Forums > Debate & DiscussPage > 10by: God

Origins of circumcision in the U.S.A.

posted 4th May '08

http://www.healthystrokes.com/circumcision.html

Circumcision

What it is, and questions from readers

Circumcision is surgical removal of the foreskin. It is a controversial procedure ordinarily performed only on infant males. Circumcision was devised as a means of preventing masturbation.

A little about the history of circumcision

Allen Edwardes writes in the book Sexual Self-Stimulation (Sherbourne Press, 1967):

Eternally united with the masturbation mystique is the circumcision mania, which evolved as a sacrifice of sinful flesh to a jealously phallic god. Removal of the foreskin, cabalistically symbolized in the evil servant, was a removal of "original sin": this being "self-abuse," contraception, "infantile eroticism." Amputation of that peccant part, which was thought to provoke excessive if not unnatural erection and manipulation by its constant contact with the highly susceptible glans, symbolically cleansed the spirit of fleshly lust -- readying one for obligatorily routine reproduction, not the vain pursuit of pleasure -- whence the Arabic tuhur, "purity," for circumcision. [...]
Removal of the prepuce in males was complemented with antimasturbatory amputation of the clitoris in females, a mutilation fatuously deisgned to discourage if not prevent "infantile sexuality" and to prepare the victim for adult generative intercourse.

http://www.noharmm.org/docswords.htm

1860: .001% of the North Eastern urban American male population circumcised

In cases of masturbation we must, I believe, break the habit by inducing such a condition of the parts as will cause too much local suffering to allow of the practice being continued. For this purpose, if the prepuce is long, we may circumcise the male patient with present and probably with future advantage; the operation, too, should not be performed under chloroform, so that the pain experienced may be associated with the habit we wish to eradicate.

[Athol A.W. Johnson. On An Injurious Habit Occasionally Met with in Infancy and Early Childhood. Lancet 1860;1:344-345.]

1871: 1% of the North Eastern urban American male population circumcised

I refer to masturbation as one of the effects of a long prepuce; not that this vice is entirely absent in those who have undergone circumcision, though I never saw an instance in a Jewish child of very tender years, except as the result of association with children whose covered glans have naturally impelled them to the habit.
[M.J. Moses. The Value of Circumcision as a Hygienic and Therapeutic Measure. New York Medical Journal 1871;14:368-374.]

1887: 10% of the North Eastern urban American male population circumcised

Hip trouble is from falling down, an accident that children with tight foreskins are especially liable to owing to the weakening of the muscles produced by the condition of the genitals.
[Lewis A. Sayer. Circumcision For The Cure of Enuresis. Journal of the American Medical Association 1887;7:631-633.]

There can be no doubt of [masturbation's] injurious effect, and of the proneness to practice it on the part of children with defective brains. Circumcision should always be practiced. It may be necessary to make the genitals so sore by blistering fluids that pain results from attempts to rub the parts.
[Angel Money. Treatment Of Disease In Children. Philadelphia: P. Blakiston. 1887:421.]

<snip>

1935: 55% of the North Eastern urban American male population circumcised

I suggest that all male children should be circumcised. This is "against nature," but that is exactly the reason why it should be done. Nature intends that the adolescent male shall copulate as often and as promiscuously as possible, and to that end covers the sensitive glans so that it shall be ever ready to receive stimuli. Civilization, on the contrary, requires chastity, and the glans of the circumcised rapidly assumes a leathery texture less sensitive than skin. Thus the adolescent has his attention drawn to his penis much less often. I am convinced that masturbation is much less common in the circumcised. With these considerations in view it does not seem apt to argue that "God knows best how to make little boys.
[R.W. Cockshut. Circumcision. British Medical Journal. 1935;2:764.]

[Routine Circumcision] does not necessitate handling of the penis by the child himself and therefore does not focus the male's attention on his own genitals. Masturbation is considered less likely.
[Alan F. Guttmacher. Should The Baby Circumcised? Parents' Magazine 1941;16:26, 76-78.]

