Faith" and Greatest Ally. I've been writing about this piecemeal at Gab, hope someday to put it all together. As my health improves.
I’m afraid I can not give you a date or a name yet, for what I remember it was some 80 bc, but I could be wrong , and could have happened before.
I first heard about it by my grandfather 50 years ago, and consequently did some research on the topic approximately 45 years ago.
some 20 years ago I researched it again, and I remember that I could only find traces of the story from Italian sites.
About dates given to our history, they are anyhow all false, as history is constantly being rewritten to justify the absurd narratives of the time.
I’m sorry not be able to give you more specific dates or names, but I don’t have here my research papers, what I can tell you is that the modern history, especially the one of religions, has been rewritten around the year 1350.
According to an egregious historian with which I had the fortune of meeting several decades ago, the first case of alteration of religious scripts dates to the late 13 century “1280?”, and begun with a controversial jewish scriber which rewrote Greek history transforming into “mythology”
His writings, first smeared and ridiculed “as they should have been ”, became adopted around 1350, and with it, a new era of censure and of rewriting of history which lasted to the present day.
About your condition, what you should always keep in mind, is that contrary to what you are made to believe, aside from when you may go crazy for some reasons or other, it is not the others who look at you in a strange way or have prejudice against you as person.
On the other hand, the indoctrination to the false myths of religion and the constant propaganda designed to make you feel hated because of your belief or physical condition, are the only thing which you should keep in mind in order to realize the true deception”religion” as the bloody cult is are designed to isolate you from the rest and to make you believe that who is not of your tribe, hates you.
We are all one way or the other victims of circumstances, it is when we are able to understand this basic fact that we can win over our fears and prejudices and see each other for what we truly are.
About christianity and judaism, christianity had always condemned judaism and the barbaric practice of sex mutilation or circumcision, read the Latin version if you are truly interested in it,.
Also Jesus was not circumcised, it is only the so called “Protestant which believe that nonsense.
Real Catholics or christians don’t circumcise their children.
Anyhow, once I find my old papers I will post more on the topic.
Jesus wasn’t circumcised? lol did you ask Him? Good lord, He was born into an observant Jewish family. It takes a lot of Jew hatred to come up with the your fanciful take.
He was mocked as one by soldiers which killed him which called him the king of the jews.
Aside from that, he was a Palestinian and a Gnostic follower which worshiped life, not a death and ritual murder or children mutilator worshipper.
The jews are the ones which betrayed and killed him.
About my hate for the jews, no, I don’t believe in hate, I understand brainwashed, immoral and dangerous people when I meet them and although judaism is in my opinion the sickest of the bloody religions, I don’t label people for their beliefs.
A religion founded by a sadomasochistic pedophile which mutilated its own sex and the one of children, has nothing to do with spirituality or with God.
Furthermore, I am no christian hider, drinking the blood and eating the flash of the savior is my language called “spiritual cannibalism”.
Anyhow, back to the topic of this article, circumcision is a bloody mutilation, crime against humanity, and an horrific atrocity which “aside from extremely rare cases of sexual deformity” brings no benefit but on the contrary, permanently damaging its victims.
Nope the the Roman Catholics never did, in fact they even tried to forbid the Latin mass which is filled with warnings about the devious , greedy, discriminatory, and criminal ways of the jews.
What you call catholic is not Roman hence not catholic at all.
Catholicism does not allow the mutilation of the infants or “circumcision”,
Nor it celebrates it.
And no, for Roman christians Jesus was not circumcised!
Christians baptize, jews mutilate.
Search “Michelangelo’s moses” to see how even him is depicted as demon with horns.
Real christianity does not celebrate circumcision, zionism does and zionism, just like circumcision , are not Christian values, they are monstrosities designed to destroy it.
This piece lays out something simple but hard to ignore: the reason for routine circumcision keeps changing, but the surgery never does. Over the last 150 years it’s been promoted as a cure or prevention for paralysis, syphilis, cancer, UTIs, and HIV—each claim rising with authority, then weakening over time, and quietly being replaced by the next one. That pattern alone raises a fair question about whether the evidence is really driving the practice.
It also highlights something most people never hear: the foreskin is not just extra skin—it’s functional tissue with nerve endings and a role in protection and sensation. Many developed countries reviewed the same data and chose not to make routine infant circumcision standard care. Regardless of where someone lands on the issue, this essay makes a strong case that parents deserve clear, complete information and honest risk-benefit discussion before making a permanent decision for their child.
Obvious benefits’ is a claim, not evidence. Any irreversible body modification should meet a very high bar — especially when done to someone who cannot consent. The real question isn’t ‘can you list a theoretical benefit,’ it’s: does it justify removing healthy, functional tissue from a child who has no say in the matter?
As for risks — they’re not zero. There are immediate risks (pain, bleeding, infection, surgical complications) and long-term considerations (loss of nerve-dense tissue, altered sensitivity, scarring, psychological impact for some men later in life). Even if complications are statistically low, they’re not nonexistent — and the procedure is not medically necessary in the vast majority of cases.
Adults can choose for themselves if they want it. Doing it to infants without consent is a very different ethical question.
Read some stories of circumcisons gone wrong then. There are many! One of the more famous ones were with twin boys...one whose his penis was so damage that Dr. Love convinced the parents to repair surgically and make the boy a girl, and raise him as such. The rise of transgender fallacy was born. Sadly that BOY never felt like a girl and he eventually killed himself! In the meantime the good Dr. Love wrote and spoke everywhere he could that you can raise one gender as the other, with hormones and surgery, and they will be happier for it. Huge fail!
