It's primarily circumcised fathers who drive the cycle of abuse. To leave their son intact would be a tacit admission that they were robbed of something valuable, and that their parents did something horrific to them. This puts up a huge psychological barrier which makes it easier to simply cut their child and move on like nothing's wrong. It also doesn't help that men's ego's are strongly linked to their genitalia.
I've talked to couples who are parents that said they circumsized their son just because they didn't want their son to ask why their dick looked different from dad's, and men who said they'll circumsize their future sons just because they're circumsized. But I'm not circumsized, and when my relationship with my girlfriend became more "serious" we sort of talked about having kids. And she said it would be up to my whether we would circumsize any of our sons or not, and I was just like "it's not my penis, I'll let them do whatever they want with it but I won't make the decision to cut anything off".
they didn’t want their son to ask why their dick looked different
This is the result of the brain thinking (all subconsciously, of course) "I don't want to contemplate how my son's dick is different" and translating it to sound like it's for their son's benefit.
Yeah one of the couples I'm thinking of had already had their first son circumsized and had talked about how much he screamed during the process, and they were justifying why they would have their second son circumsized as well.
Let's be clear that not all fathers who circumcised their sons are driving a cycle of abuse. Especially not that long ago when it was just viewed as a normal thing many people did. These parents simply didn't know better. They weren't abusing their kids. They didn't do it based on ego. It was just something you did with newborns.
I do sympathize with parents who didn't know better, including my loving parents. The medical establishment is to blame. Nobody who chooses circumcision thinks they are abusing their son, nor are they criminally negligent. But I can't say that someone who circumcises their son isn't technically continuing the cycle. Also, sorry to hear about your son.
That's the thing. A lot of parents didn't do it for aesthetic reasons. They thought it was healthier. This is what I mean when I say people are extreme about it. You're being completely hostile about it. The reality is it's an unnecessary practice we should stop doing but it doesn't negativity affect the lives of the vast majority of people it's done to. Implying that every circumcised male in history was abused by their parents is ludicrous.
mutilating your child's genitals because you couldn't be bothered to inform yourself about it is also abuse
imagine making this argument for literally any other form of abuse. hell, even any other form of mutilation. oh, yeah, i cut off the baby's earlobes because, uhh ... i get cysts in mine sometimes and thats kinda scary. earlobes must be bad.
and yes, im being hostile. we should be hostile toward INFANT GENITAL MUTILATION and those who support it.
But you're being hostile to somebody who doesn't support it.
It's not that parents couldn't be bothered to inform themselves. They were given the wrong information. Though it is factually correct that it's more hygienic.
I would argue that missing earlobes has a more profound effect on a person than missing foreskin.
Yeah, this is bullshit. My sister, among others, mutilated both her sons because she thinks intact members look "gross." I have heard similar sentiments, and their ensuing mutilations, from women in similar demos.
I didn't say that women don't participate in the genital cutting culture. Men are just more likely to give strong pushback to criticism of the practice because it's more personal. It also happens to be that almost all of the medical authorities and researchers responsible for endorsing and promoting circumcision are circumcised men, and they bear the most blame.
No, you just claimed that men hold the reins. This was almost certainly true once. At least in the U.S., not anymore - male mutilation has become a cultural issue as the “scientific” basis is questioned and the absolute rate drops. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/circumcision_2013/circumcision_2013.pdf
Men are just more likely to give strong pushback to criticism of the practice because it’s more personal
Do you have any sources for that argument? Or just an assertion about their psychosexual rationalizations?
It also happens to be that almost all of the medical authorities and researchers responsible for endorsing and promoting circumcision are circumcised men
Do you know that? Or do you just infer that they’re cut?
it's fucked up, and there's definitely some creepy psychology behind parents still doing it to their kids
It's primarily circumcised fathers who drive the cycle of abuse. To leave their son intact would be a tacit admission that they were robbed of something valuable, and that their parents did something horrific to them. This puts up a huge psychological barrier which makes it easier to simply cut their child and move on like nothing's wrong. It also doesn't help that men's ego's are strongly linked to their genitalia.
