Circumcision advocate: Difference between revisions

(4 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)

Line 1:

'''Circumcision advocate''' describes a person who vehemently advocates in favor of medically not necessary, non-therapeutic genital mutilation in children.

'''Circumcision advocate''' describes a person who vehemently advocates in favor of medically not necessary, non-therapeutic [[circumcision]] aka [[foreskin]] [[amputation]] aka [[genital mutilation]] in children.

Some of these people are committed to ~~their sexual 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]].

== Reasons ==

* Some of these people that advocate [[circumcision]] are have a sexual fetish and are committed to it 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]].

* But many also simply believe that it is the [[Parental rights|legal right of parents]] to choose and allow their sons to have part of their healthy genitalia cut off without any medical necessity.

There is reason to believe that many (perhaps most) circumcision advocates are actually victims of circumcision who suffer from [[Psychological issues of male circumcision#Depression, rage, and grief in circumcised men|denial of loss]].

There is reason to believe that many (perhaps most) circumcision advocates are actually victims of [[circumcision]] who suffer from [[Psychological issues of male circumcision#Depression, rage, and grief in circumcised men|denial of loss]].

== 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 sophistry and fallacious aurguments to pretend seriousness on the subject: They claim to take a "neutral" point of view and list the [[Arguments pro circumcision|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.

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 sophistry and fallacious aurguments to pretend seriousness on the subject: They claim to take a "neutral" point of view and list the [[Arguments pro circumcision|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 [[Category:Circumcision fetishist|circumcision fetishists]] 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 claimed that the intact [[foreskin]] would be a great danger for boys.

True [[Category:Circumcision fetishist|circumcision fetishists]] 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 claimed that the [[intact]] [[foreskin]] would be a great danger for boys.

== Bullying techniques ==

Line 94:

Line 97:

== No choice for human rights violations ==

The approach of all websites and pages listed here, 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 these websites and pages should be viewed as fundamentally critical, if not as a call for human rights violations.

The approach of all websites and pages listed here, 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 these websites and pages should be viewed as fundamentally critical, 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]].

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-'''Circumcision advocate''' describes a person who vehemently advocates in favor of medically not necessary, non-therapeutic genital mutilation in children.
+'''Circumcision advocate''' describes a person who vehemently advocates in favor of medically not necessary, non-therapeutic [[circumcision]] aka [[foreskin]] [[amputation]] aka [[genital mutilation]] in children.
-Some of these people are committed to their sexual 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]].
+== Reasons ==
+* Some of these people that advocate [[circumcision]] are have a sexual fetish and are committed to it 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]].
+* But many also simply believe that it is the [[Parental rights|legal right of parents]] to choose and allow their sons to have part of their healthy genitalia cut off without any medical necessity.
-There is reason to believe that many (perhaps most) circumcision advocates are actually victims of circumcision who suffer from [[Psychological issues of male circumcision#Depression, rage, and grief in circumcised men|denial of loss]].
+There is reason to believe that many (perhaps most) circumcision advocates are actually victims of [[circumcision]] who suffer from [[Psychological issues of male circumcision#Depression, rage, and grief in circumcised men|denial of loss]].
 == 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 sophistry and fallacious aurguments to pretend seriousness on the subject: They claim to take a "neutral" point of view and list the [[Arguments pro circumcision|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.
+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 sophistry and fallacious aurguments to pretend seriousness on the subject: They claim to take a "neutral" point of view and list the [[Arguments pro circumcision|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 [[Category:Circumcision fetishist|circumcision fetishists]] 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 claimed that the intact [[foreskin]] would be a great danger for boys.
+True [[Category:Circumcision fetishist|circumcision fetishists]] 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 claimed that the [[intact]] [[foreskin]] would be a great danger for boys.
 == Bullying techniques ==
@@ Line 94: / Line 97: @@
 == No choice for human rights violations ==
-The approach of all websites and pages listed here, 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 these websites and pages should be viewed as fundamentally critical, if not as a call for human rights violations.
+The approach of all websites and pages listed here, 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 these websites and pages should be viewed as fundamentally critical, 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]].
 {{SEEALSO}}