I believe the case you're referring to involved a Doctor John Money; I remember "Doctor Love" as a rock 'n roll tune by (the very Jewish) KISS.
A boy named David Reimer, who had a twin brother, lost his entire penis to a "botched" circumcision. Dr. Money stepped in and suggested that David be raised as a girl, and supervised the twins for years under his working premise that "gender" is a social construct. That didn't go well, as Money subjected both twins to extensive trauma and humiliation, which was likely what drove Brian to overdose on antidepressants. Two years later, David also ended his life.
Babies *do* die from circumcision. Maybe a dozen or more every year. Hard to know, since – just as with the insane "vaccination" schedule – the deaths are concealed under the rubric "crib death" and the doctors throw up their hands and look mystified.
The whole business is insane, like any other Satanic sacrament – see what's coming out nowadays about Jeffrey Epstein and his elite crowd.
Babies can die from lots of things. One of the saddest I saw was an infant who died malnourished because mom didn't want a 'fat baby' so only let the babe nurse 5 min and if still hungry gave a bottle of water flavored w 1/2oz apple juice! Sadly people are ignorant of infant needs and development, and listen to doctors who are ignorant as well. Time for changes.
And in the aftermath, betrayed by the industrial allopathic, iatrogenic system my parents trusted, and which mutilated me irrevocably in my first hours on this planet, 68 years later I remain incredibly angry about what was stolen from me. Is there any doubt why people are increasingly rejecting the allopathic system? Set a fractured bone, suture a laceration, treat a severe burn…otherwise, question everything.
Same bro. Pisses me off. Shit happens but the fucking complete lack of cultural change to openly discredit this crazy shit where you cut the end of a babies penis off before he even feels the tenderness of the mother that bore him. Insanity. Cruelty.
Even burns are treated with plants, such as aloe vera, better than any expensive pharma product. I was severely burned in my face when torch lighting an outside wood burning oven. I ran to the garden and slathered the inner gel over the affected area and, with repeated use, completely healed within 3 days.
Better yet, never enter the hospital. I was home birthed, along with my five siblings. My four children, born at home with competent midwives. My children are confidently continuing the wonderful experience, never even considering the mutilizing practice of removing any part of a body designed by our Maker.
The great thing about circumcision is that you can collect all the discarded foreskins, sew them together to make a wallet, and if you rub it, it turns into a fine piece of luggage.
when you have a religion that has foundational aspects of slaughtering every man, woman, and child, and even the sheep and goats of your enemies, as well as slaughtering animals at the altars of your temples, what better demand to make on the practitioners of that religion than to inflict terror and violence on the newborn males of that religion? Expose them to violence and terror at that tender age and they will carry that in their consciousness all their lives, and that will make it easier for them to inflict violence and death on their enemies and their animals.
yes, that used to be the belief. My brother had ingrown toenails at 2 years old. The doctor cut them out without anesthetic. He said, he won't remember it. But we do remember on a visceral level. It's in there in our consciousness. There have been men who during regression therapy remember their own circumcision and the experience was one of complete terror, this giant coming at him with a sharp knife who was going to cut off his penis or kill him. We remember, but for most it's not a conscious memory, but it's there.
IMO modern routine circumcision started with religion and ended up becoming a religion itself.
Grew up in a primarily Gentile nominally Christian population. They went to church but were not necessarily fanatical. Secular people of Luke warm enough faith. Just salt of the earth who did what was expected, meaning they followed the rules and listened to authority, IE their doctors.
Always wondered why there seemed to be almost 100% circumcision conformance in that population except (it seemed) in the post WWII immigrant refugee population. Those kids were usually different. Apparently back in Europe they hadn't gotten the memo.
Obviously my observations don't amount to "a study" but in that era there was little privacy and showers at school were not private at all. There was little privacy really and not that much modesty since most of us grew up sharing living space. No private bath and bedrooms. You don't have to do a study to notice what is "normal" in your region. Always wondered "why are Christians submitting their infants to this stuff when it clearly is not part of their religious tradition?". If you asked your elders or parents (at least when I asked them) you would get answers like "you don't want your kid to be different than the other kids". Weak BS answers like that. A little mutilation for acceptance. Same way these days we submit to disease lottery injections in order to fit in to the madness of the societies we inhabit and to be accepted as "not a kook". People will submit to all sorts of things to blend in. These days it is not uncommon to see kids let someone put a bolt in their tongue. I feel like such a girlie man when I see what people PAY to have that done to themselves to fit in. Sorry, I've had enough cows step on my feet, enough errant baseballs whack me to not need to pay some one to drive bolts through my body to get my dose of pain for acceptance. At one time just the physical demands of life had enough inherent pain that we did not need to pay someone to drive bolts through our tongues.
It all seems extreme to me. But I guess acceptance is pretty important. Not being different becomes its own religion. No one seemed to question circumcision (or vaccines)t much. Heard all the lies that surely were told to our mothers by their doctors and THEIR mothers who had been equally indoctrinated. I am sure they believed them because (here we go again) they trusted their doctors.
It was just something that was done. There seemed to be no explanation for it. But when you're in a big family and a new boy is carted home every few years you do wonder as a little kid old enough to understand some things, "why the hell did they do that to my little brother?" To a child routine circumcision seemed gratuitously cruel. Still does.
But now we have people turning a blind eye to female circumcision. Voters just can't muster the "courage" to ban it because it may mean loss of a vote and some dollars. Soon enough they could find THEIR grand children subjected to such things. Just because they found it easier and more profitable to go along to get along. Never under estimate the power of a vote and the power of power (IE money) to get otherwise "normal" people to tolerate unspeakable things.
