Difference between revisions of "Andrew Gross"
m (wikify medical indication) |
(→No choice for human rights violations: "foreskin is not a human right") |
||
| Line 48: | Line 48: | ||
=== No choice for human rights violations === | === No choice for human rights violations === | ||
| − | The approach of Gross and Circumcision Choice that it is reliably a parental choice whether to have a healthy child's healthy [[foreskin]] amputated without [[medical indication]] for any reason, disregards the legal fact that there is no choice as to whether or not to commit [[human rights]] abuses. Medically not indicated amputation of any part of a child's body is illegal by definition and cannot be legalized by parental agreements. Therefore, all information on the Circumcision Choice website should be viewed | + | The approach of Gross and Circumcision Choice that it is reliably a parental choice whether to have a healthy child's healthy [[foreskin]] amputated without [[medical indication]] for any reason, disregards the legal fact that there is no choice as to whether or not to commit [[human rights]] abuses. Medically not indicated amputation of any part of a child's body is illegal by definition and cannot be legalized by parental agreements. Therefore, all information on the Circumcision Choice website should be viewed with suspicion, if not as a call for human rights violations. |
[[Peter W. Adler|Adler]] (2022) layed out in his comprehensive legal treatise [[Circumcision Is A Fraud: And The Coming Legal Reckoning]]: There is no legal basis for parents to consent to the irreversible amputation of healthy parts of their children's bodies without a compelling and urgent [[medical indication]]. | [[Peter W. Adler|Adler]] (2022) layed out in his comprehensive legal treatise [[Circumcision Is A Fraud: And The Coming Legal Reckoning]]: There is no legal basis for parents to consent to the irreversible amputation of healthy parts of their children's bodies without a compelling and urgent [[medical indication]]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Gross strictly believes: "Circumcision is not a human rights violation because foreskin is not a human right."<ref>{{REFweb | ||
| + | |url=https://www.circumcisionchoice.com/single-post/intactwiki4 | ||
| + | |title=German intactivist pretends to be an American law expert | ||
| + | |pubisher=Circumcision Choice | ||
| + | |date=2022-09-03 | ||
| + | |accessdate=2022-09-04 | ||
| + | }}</ref> His recent statement shows very nicely that Gross really doesn't understand the range of [[human rights]] and that he doesn't care about children's rights at all. Bodily integrity is a human right and there parental rights don't cover the right to cut off intact body parts from children without any urgent medical indication. | ||
== Guessed reasons for his engagement == | == Guessed reasons for his engagement == | ||
Revision as of 12:29, 4 September 2022
Andrew Gross is a Jewish (Why is this important?) circumcision advocate from Union City, CA, USA. He is a member of Peninsula Sinai Congregation in Foster City, CA.[1] He is an admin for the Circumcision Choice Facebook page and a contributor to the Circumcision Choice website.[2]
Contents
Circumcision Choice
Gross is a very diligent author on Circumcision Choice, a blog which claims to "supporting choice NOT misinformation" about male circumcision, esp. on minors. Neutral information is always a good idea and even the claim to stop bullying attacks by intactivists is honorable. But the choice of words on the website shows that it is not interested in neutral information, but in combating intactivism. They even mock about people who cannot stand the psychological pain of being mutilated as a child ("Intactivism is a Mental Disorder").[3]
Their "mission"
| “ | We are a group of concerned citizens who have first hand experience dealing with the crazy online world of anti-circumcision activism. We are neither trying to promote circumcision nor discourage it, but we definitely want to promote good information for parents and other interested people with regards to routine infant circumcision. We feel someone needs to stand up for informed consent and parental choice when it comes to circumcision. Someone also needs to stand up against the bullying and hate speech by anti-circumcision fanatics! Enough is enough! – Circumcision Choice[4] |
This "mission" clearly shows that he absolutely believes in a parental right of choice for genital mutilation of minors without any medical indication. This way he totally ignores the parental duty to protect children from harm. Circumcision promoters like him often totally ignore the human rights of the child. He even ignores the physical fact that "circumcision" aka foreskin amputation is always genital mutilation by definition.[5]
No choice for human rights violations
The approach of Gross and Circumcision Choice that it is reliably a parental choice whether to have a healthy child's healthy foreskin amputated without medical indication for any reason, disregards the legal fact that there is no choice as to whether or not to commit human rights abuses. Medically not indicated amputation of any part of a child's body is illegal by definition and cannot be legalized by parental agreements. Therefore, all information on the Circumcision Choice website should be viewed with suspicion, if not as a call for human rights violations.
Adler (2022) layed out in his comprehensive legal treatise Circumcision Is A Fraud: And The Coming Legal Reckoning: There is no legal basis for parents to consent to the irreversible amputation of healthy parts of their children's bodies without a compelling and urgent medical indication.
Gross strictly believes: "Circumcision is not a human rights violation because foreskin is not a human right."[6] His recent statement shows very nicely that Gross really doesn't understand the range of human rights and that he doesn't care about children's rights at all. Bodily integrity is a human right and there parental rights don't cover the right to cut off intact body parts from children without any urgent medical indication.
Guessed reasons for his engagement
This behavior is a normal response from people who have become aware that they too were victims of early childhood circumcision and are now trying to resolve the cognitive dissonance and dilemma. Because Gross is a Jewish American man, it is obvious that he is circumcised himself - probably on his 8th day of life as usual in Judaism. He doesn't like this obvious link to be seen.[5] A cognitive dissonance can develop from the dilemma that you believe that your parents always love you and won't harm you in any way, but then you get information that they had someone remove an intact, healthy, most sensitive and protecting part from your most private parts when you were a newborn, the foreskin.
One suspects that he is trying to encourage repeating the trauma of circumcision on others.[7]
See also
External links
Facebook profile. Retrieved 8 June 2021.
References
- ↑ Gross, Andrew (17 April 2015).
It’s time for anti-circumcision activists to stop the bullying
, The Jewish News of Northern California. Retrieved 8 June 2021. - ↑ Gross, Andrew (17 April 2015).
It’s time for anti-circumcision activists to stop the bullying
, Circumcision Choice. Retrieved 8 June 2021. - ↑ (7 May 2019).
Intactivism is a Mental Disorder
, Circumcision Choice. Retrieved 4 August 2021. - ↑
Mission
, Circumcision Choice. Retrieved 4 August 2021. - ↑ a b (10 July 2021).
IntactWiki creates a page dedicated to me
, Circumcision Choice. Retrieved 3 August 2021. - ↑ (3 September 2022).
German intactivist pretends to be an American law expert
. Retrieved 4 September 2022. - ↑
van der Kolk, Bessell. The compulsion to repeat the trauma: re-enactment, revictimization, and masochism. Psychiatr Clin North Am. June 1989; 12(2): 389-411. PMID. Retrieved 28 June 2022.