...[W]e do feel that there are many excellent reasons for routinely circumcising the male...Circumcision will reduce the incidence of onanism. ...Circumcision will increase the male libido.... Longevity, immunity to nearly all physical and mental illness, increased physical vigor, etc., are all attributed to this practice... In addition to the aforementioned reasons for doing the operation, we shall list several reasons to support immediate circumcision. ... Convenience: Under the present regime the obstetrician finishes his episiotomy, walks across the hall and circumcises the infant, and is finished with the whole business. Stimulation of the baby: Frequently following a general anesthetic the newborn is depressed and various stimulants are employed; circumcision unfailingly produces and excellent response in a sleepy baby.
[Richard L. Miller. Donald C. Snyder. Immediate Circumcision of the Newborn Male. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 1953;65:1-11.]

Malnutrition, epistaxis, convulsions, night terrors, chorea, and epilepsy have all been reflexly attributed to phimosis. Parents readily recognize the importance of local cleanliness and genital hygiene in their children and are usually ready to adopt measures which may avert masturbation. Circumcision is usually advised on these grounds.
[Meredith F. Campbell. The Male Genital Tract and the Female Urethra. in: Campbell's Urology. vol. 2. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company. 1970:1836.]
One of the biggest proponents of circumcision was cereal magnate J. Kellogg:

http://english.pravda.ru/science/health/27-03-2006/77873-circumcision-0

American cornflakes magnate John Harvey Kellogg (the manufacturer of Kellogg’s Corn Flakes) declared war on masturbation at the end of 19th century. Being an influential politician, he sparked off an “anti-masturbation hysteria” in society. Inspired by Kellogg’s ideas, the doctors maintained that “self-abuse may result in exhaustion, paralysis and heart diseases. Because of self-abuse some people will end up losing their minds, others will commit suicide.”

(Mary R. Melendy, MD, The Ideal Woman – For Maidens, Wives and Mothers, 1903) .

Kellogg decided to use circumcision for protecting protect the boys from the terrible consequences. “One can achieve good results only by means of removing a large quantity of skin and mucus from the penis. Following the cicatrisation of the wounds, the skin will cover the organ tight … which will considerably hamper masturbation or eradicate it altogether.”
(E.J. Spratling, MD. Medical Record, Masturbation in the Adult, vol. 48, no. 13, September 28, 1895, pp. 442-443) .

According to Kellogg, “circumcision in infancy is a good remedy for masturbation, it helps in most cases. It is important to perform surgery without using any anesthetic so that pain during an operation may affect the mind. It would be good if pain could be also associated with the idea of punishment. Cauterizing the clitoris with carbolic acid can help women combat the perverted ways of getting sexual pleasure.” (John Harvey Kellogg, M.D., “Treatment for Self-Abuse and its Effects,” Plain Fact for Old and Young. Burlington , Iowa : F. Segner & Co. (188 . p. 295) .

Surprisingly enough, U.S. doctors quickly embraced Kellogg’s controversial concepts. Moreover, the babyhood circumcision became widespread in other English-speaking countries.

So... most of us agree female genital mutilation is a human rights violation, because its purpose is to reduce sexual pleasure in women... yet male circumcision in the U.S.A. had the same goal for decades... and if you call it mutilation, many women who have had their children circumcised will yell at you for being judgmental.

Well, you know what? Look up the word:

Main Entry:mu·ti·late
Pronunciation: \ˈmyü-tə-ˌlāt\ Function:transitive verb Inflected Form(s):mu·ti·lat·ed; mu·ti·lat·ingEtymology:Latin mutilatus, past participle of mutilare, from mutilus truncated, maimedDate:1534
1 :to cut up or alter radically so as to make imperfect <the child mutilated the book with his scissors>
2 :to cut off or permanently destroy a limb or essential part of :cripple

If we agree that cutting off a clitoris is mutilation, then so is circumcision.

So, does it make you view male circumcision differently at all now, knowing why it is so prevalent in the U.S.A.?

C.

Origins of circumcision in the U.S.A.

allsearch

who's online