There NEVER was a satisfactory answer. By the time my generation arrived circumcision seems to have become an established religion for many generations already.
Sounds a lot like vaccines, except vaccines didn't start with a prejudicial religious tradition that ended up looking for a "scientific" "justification". Sure, they leverage religious precepts (do it for the greater good) but vaccines were not part of an established religious practice like circumcision. I guess the bottom line is that the unethical will as readily use religion to sell us lies and product as they will use religion to sell us faith and truth. When you have a practice based in religion soon enough it can become religion itself (no one dare question it) and inevitably there's the money. If you can't question nonsense you doubly can't question enriching nonsense that may disrupt money streams. Business models depend on the practice. Just one more reliable fee that can be harvested when another innocent child is delivered. Sounds DANGEROUSLY like vaccines with slightly different evolution. BUT IN THE END the practices become religion in and of themselves because to threaten the practice threatens the money and money after all is "god".
I think they've provided airtight prof that they ARE a bunch of money hungry psychos
Certainly it wasn't the science
And by this time I think we can agree that some of the gate keeper credentialing organizations like the AMA and Pediatric associations are utter pharma captured disgraces. Those two in particular have disgraced themselves in epic fashion during COVID. STILL fighting for injections and STILL doing their best to punish honest doctors.
It took me so long to grow up and lose my trust because I grew up in what was a safe high trust decent environment where doors were left unlocked, neighbors helped each other and you knew and trusted people. So there was no reason NOT to trust.
Never even occurred to me that trust is routinely exploited AT SCALE by those institutions we are indoctrinated to trust. Not as if the AMA and Pediatric associations are selling used cars
So many things like vaccines and circumcision were ubiquitous and accepted on faith just like religion. No reason really to question them since everyone else is the same and it hasn't seemed to harm them much (it was before autism was a big thing). ALL friends neighbors relatives pretty much submitted to the same standards
Then your brand new little brother is brought home from the hospital and as a kid you experience an "Oh MY god, what did they do to him?" moment.
After that and as time goes by you realize that so much was all there to see. WE JUST DID NOT TAKE TIME TO NOTICE.
If a "trusted authority" (and the system that supports it) sends your poor innocent brother home mutilated JUST TO COLLECT THE FEES and is willing to indoctrinate all the parents "it's for his own good" JUST TO COLLECT THE FEES you start to realize
If they'll do that to helpless infants JUST TO COLLECT THE FEES (or to act on their own indoctrination) you start to realize there really is not much they WON'T do. It is not as if your infant brother is a puppy or a calf that needs an ear tag for animal husbandry purposes.
The POINTLESS routine cruelties that we don't see because we are trained NOT to see is what informs you as you mature. Some cruelties (like the physical fitness programs) have a point but surely cutting an infant's hoodie off is just POINTLESS cruelty, except for the fee, and for those who have religious ideas about it to force their system on the uniformed otherwise would not consent population.
Perhaps these things don't seem like a big deal but the big deal is it sets the stage for the next incremental insult. Like VIRTUALLY FORCING kids to take mRNA shots (particularly to go to college) then trying to spin the consequences as "mild carditis".
This is exactly right. Unfortunately kind and trusting people are the ones most likely to get hoodwinked by the psychopaths on top. They can’t even imagine committing such atrocities, and therefore can’t believe others do.
I grew up a little less trusting and more resentful of authority, so when my son was harmed (and later recovered, thank god) by vaccines it was not that hard for me to stat to see and believe what was actually going on. This also saved us from the covid propaganda.
4% of the population qualify as psychopathic. That’s 1 out of 25. Guess the prevalence in politics, business, clergy etc! Much higher. Below the psychopaths we have self serving or servile people, willing to participate in the game or at least look the other way. No wonder the world looks the way it does.
Yes. A true sense of betrayal and righteous indignation requires that you once trusted. I guess I've been cured. 🤣🤣🤨 I still get angry when things go sideways but not with the same sense of betrayal. It's more like, "I'm not surprised". I always say "I've reached Peak Soviet" because I feel that the level of distrust in that part of the world by this time is genetically embedded. Only so many government sponsored pogroms, purges wars and famines a people can survive before the deep distrust embeds at a brain stem level.
I think A LOT of people have been woken up by experiences like yours. I started out distrustful of mRNA. I went so deep in to that rabbit hole and came out distrusting the whole vaccine paradigm. A legacy I and everyone I knew MY WHOLE LIFE accepted without question. Makes you think, "what else have I missed?"
In some Tantric traditions (like Bhairawa Tantra) comes the description of a charged rajasic /fire energy during sex between two open hearted adults. Although Tantra is often thought of as a plural field of experiments in liberation, its constellation of practices always assumes female and male biological energies when describing this:
Starting from the root chakra of the male, the subtle fire travels into the sex chakra of the female (activating it), then spirals back into the third chakra of the male and then back again into the heart of the woman opening her Love center. It is then supposed to end all the way up into the crown chakras of both partners, closing the circle.
The first link up in the sex chakra is modulated though by a subtle energy node (with its own sacred syllables and astral functions), just at the level of the foreskin of the penis in the auric field, which thus gets damaged not only physically with circumcision but also at a subtle energy level.
Circumcision could then also be seen as a sort of techno magic spell, the intentional disconnect of the polarities in an inverted ritual.
The US is a nation of lab rats. Very few countries in the world allow GMO food. Could this be the reason why nobody wants our crops? Only in this country do we allow genital mutilations of infants, a procedure looking for a reason to exist. Even the eugenicists in Europe don't practice this. Betcha no country jabs an infant 77 times, now down to 11, 11 jabs too many. Just say no. Before we go preaching to Islamic countries about FGM, how about getting our own house in order first?
