LiveScience: Christopher Wanjek supports male circumcision

Holy crap bacteria!!11! Its called opposable thumbs and soap!

In parts of Africa they lack the amenities we have for daily hygiene, so duh, no wonder the findings were so pronounced over there.

Outside of the church curbing sexuality, even outside of losing sexual nerves, I mean, this is so simple its stupid to argue it, why cut off something you are born with? Teach kids to wash their willy right and if no problems arise keep it.

Shit we used to also run naked thru fires, scar our bodies, and all sorts of other retarded self mutilating practices, preformed during coming of age/spiritual rituals, but its called progress.

Is there a circumcision industry or is this pro circumcision crap a fundamentalist thing? What gives?

..so I wrote the guy some e-mail, in spite of this taking a fairly long time for me in English.
Doubt I'll get a reply though. Defenders of rituals, transfered to medics and science or not, are caught in their own belief system.
To force them to break out from it, anti-circ groups would have to provide more hard facts so they can no longer deny what really happens. For example, why is there no medically sound list of what exactly the female equivalent to MGM would be. I think it's fairly clear but it needs to be proven.
Flatter and shorter orgams, prove it. Let's record some electroencephalograms. I'm sure this can be done. Let's throw the facts at them. If I can be of any help (I'm only "mildly" circed), don't hesitate to leave a personal message or tell me whom to contact.

Instead, Anti-MGM groups are doing it the American way.. "oh John, your personal story is so touching". Stop! This works for women but won't work for us.

Is it Christopher Wanjek?

OR

Christopher Wangjerk?

I've read that the average cost of a circumcision done in a hospital is $1,200.

Small change compared to anticipated profits for the removal of the male baby's prostate gland when he arrives at the hospital 70 years later (assuming he lives that long) for his second encounter with the Penis Industry.

Hospitals sell excised foreskins to cosmetics firms, apparently. They're used to make lipstick and masquera.

Wonder why the feminists have not protested this obvious patriarchal insult to women ---making them rub foreskin-based chemicals on their lips and eyelids?

The author of the piece, decrying female genital mutilation while dismissing MGM stated --

"Female genital cutting is an act of subjugation...."

That's interesting.

The feminist politics of slicing off genital parts apparently only cut one way.

A labia is far more ideologically important than a mere foreskin.

Why is there no market for excised labias?

That would indicate gender equality, right?

"Female genital cutting is an act of subjugation...."

That was the part I really didn't get.

He states that it is not fair to compare the two because sometimes it removes too much, and because it is an act of subjugation.

That is either an over generalization, or not relavent. Is it an act of subjugation in *all* cases (I don't know, it may be)? It is *always* wrong because it *sometimes* removes too much?

It seems to me that the argument against female cutting is that cutting any is cutting too much, becuase it is painful and unnecesary. Wouldn't that same argument apply then to male cutting?

The guy seems to be saying that peeling an red apple is OK, but peeling an green pear is wrong, without stating what is actually different. The language used seems to indicate to me that the guy is more interested in the ideology than the facts. He is just happy that some facts... any facts... have fallen his way.
__________________________________________________
http://www.vius.ca

Hello. This is a blanket reply to the gentlemen who
wrote to me this past week about the circumcision
column. This was a bad week to travel, because the
column has generated far more mail than usual and I
have limited access to email until September.

The point that I was hoping to relay is that
circumcision in the United States is not that
important, but you cannot call the procedure useless.
I was also hoping to relay some of the excitement
coming from the Toronto AIDS meeting.

The comparison of the anti-circumcision movement to
the white student union came from a conversation with
anti-FGM activists at a meeting last year who remain
annoyed by the comparison of circumcision to FGM,
because many men in regions where FGM is practiced are
circumcised and thus think that FGM is no big deal.
The anti-circumcision movement was not born of
oppression, like the anti-FGM movement.

Indeed, despite the 27 angry letters, I was supported
by about a dozen positive messages, mostly from
doctors (ah, the establishment) and anti-FGM groups.

Clearly we have different opinions on the issue, and I
don't think it will be useful to engage in a debate.
Please know, though, that I read each of your messages
from start to finish and went to some of the links...
despite the foul language and violent suggestions.

Sincerely,

christopher wanjek

p.s. You'll be happy to know that no one reads my
column, so the damage will be minimal.

************************************
Christopher Wanjek
Freelance Science Writer & Author
Food at Work / Bad Medicine
http://www.christopherwanjek.com
************************************