I've talked to couples who are parents that said they circumsized their son just because they didn't want their son to ask why their dick looked different from dad's, and men who said they'll circumsize their future sons just because they're circumsized. But I'm not circumsized, and when my relationship with my girlfriend became more "serious" we sort of talked about having kids. And she said it would be up to my whether we would circumsize any of our sons or not, and I was just like "it's not my penis, I'll let them do whatever they want with it but I won't make the decision to cut anything off".
This is the result of the brain thinking (all subconsciously, of course) "I don't want to contemplate how my son's dick is different" and translating it to sound like it's for their son's benefit.
Yeah one of the couples I'm thinking of had already had their first son circumsized and had talked about how much he screamed during the process, and they were justifying why they would have their second son circumsized as well.
Let's be clear that not all fathers who circumcised their sons are driving a cycle of abuse. Especially not that long ago when it was just viewed as a normal thing many people did. These parents simply didn't know better. They weren't abusing their kids. They didn't do it based on ego. It was just something you did with newborns.
I do sympathize with parents who didn't know better, including my loving parents. The medical establishment is to blame. Nobody who chooses circumcision thinks they are abusing their son, nor are they criminally negligent. But I can't say that someone who circumcises their son isn't technically continuing the cycle. Also, sorry to hear about your son.
Lol I don't have kids and I'm not planning to. Just think people on here get a little extreme about the whole circumcision thing.
i would hope people would be "a little extreme" about widespread, normalized infant genital mutilation
you are the weird one for not being upset about it
I didn't say anyone was weird. That's just my opinion.
It's because of the obsessive epiphany.
Abuse is still abuse even if it's normal and even if you don't think it's abuse.
Just because you think it's abuse doesn't mean it is.
mutilating your child's genitals without anesthetic for cosmetic reasons is abuse. if you disagree with that you're fucking wrong.
That's the thing. A lot of parents didn't do it for aesthetic reasons. They thought it was healthier. This is what I mean when I say people are extreme about it. You're being completely hostile about it. The reality is it's an unnecessary practice we should stop doing but it doesn't negativity affect the lives of the vast majority of people it's done to. Implying that every circumcised male in history was abused by their parents is ludicrous.
mutilating your child's genitals because you couldn't be bothered to inform yourself about it is also abuse
imagine making this argument for literally any other form of abuse. hell, even any other form of mutilation. oh, yeah, i cut off the baby's earlobes because, uhh ... i get cysts in mine sometimes and thats kinda scary. earlobes must be bad.
and yes, im being hostile. we should be hostile toward INFANT GENITAL MUTILATION and those who support it.
But you're being hostile to somebody who doesn't support it.
It's not that parents couldn't be bothered to inform themselves. They were given the wrong information. Though it is factually correct that it's more hygienic.
I would argue that missing earlobes has a more profound effect on a person than missing foreskin.
deleted by creator
Yeah, this is bullshit. My sister, among others, mutilated both her sons because she thinks intact members look "gross." I have heard similar sentiments, and their ensuing mutilations, from women in similar demos.
I didn't say that women don't participate in the genital cutting culture. Men are just more likely to give strong pushback to criticism of the practice because it's more personal. It also happens to be that almost all of the medical authorities and researchers responsible for endorsing and promoting circumcision are circumcised men, and they bear the most blame.
No, you just claimed that men hold the reins. This was almost certainly true once. At least in the U.S., not anymore - male mutilation has become a cultural issue as the “scientific” basis is questioned and the absolute rate drops. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/circumcision_2013/circumcision_2013.pdf
Do you have any sources for that argument? Or just an assertion about their psychosexual rationalizations?
Do you know that? Or do you just infer that they’re cut?
https://en.intactiwiki.org/index.php/Adamant_father_syndrome
https://en.intactiwiki.org/index.php/Psychological_issues_of_male_circumcision#Circumcised_medical_doctors