Juvenile genital mutilation, male or female, surgical or hormonal, is a Crime against Humanity and should be prosecuted as such. No exemptions. Minors can not consent to their own mutilation.
I have heard many women call intact penises gross or disgusting, so another benefit of keeping your sons intact is that it will keep those idiots away from them.
Author's Note
The justification rotates. The surgery stays the same. If that single pattern is what you take from this essay, it's enough. It applies far beyond circumcision.
One commenter tried discussing male genital cutting with a researcher studying FGM. She kept changing the subject. That deflection *is* the subject. The moral clarity we bring to cutting girls disappears the moment the same question is asked about boys. Not because the anatomy is identical—but because the ethical principle is. You don't remove healthy tissue from someone who can't consent. That holds regardless of sex, or it holds for neither.
A 68-year-old man writes that he remains incredibly angry about what was stolen from him. Another writes "Whatever!?" Both circumcised. The distance between those two responses is not evidence that the procedure is harmless. It's evidence that people process violation differently—and that some never examine what was done to them because the cost of examining it is too high.
The simplest question nobody in the medical literature bothers to ask: Nordic countries never adopted routine circumcision. Their health outcomes are equivalent or better. End of discussion, really. The fact that this comparison doesn't appear on page one of every policy review tells you the policy isn't being driven by health outcomes.
Several comments moved into religious origins, ancient history, tantra. The origins matter to some. But the present reality needs no historical framework to evaluate. Healthy tissue. No consent. No medical necessity. A fee collected. That sequence is sufficient.
Someone asked me to name one risk. Babies do die from circumcision. The number is imprecise because the deaths get attributed to other causes—a pattern that will be familiar to anyone who has looked closely at how infant vaccine deaths get classified. Different practice, same accounting trick. When the institution performing the procedure is also the institution recording the cause of death, the numbers will always look reassuring.
Home birth came up. It deserves more than a passing mention. The most reliable way to protect a newborn from unnecessary procedures is to not deliver them inside the institution that profits from those procedures. This isn't anti-medicine. It's recognizing that incentive structures produce predictable outcomes.
The conformity point is the one that extends furthest. Circumcision became unquestionable not because the evidence was overwhelming, but because questioning it threatened revenue, professional identity, and the psychological comfort of parents who'd already made the decision. That mechanism—where a practice becomes its own justification—is the engine running most of what I write about.
Thank you for reading.
Thank you so much for writing this. The slicing off of the most sensitive area of the baby has effects and they are not uniform or predictable. For myself it has caused confusion as a boy (why is mine different to theirs?), concern as I got older? - why would they do this? And many other feelings from resentment, ambiguity to outrage. I honestly think that it has just been allowed with zero pushback reminds me of how messed up our culture is. That women, men and SJW's everywhere don't acknowledge it is very telling.
I personally have been mocked when mentioning it even in very neutral language and tone and I ain't no fragile male. I'm a very physical and capable kinda dude. I'm not looking to play alpha victim but if we can't even discuss it then what the fuck?
Male genital mutilation at birth is the first and most profound submission to state authority. Aside from all the medical claptrap and justifications, it is psychological damage and social damage in terms of healthy sexuality and manhood. I tried discussing this with a woman who was making a study of FGM in the Middle East, telling her that circumcision was MGM. She kept changing the subject or dismissing my points entirely. I suspect this attitude is widespread.
You're welcome to your opinion. I know zero circumcised males who feel damaged, and they would not have wanted to be uncircumcised.
I beg to differ about psychological and damage. This is imaginary on your part, a prejudice. If you don’t like the idea, fine. That is your right. But don’t presume to tell people what their reality is. Also, “mutilation” is a biased term. Is tattooing muiltation? Are pierced ears or other piercings mutilation? Are tribal marks? Plastic surgery? Removal or insertion of hair follicles? Surgical removal of fat? In the US circumcision is most definitely not state authority. I have no idea where you are talking about.
Every procedure you describe is voluntary. I sincerely doubt adult men would willingly circumcise.
Agreed! No way should it be imposed on an adult, the same as for any medical procedure. For babies it is the parents' decision, as with all medical decisions.
Would you give a tattoo to an infant? The point is babies can’t consent to body parts being removed for no reason. If you want to get yourself circumcised at the same age that you can get a tattoo, then go ahead and fuck it up. Doing that to a brand new infant is psychologically damaging, whether you recognize an infant’s right to its own entire body or not.
Your defensiveness comes from your own brain recognizing that you have no choice but to accept the fact that your genitals were permanently changed before you ever got the chance to experience what they naturally felt like. There’s nothing you can do to undo the choice you didn’t get to make for your penis, and that must be a devastating feeling. I would be in denial too, if i found out something like that!
The mutilation which we call “circumcision” was first adopted by a Roman general.
The practice was sold to the slaves, on the pretense of hygiene.
On the other hand, the General wrote that the true reason was to make the mutilated “semi” or “not complete ” or “not full” and of no interest for the gods, which supposedly, would look away from the suffering of the slaves.
Following the General’s declaration, the General was demoted and the practice outlawed, as the Roman motto became ” mens sana in corpore sano” “a sane mind in a sane body”.
The trauma bonding practice was later adopted by the infanticide cult of the jews, which stoped demanding the murder of the first born, and begun to force parents to mutilate their children.
The so called “medical science” behind the mutilation practice, was and is used to justify the immoral religious practice.
