Difference between revisions of "TheDoctorsTV on Circumcision - a critique"
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs) (Add Video section; Wikify.) |
WikiModEn2 (talk | contribs) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | '''{{FULLPAGENAME}}''' reflects American [[bias]] in favor of infant [[circumcision]]. Medical science, however, is not to be found. | ||
==Video== | ==Video== | ||
<br> | <br> | ||
| Line 7: | Line 8: | ||
Today's parents say no to [[circumcision]], but you wouldn't necessarily know it from watching this trite show executive-produced by Dr. Phil. They manage to trivialize and mislead on a myriad of topics including circumcision. | Today's parents say no to [[circumcision]], but you wouldn't necessarily know it from watching this trite show executive-produced by Dr. Phil. They manage to trivialize and mislead on a myriad of topics including circumcision. | ||
| − | I theorize that when their show promoting infant circumcision last fall was greeted with outraged posts to their forum (http://TheDoctorsTV.com), they did a tiny bit of research and decided to take up the topic again with a slight amount of sympathy for [[intact]] men. In the recent footage at the beginning of this video they are suddenly aware that non-surgical [[foreskin restoration]] exists, and that MAYBE the infant's right to choose is relevant to the discussion. Then keep listening to the second half to hear what they had to say last fall. | + | I theorize that when their show promoting infant [[circumcision]] last fall was greeted with outraged posts to their forum (http://TheDoctorsTV.com), they did a tiny bit of research and decided to take up the topic again with a slight amount of sympathy for [[intact]] men. In the recent footage at the beginning of this video they are suddenly aware that non-surgical [[foreskin restoration]] exists, and that MAYBE the infant's right to choose is relevant to the discussion. Then keep listening to the second half to hear what they had to say last fall. |
They may have given it a bit of thought, but no more than a bit. The ridiculousness of what they say is obvious if you imagine every reference to male and female reversed. Mutilated genitals LOOK better? | They may have given it a bit of thought, but no more than a bit. The ridiculousness of what they say is obvious if you imagine every reference to male and female reversed. Mutilated genitals LOOK better? | ||
| Line 16: | Line 17: | ||
[[Foreskin]] feels REALLY good. HIS body HIS decision. | [[Foreskin]] feels REALLY good. HIS body HIS decision. | ||
| + | {{SEEALSO}} | ||
| + | * [[Bias]] | ||
| + | * [[Foreskin restoration]] | ||
| + | * [[The Doctors]] | ||
| + | * [[United States of America]] | ||
<!-- {{REF}} --> | <!-- {{REF}} --> | ||
| Line 21: | Line 27: | ||
[[Category:Film]] | [[Category:Film]] | ||
[[Category:Film about circumcision and intactivism]] | [[Category:Film about circumcision and intactivism]] | ||
| + | [[Category:Promoter]] | ||
| + | [[Category:USA]] | ||
[[Category:From IntactWiki]] | [[Category:From IntactWiki]] | ||
[[de:{{FULLPAGENAME}}]] | [[de:{{FULLPAGENAME}}]] | ||
Latest revision as of 22:38, 11 May 2024
TheDoctorsTV on Circumcision - a critique reflects American bias in favor of infant circumcision. Medical science, however, is not to be found.
Video
Comment by user TLCTugger:
Today's parents say no to circumcision, but you wouldn't necessarily know it from watching this trite show executive-produced by Dr. Phil. They manage to trivialize and mislead on a myriad of topics including circumcision.
I theorize that when their show promoting infant circumcision last fall was greeted with outraged posts to their forum (http://TheDoctorsTV.com), they did a tiny bit of research and decided to take up the topic again with a slight amount of sympathy for intact men. In the recent footage at the beginning of this video they are suddenly aware that non-surgical foreskin restoration exists, and that MAYBE the infant's right to choose is relevant to the discussion. Then keep listening to the second half to hear what they had to say last fall.
They may have given it a bit of thought, but no more than a bit. The ridiculousness of what they say is obvious if you imagine every reference to male and female reversed. Mutilated genitals LOOK better?
95% of the world's non-Muslim families do not circumcise. Every mammal evolved a foreskin before there was surgery or soap, and nature has been perfecting foreskins ever since, for 65 million years. No other mammal seems to "need" this corrective surgery at birth. Would you be locked up for inviting friends to witness the circumcision of your new puppy?
No national medical association of doctors anywhere on earth endorses routine {non-therapeutic) circumcision for any medical reason.
Foreskin feels REALLY good. HIS body HIS decision.