Hi! You're not currently logged in or aren't yet a member -- but you can still read everything, as well as reply to posts and vote in polls. If you register (for free), you can also create new topics, track messages/friends, use a sig file and make a blog! (We're also offering great prizes for posting to your blog -- get the details here.)
This is a discussion on Circumcision - Part 2 within the March 2007 - Babies In Bloom forums, part of the Born in 2007 category; I know I posted a while back about circumcision and how we were researching whether or not to do it. ...
I know I posted a while back about circumcision and how we were researching whether or not to do it. Well this week when we took Kate to the pediatrician for her croup, we asked the head doctor of the practice what he thought about it. I figured he wouldn't take a stance since the AAP hasn't taken a formal stance - and also because it's a religious practice for some. He told me he had done some research about the origins of circumcision.
Apparently when circumcision was done thousands of years ago, it was done because people were living in the desert and back then it was more of a hygiene issue. There was a severe lack of water in the desert. They weren't able to bathe as frequently, therefore they circumcised to prevent infection. Circumcision became big in the US during WWI. A lot of the men were coming home from war with infections and diseases due to hygiene issues because they were fighting and were not able to properly clean themselves. As a result, men were then required to be circumcised before going to war. Because it was so painful for the grown men to be circumcised, they decided to circumcise their sons at birth so they wouldn't have to endure the pain that they did as adults.
I thought it was pretty interesting so I thought I would share.
Hmm....really interesting. I had read somewhere before about the reason it was done for those living in the desert but never hear about why it became as big as it has in North America. I love learning new stuff!
I've looked into that aspect myself, Kristina, and it makes a heck of a lot of sense, huh? I think the reason why many people look back in history on it, is that they remember the command that God made for the men to be circumsized....it was a covenant with God. Anytime in the Old Testament when God put his foot down, so to speak, about something like this, it appears that all of those things were'nt just crazy rules he came up with, but it was his design to protect his people....ex: not eating certain things, and the other cleanliness "rules"....all the things that God said not to eat in Leviticus are things that we can prove today are terrible and unhealthy foods. Anyhow, it makes sense why God would make circumcision necessary so that he could protect them. I do not claim to be a Bible scholar by the way, it's a tidbit that we looked into when we were researching it the first time. Interesting anyway! As a sidenote just to be clear though, I'm not trying to say that men who are uncircumsized today are not in covenant with God. The new testament is clear on that....anyway!
You know, Kendel, I just found this site that talks about how Christian's at one point renounced circumcision. Here's the site: History of Circumcision
I haven't had a chance to read the whole thing yet. There's so much information out there that I think I've put DH into overdrive. He said he prays we will have a girl so the decision won't be so tough. I don't think he's off the hook!
I would so love to know that God's reasoning was one of protection due to hygiene issues. That's not something I have personally researched (yet ) but I probably will. It's hard for me because I truly feel it's such a sad thing to do to a defenseless little baby, and it's hard for me to understand why God would command His people to do it. But, I am ok with saying that I don't understand that, but that I know God has His reasons and that's good enough for me.
Also, I have read in many, many places that in the US and other English speaking countries, circumcision became very popular due to a desire to curb masturbation because self-pleasure was seen as self-abuse and a mental disorder. Wikipedia says:
Non-religious circumcision in English-speaking countries arose in a climate of negative attitudes towards sex, especially concerning masturbation. In her 1978 article The Ritual of Circumcision,[19] Karen Erickson Paige writes: "In the United States, the current medical rationale for circumcision developed after the operation was in wide practice. The original reason for the surgical removal of the foreskin, or prepuce, was to control 'masturbatory insanity' - the range of mental disorders that people believed were caused by the 'polluting' practice of 'self-abuse.'"
And, interestingly enough, at the same time that male circumcision was becoming so popular as a way to curb masturbation, so was female circumcision.
It sounds ridiculous to us, but circumcision became popular in Christian countries in the 19th century because they thought masturbation led to physical and mental illness, and they thought circumcision would stop masturbation. No, I'm not making this up. Read the following quotes from medical journals if you don't believe me:
Since then, people have looked for different reasons to justify circumcision, but the rates have been dropping:
USA: from 90% to 56%
Canada: from 47% to 14%
UK: from 35% to about 3% (less than 1% among Christians)
Australia: 90% to 12.6%
New Zealand: 95% to below 3% (mostly Samoans and Tongans, less than 1% among whites)
South America and Europe: never above 3% (includes many of the world's most Christian countries eg Poland, Spain, Italy, Brazil)
That is interesting. We decided to circ mostly because everyone in our family has, more of a tradition. Not really sure how I feel about it one way or another.
HEY. The whole desert/sand-in-the-foreskin thing is a too-often-repeated myth. Even some doctors can repeat such junk.
During the 40 years after the exodus, Moses' followers STOPPED circumcising while wandering the desert.
Nothing PROTECTS the urinary meatus like a foreskin. To keep hygienic while camping or otherwise without showers, just urinate. If you have something scratching at the inside of the foreskin you can lightly grip the tip of the skin tube as you urinate and let the sterile urine balloon the foreskin out, and release it with a forceful gush.
The previous paragraph is why I believe circumcision arose in Judaism and Islam. Both have strong taboos about avoiding contact with bodily fluids. If you can't make your foreskin balloon as needed (for fear of touching some urine), you just MIGHT get an undue infection or inflammation once in a while.
Nearly ALL the soldiers in the civil war (and every earlier US war) were intact. Show me one legit citiation about rampant foreskin problems in those battlefields.
Every mammal on earth has a foreskin, and that fact goes back for 100s of 1000s of years. Certainly surgeries and soap weren't around to allow those ancient specimens to stay healthy enough to be our ancestors.
No national medical association on earth recommends routine circumsion.
Over 95% of the world's Christians follow the New Testament's clear instruction not to circumcise. For Catholics it is expressly forbidden. Somehow, Catholics in the US and Philippines didn't get the memo.
The Holy Roman Church "...strictly orders all who glory in the name of Christian, not to practise circumcision either before or after baptism, since whether or not they place their hope in it, it cannot possibly be observed without loss of eternal salvation."
From Cantate Domino, re-affiirmed by Pope Pius XII in 1952
We don't really circumcise in South Africa. Exept for the Indian population. I will never put Kadin through something like that. He's been through enough trama and pain in his 13 months of life.
Circumcision - Part 2
Re: Circumcision - Part 2