Circumcision is a crime against humanity because beside mutilating its direct subjects, it divides humanity into sane, and trauma bonded individuals which will consequently feel and be different from the natural people.
Here a story which precedes the invention of the trauma bonding religions and which provides the original meaning of words used by religions to frighten their subjects and to demonize the ancient cults of veneration of life. “Sex”
https://bocksaga.substack.com/
Sol Sön: I'm moved to apologize – once removed – for the previous reply I see to your comment.
I know how 110th feels, have felt somewhat the same myself, in the 30+ years since the trauma of my circumcision (at birth in 1943) rose to the surface of my mind and devastated my life – resulting in chronic illnesses of both body and mind (including a lot of work to avoid suiciding) that have occupied most of my life energy to this day.
However, it is my understanding that giving oneself over to raging anger is not healthy either. I've been exploring the subject of circumcision in depth since 1993, have learned a lot, have written a lot, have been ridiculed, abused, ignored.
But as the Buddha says, that's the nature of this world; such things happen. Having chosen to take birth here, this is part of the deal. (As a teacher I follow says, our problem is that we don't read the fine print.) My first job is to keep myself on an even keel.
But your comment includes a number of assertions I've never heard before. Who was this "Roman general" who you claim initiated the practice of male genital mutilation in the Empire – and when?
From my (so far preliminary) studies, it seems the practice first appeared in ancient Egypt (don't know when), but was then adopted by the Levite tribe (the only "Jewish" tribe that was "bound in Egypt"), which then conquered the Israelite tribes in Canaan, and forced on them the worship of their G-d יהוה (YHVH, whom Christians worship as "Yahweh"), including the "sacrament" of circumcision – which as you say was the "kinder, gentler" form of Yahweh's original demand of sacrifice of first born sons.
All of which happened ca. 1000 BCE, long before Rome was an empire, or even a republic.
My primary source for the history has been the work of Laurent Guyénot on the history of Christianity and Judaism, which can be found both here at Substack and at Unz.com.
At this point I regard the circumcision rite as a Satanic ritual, and its adoption by the American people perhaps the most stark evidence of our apparently voluntary subjection to "our elder brothers in the Faith" and Greatest Ally. I've been writing about this piecemeal at Gab, hope someday to put it all together. As my health improves.
Hello Philip, sorry to read about your trauma.
I’m afraid I can not give you a date or a name yet, for what I remember it was some 80 bc, but I could be wrong , and could have happened before.
I first heard about it by my grandfather 50 years ago, and consequently did some research on the topic approximately 45 years ago.
some 20 years ago I researched it again, and I remember that I could only find traces of the story from Italian sites.
About dates given to our history, they are anyhow all false, as history is constantly being rewritten to justify the absurd narratives of the time.
I’m sorry not be able to give you more specific dates or names, but I don’t have here my research papers, what I can tell you is that the modern history, especially the one of religions, has been rewritten around the year 1350.
According to an egregious historian with which I had the fortune of meeting several decades ago, the first case of alteration of religious scripts dates to the late 13 century “1280?”, and begun with a controversial jewish scriber which rewrote Greek history transforming into “mythology”
His writings, first smeared and ridiculed “as they should have been ”, became adopted around 1350, and with it, a new era of censure and of rewriting of history which lasted to the present day.
About your condition, what you should always keep in mind, is that contrary to what you are made to believe, aside from when you may go crazy for some reasons or other, it is not the others who look at you in a strange way or have prejudice against you as person.
On the other hand, the indoctrination to the false myths of religion and the constant propaganda designed to make you feel hated because of your belief or physical condition, are the only thing which you should keep in mind in order to realize the true deception”religion” as the bloody cult is are designed to isolate you from the rest and to make you believe that who is not of your tribe, hates you.
We are all one way or the other victims of circumstances, it is when we are able to understand this basic fact that we can win over our fears and prejudices and see each other for what we truly are.
About christianity and judaism, christianity had always condemned judaism and the barbaric practice of sex mutilation or circumcision, read the Latin version if you are truly interested in it,.
Also Jesus was not circumcised, it is only the so called “Protestant which believe that nonsense.
Real Catholics or christians don’t circumcise their children.
Anyhow, once I find my old papers I will post more on the topic.
Jesus wasn’t circumcised? lol did you ask Him? Good lord, He was born into an observant Jewish family. It takes a lot of Jew hatred to come up with the your fanciful take.
Jesus was not a jew, he was Palestinian.
He was mocked as one by soldiers which killed him which called him the king of the jews.
Aside from that, he was a Palestinian and a Gnostic follower which worshiped life, not a death and ritual murder or children mutilator worshipper.
The jews are the ones which betrayed and killed him.
About my hate for the jews, no, I don’t believe in hate, I understand brainwashed, immoral and dangerous people when I meet them and although judaism is in my opinion the sickest of the bloody religions, I don’t label people for their beliefs.
A religion founded by a sadomasochistic pedophile which mutilated its own sex and the one of children, has nothing to do with spirituality or with God.
Furthermore, I am no christian hider, drinking the blood and eating the flash of the savior is my language called “spiritual cannibalism”.
Anyhow, back to the topic of this article, circumcision is a bloody mutilation, crime against humanity, and an horrific atrocity which “aside from extremely rare cases of sexual deformity” brings no benefit but on the contrary, permanently damaging its victims.
The Feast of the Circumcision (of Jesus) is on 1 January, on the 8th day.
Not for the catholics!
Yes, for the Catholics. And the Orthodox. I am Catholic, and we celebrate it every 1 Jan. (The Romans may have dropped it.)
https://MCI.ArchPitt.org/LiturgicalCalendar2026.html
See the first entry in the link above.
