The term Circumcision advocate describes a person who vehemently advocates and pronounces medically not necessary genital mutilation in children.
Some of these people are committed to their fetish as individuals and influence e.g. information available online (example: Jake Waskett). Others work in groups and denounce, ridicule or stalk intactivists or spread myths that have long been refuted by science as arguments for circumcision.
Contradiction in terms
Virtually all of the leading medical associations around the world agree that circumcision in children almost never has a medical indication. Nevertheless, it is significant that the circumcision advocates try again and again with a sophisticated method to pretend seriousness on the subject: They claim to take a "neutral" point of view and list the alleged advantages of genital mutilation alongside the disadvantages, although they regularly only touch on the latter, not but show that they want to describe them completely.
Since, according to the current state of science and medical ethics, there is no medical justification for foreskin amputation, there can be no advantages for the affected boy. Therefore, many circumcision advocates expose themselves to this allegedly "neutral" point of view from the outset.
True like Brian Morris on the other hand speak straight away: He e.g. has repeatedly called for circumcision to be made compulsory for all boys worldwide, and has claimd that the intact foreskin would be a great danger for boys.
Chances are that discussions about the MGM topic culminate in an exchange of unkindness. There is no tendency to determine whether intactivists or circumcision advocats have started to escalate a discussion; people and situations are too different for that and each person has other trigger words to react on. But there are samples which often repeat and are used by circumcision advocats mostly, especially when they can no longer stand up argumentatively.
Work in progress: The following information does not claim to be complete. More content will be added gradually.
- Accuse the opponent as being anti-Semitic.
- Accuse the opponent as being islamophob.
- Attack ad hominem, i.e. attack the discussion partner personally, not speaking about the topic (ad rem).
- Cite arguments pro circumcision that have long since been refuted.
- Claim that inactivists are not about children's rights.
- Claim that intactivists are pedophile.
- Denounce inactivists to their employer/organization/party as anti-Semites, etc.
- Deny and make fun of personal experiences and sufferings from mutilated men.
- Distract from the topic.
- Focus on the child's penis, not on his human rights.
- Give names.
- Insist on circumcision myths which are already debunked by science or testemonies.
- Name intactivism a "cult".
- Ridicule all arguments of the opponent, without counter arguments.
- Send death threats.
- Write private messages to the opponent with threatening or bullying content.
Circumcision advocate websites
This incomplete list shows websites and their own "claims" quoted from the websites:
- "Real Facts About Male Circumcision"
- The website name suggests that there are verified facts ("real facts" is a tautology). In fact, the information there is highly selective and tendentious.
- "supporting Choice NOT misinformation"
- The website name suggests that people have a choice of whether or not to be circumcised. This does not apply to children who by definition are not capable of giving consent.
Circumcision advocat pages on Facebook
This incomplete list shows some Facebook pages and their own "claims" quoted from their info pages:
- "Correcting intactivist LIES"
- "Parody page"
- "This page will provide information on circumcision and expose the malevolent actions of anti-circumcision fanatics."
- "Health benefits from circumcising are leading medical organizations to recommend circumcision."
- "Due to several anti-circumcision extremists spreading lies and fear about infant circumcision, I decided to create this group to get the real truth on circumcision out. There are both pros and cons to circumcision and both should be known and should be discussed without hatred and shaming, which is what the anti-circumcision extremists do. I also want to expose the extremists method of operation so that their shaming and degrading doesn't keep parents from making a fully informed decision about circumcision."
- "Since Facebook does not want to take down Mutilation Watch, a horrible bully page, we have decided to give those folks a taste of their own medicine."
- "This page is devoted to exposing the anti-Semitic roots of intactivism."
It is striking that the choice of words is often quite aggressive and full of ad hominem attacks, intactivists are referred to often as liars, etc. At first glance, groups like The Antisemitic Roots of Intactivism seem to be important, since intactivists don't tolerate anti-Semitism of course, too. But groups whose names already imply that intactivism is fundamentally anti-Semitic disqualify themselves from the outset as being biased.
Most of these pages are run anonymously, while e.g. "REAL Circumcision Truths." seems to be a covered advertising page from mohel Hayim Leiter who does all the contribution.