Nope the the Roman Catholics never did, in fact they even tried to forbid the Latin mass which is filled with warnings about the devious , greedy, discriminatory, and criminal ways of the jews.
What you call catholic is not Roman hence not catholic at all.
Catholicism does not allow the mutilation of the infants or “circumcision”,
Nor it celebrates it.
And no, for Roman christians Jesus was not circumcised!
Christians baptize, jews mutilate.
Search “Michelangelo’s moses” to see how even him is depicted as demon with horns.
Real christianity does not celebrate circumcision, zionism does and zionism, just like circumcision , are not Christian values, they are monstrosities designed to destroy it.
This piece lays out something simple but hard to ignore: the reason for routine circumcision keeps changing, but the surgery never does. Over the last 150 years it’s been promoted as a cure or prevention for paralysis, syphilis, cancer, UTIs, and HIV—each claim rising with authority, then weakening over time, and quietly being replaced by the next one. That pattern alone raises a fair question about whether the evidence is really driving the practice.
It also highlights something most people never hear: the foreskin is not just extra skin—it’s functional tissue with nerve endings and a role in protection and sensation. Many developed countries reviewed the same data and chose not to make routine infant circumcision standard care. Regardless of where someone lands on the issue, this essay makes a strong case that parents deserve clear, complete information and honest risk-benefit discussion before making a permanent decision for their child.
Benefits are obvious. Name one risk.
Obvious benefits’ is a claim, not evidence. Any irreversible body modification should meet a very high bar — especially when done to someone who cannot consent. The real question isn’t ‘can you list a theoretical benefit,’ it’s: does it justify removing healthy, functional tissue from a child who has no say in the matter?
As for risks — they’re not zero. There are immediate risks (pain, bleeding, infection, surgical complications) and long-term considerations (loss of nerve-dense tissue, altered sensitivity, scarring, psychological impact for some men later in life). Even if complications are statistically low, they’re not nonexistent — and the procedure is not medically necessary in the vast majority of cases.
Adults can choose for themselves if they want it. Doing it to infants without consent is a very different ethical question.
Wait. I meant benefits of not cutting. I am totally aghast that it continues. My
Apostle Paul says circumcision profits NOTHING! Worse, as you describe above. My comment was unclear. Thanks for replying.
Oops, I am totally against that barbaric bullshit also... https://cosmiconion.substack.com/p/the-elohim-blade
Read some stories of circumcisons gone wrong then. There are many! One of the more famous ones were with twin boys...one whose his penis was so damage that Dr. Love convinced the parents to repair surgically and make the boy a girl, and raise him as such. The rise of transgender fallacy was born. Sadly that BOY never felt like a girl and he eventually killed himself! In the meantime the good Dr. Love wrote and spoke everywhere he could that you can raise one gender as the other, with hormones and surgery, and they will be happier for it. Huge fail!
I believe the case you're referring to involved a Doctor John Money; I remember "Doctor Love" as a rock 'n roll tune by (the very Jewish) KISS.
A boy named David Reimer, who had a twin brother, lost his entire penis to a "botched" circumcision. Dr. Money stepped in and suggested that David be raised as a girl, and supervised the twins for years under his working premise that "gender" is a social construct. That didn't go well, as Money subjected both twins to extensive trauma and humiliation, which was likely what drove Brian to overdose on antidepressants. Two years later, David also ended his life.
Correct…my bad, it was Dr. Money. Dr. Love was involved with human sexuality studies🥴. Great names tho…
My comment was unclear. I corrected myself above. Smiles!
Babies can die from circumcision.
Babies *do* die from circumcision. Maybe a dozen or more every year. Hard to know, since – just as with the insane "vaccination" schedule – the deaths are concealed under the rubric "crib death" and the doctors throw up their hands and look mystified.
The whole business is insane, like any other Satanic sacrament – see what's coming out nowadays about Jeffrey Epstein and his elite crowd.
They absolutely can. Grow up.
Babies can die from lots of things. One of the saddest I saw was an infant who died malnourished because mom didn't want a 'fat baby' so only let the babe nurse 5 min and if still hungry gave a bottle of water flavored w 1/2oz apple juice! Sadly people are ignorant of infant needs and development, and listen to doctors who are ignorant as well. Time for changes.
And in the aftermath, betrayed by the industrial allopathic, iatrogenic system my parents trusted, and which mutilated me irrevocably in my first hours on this planet, 68 years later I remain incredibly angry about what was stolen from me. Is there any doubt why people are increasingly rejecting the allopathic system? Set a fractured bone, suture a laceration, treat a severe burn…otherwise, question everything.
Same bro. Pisses me off. Shit happens but the fucking complete lack of cultural change to openly discredit this crazy shit where you cut the end of a babies penis off before he even feels the tenderness of the mother that bore him. Insanity. Cruelty.
Even burns are treated with plants, such as aloe vera, better than any expensive pharma product. I was severely burned in my face when torch lighting an outside wood burning oven. I ran to the garden and slathered the inner gel over the affected area and, with repeated use, completely healed within 3 days.
Whatever happened to you, it sounds wretched, awful. I so hope you have better care than allopathic, costly though real health care is.
CIRCUMCISION IS A SATANIC RITUAL!!
Child Circumcision: An Elephant in the Hospital by Professor R. McAllister
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ceht-3xu84I&app=desktop
Take Your Whole Baby Home
http://www.drmomma.org/2009/06/take-your-whole-baby-home.html?m=1
Better yet, never enter the hospital. I was home birthed, along with my five siblings. My four children, born at home with competent midwives. My children are confidently continuing the wonderful experience, never even considering the mutilizing practice of removing any part of a body designed by our Maker.
Also the same for Female Genital Mutilation - FGM
FGM: number of victims found to be 70 million higher than thought
¨Half of girls and women cut live in just three countries as Unicef statistics reveal shocking global scale of barbaric ritual...¨
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/feb/05/research-finds-200m-victims-female-genital-mutilation-alive-today
https://www.theguardian.com/society/female-genital-mutilation
Yes I was waiting for someone to "note" about this other athrocity performed on women as well.
Both pratices are to be condemned as mutilation.
But for the little girls it causes the LOSS of most pleasure during sex.
Let's think about how barbaric this is.
PS: I had two sons, in their forties today. They both are complete - no circumcision thank you.
Same here. My mother was agaisnt that. Thank you Maman!
Answers To Your Questions About Infant Circumcision
National Organization of Circumcision Information Resources Centers
Educating A New Generation For The Well-Being Of All Children.
www.nocirc.org
The great thing about circumcision is that you can collect all the discarded foreskins, sew them together to make a wallet, and if you rub it, it turns into a fine piece of luggage.
when you have a religion that has foundational aspects of slaughtering every man, woman, and child, and even the sheep and goats of your enemies, as well as slaughtering animals at the altars of your temples, what better demand to make on the practitioners of that religion than to inflict terror and violence on the newborn males of that religion? Expose them to violence and terror at that tender age and they will carry that in their consciousness all their lives, and that will make it easier for them to inflict violence and death on their enemies and their animals.
Most people believe that children can grow up to be well-adjusted adults despite any trauma that occurred before the age of three.
yes, that used to be the belief. My brother had ingrown toenails at 2 years old. The doctor cut them out without anesthetic. He said, he won't remember it. But we do remember on a visceral level. It's in there in our consciousness. There have been men who during regression therapy remember their own circumcision and the experience was one of complete terror, this giant coming at him with a sharp knife who was going to cut off his penis or kill him. We remember, but for most it's not a conscious memory, but it's there.
Tell me you don’t understand the Old Testament without telling me you don’t understand it.
IMO modern routine circumcision started with religion and ended up becoming a religion itself.
Grew up in a primarily Gentile nominally Christian population. They went to church but were not necessarily fanatical. Secular people of Luke warm enough faith. Just salt of the earth who did what was expected, meaning they followed the rules and listened to authority, IE their doctors.
Always wondered why there seemed to be almost 100% circumcision conformance in that population except (it seemed) in the post WWII immigrant refugee population. Those kids were usually different. Apparently back in Europe they hadn't gotten the memo.
Obviously my observations don't amount to "a study" but in that era there was little privacy and showers at school were not private at all. There was little privacy really and not that much modesty since most of us grew up sharing living space. No private bath and bedrooms. You don't have to do a study to notice what is "normal" in your region. Always wondered "why are Christians submitting their infants to this stuff when it clearly is not part of their religious tradition?". If you asked your elders or parents (at least when I asked them) you would get answers like "you don't want your kid to be different than the other kids". Weak BS answers like that. A little mutilation for acceptance. Same way these days we submit to disease lottery injections in order to fit in to the madness of the societies we inhabit and to be accepted as "not a kook". People will submit to all sorts of things to blend in. These days it is not uncommon to see kids let someone put a bolt in their tongue. I feel like such a girlie man when I see what people PAY to have that done to themselves to fit in. Sorry, I've had enough cows step on my feet, enough errant baseballs whack me to not need to pay some one to drive bolts through my body to get my dose of pain for acceptance. At one time just the physical demands of life had enough inherent pain that we did not need to pay someone to drive bolts through our tongues.
It all seems extreme to me. But I guess acceptance is pretty important. Not being different becomes its own religion. No one seemed to question circumcision (or vaccines)t much. Heard all the lies that surely were told to our mothers by their doctors and THEIR mothers who had been equally indoctrinated. I am sure they believed them because (here we go again) they trusted their doctors.
It was just something that was done. There seemed to be no explanation for it. But when you're in a big family and a new boy is carted home every few years you do wonder as a little kid old enough to understand some things, "why the hell did they do that to my little brother?" To a child routine circumcision seemed gratuitously cruel. Still does.
But now we have people turning a blind eye to female circumcision. Voters just can't muster the "courage" to ban it because it may mean loss of a vote and some dollars. Soon enough they could find THEIR grand children subjected to such things. Just because they found it easier and more profitable to go along to get along. Never under estimate the power of a vote and the power of power (IE money) to get otherwise "normal" people to tolerate unspeakable things.
There NEVER was a satisfactory answer. By the time my generation arrived circumcision seems to have become an established religion for many generations already.
Sounds a lot like vaccines, except vaccines didn't start with a prejudicial religious tradition that ended up looking for a "scientific" "justification". Sure, they leverage religious precepts (do it for the greater good) but vaccines were not part of an established religious practice like circumcision. I guess the bottom line is that the unethical will as readily use religion to sell us lies and product as they will use religion to sell us faith and truth. When you have a practice based in religion soon enough it can become religion itself (no one dare question it) and inevitably there's the money. If you can't question nonsense you doubly can't question enriching nonsense that may disrupt money streams. Business models depend on the practice. Just one more reliable fee that can be harvested when another innocent child is delivered. Sounds DANGEROUSLY like vaccines with slightly different evolution. BUT IN THE END the practices become religion in and of themselves because to threaten the practice threatens the money and money after all is "god".
You are so spot on here. It's kind of a banality of evil the human race carries because if the critical risks of shunning group binding behaviour.
Well said! And it IS nuts like the “disease lottery injections”, as you point out.
Did the American academy of pediatrics ever do anything that would prove they are not just a bunch of money-hungry psychos?
I think they've provided airtight prof that they ARE a bunch of money hungry psychos
Certainly it wasn't the science
And by this time I think we can agree that some of the gate keeper credentialing organizations like the AMA and Pediatric associations are utter pharma captured disgraces. Those two in particular have disgraced themselves in epic fashion during COVID. STILL fighting for injections and STILL doing their best to punish honest doctors.
It took me so long to grow up and lose my trust because I grew up in what was a safe high trust decent environment where doors were left unlocked, neighbors helped each other and you knew and trusted people. So there was no reason NOT to trust.
Never even occurred to me that trust is routinely exploited AT SCALE by those institutions we are indoctrinated to trust. Not as if the AMA and Pediatric associations are selling used cars
So many things like vaccines and circumcision were ubiquitous and accepted on faith just like religion. No reason really to question them since everyone else is the same and it hasn't seemed to harm them much (it was before autism was a big thing). ALL friends neighbors relatives pretty much submitted to the same standards
Then your brand new little brother is brought home from the hospital and as a kid you experience an "Oh MY god, what did they do to him?" moment.
After that and as time goes by you realize that so much was all there to see. WE JUST DID NOT TAKE TIME TO NOTICE.
If a "trusted authority" (and the system that supports it) sends your poor innocent brother home mutilated JUST TO COLLECT THE FEES and is willing to indoctrinate all the parents "it's for his own good" JUST TO COLLECT THE FEES you start to realize
If they'll do that to helpless infants JUST TO COLLECT THE FEES (or to act on their own indoctrination) you start to realize there really is not much they WON'T do. It is not as if your infant brother is a puppy or a calf that needs an ear tag for animal husbandry purposes.
The POINTLESS routine cruelties that we don't see because we are trained NOT to see is what informs you as you mature. Some cruelties (like the physical fitness programs) have a point but surely cutting an infant's hoodie off is just POINTLESS cruelty, except for the fee, and for those who have religious ideas about it to force their system on the uniformed otherwise would not consent population.
Perhaps these things don't seem like a big deal but the big deal is it sets the stage for the next incremental insult. Like VIRTUALLY FORCING kids to take mRNA shots (particularly to go to college) then trying to spin the consequences as "mild carditis".
This is exactly right. Unfortunately kind and trusting people are the ones most likely to get hoodwinked by the psychopaths on top. They can’t even imagine committing such atrocities, and therefore can’t believe others do.
I grew up a little less trusting and more resentful of authority, so when my son was harmed (and later recovered, thank god) by vaccines it was not that hard for me to stat to see and believe what was actually going on. This also saved us from the covid propaganda.
4% of the population qualify as psychopathic. That’s 1 out of 25. Guess the prevalence in politics, business, clergy etc! Much higher. Below the psychopaths we have self serving or servile people, willing to participate in the game or at least look the other way. No wonder the world looks the way it does.
Yes. A true sense of betrayal and righteous indignation requires that you once trusted. I guess I've been cured. 🤣🤣🤨 I still get angry when things go sideways but not with the same sense of betrayal. It's more like, "I'm not surprised". I always say "I've reached Peak Soviet" because I feel that the level of distrust in that part of the world by this time is genetically embedded. Only so many government sponsored pogroms, purges wars and famines a people can survive before the deep distrust embeds at a brain stem level.
I think A LOT of people have been woken up by experiences like yours. I started out distrustful of mRNA. I went so deep in to that rabbit hole and came out distrusting the whole vaccine paradigm. A legacy I and everyone I knew MY WHOLE LIFE accepted without question. Makes you think, "what else have I missed?"
In some Tantric traditions (like Bhairawa Tantra) comes the description of a charged rajasic /fire energy during sex between two open hearted adults. Although Tantra is often thought of as a plural field of experiments in liberation, its constellation of practices always assumes female and male biological energies when describing this:
Starting from the root chakra of the male, the subtle fire travels into the sex chakra of the female (activating it), then spirals back into the third chakra of the male and then back again into the heart of the woman opening her Love center. It is then supposed to end all the way up into the crown chakras of both partners, closing the circle.
The first link up in the sex chakra is modulated though by a subtle energy node (with its own sacred syllables and astral functions), just at the level of the foreskin of the penis in the auric field, which thus gets damaged not only physically with circumcision but also at a subtle energy level.
Circumcision could then also be seen as a sort of techno magic spell, the intentional disconnect of the polarities in an inverted ritual.
The US is a nation of lab rats. Very few countries in the world allow GMO food. Could this be the reason why nobody wants our crops? Only in this country do we allow genital mutilations of infants, a procedure looking for a reason to exist. Even the eugenicists in Europe don't practice this. Betcha no country jabs an infant 77 times, now down to 11, 11 jabs too many. Just say no. Before we go preaching to Islamic countries about FGM, how about getting our own house in order first?
Circumcision: the express route from penis ➡️ leather glove 🧤✂️💨 ⚡😩🤚
Juvenile genital mutilation, male or female, surgical or hormonal, is a Crime against Humanity and should be prosecuted as such. No exemptions. Minors can not consent to their own mutilation.
to create a trauma in the mind to cut off emphaty.
Only in America...
And this was not due to Jewish influence?
I have heard many women call intact penises gross or disgusting, so another benefit of keeping your sons intact is that it will keep those idiots away from them.
It's pretty simple -- don't interfere with what nature intended. Just don't. Leave baby boys' genitals intact.