TheDoctorsTV on Circumcision - a critique: Difference between revisions

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.

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?

Line 17:

[[Foreskin]] feels REALLY good. HIS body HIS decision.

* [[Bias]]

* [[Foreskin restoration]]

* [[The Doctors]]

* [[United States of America]]

Line 22:

Line 27:

[[Category:Film]]

[[Category:Film about circumcision and intactivism]]

[[Category:Promoter]]

[[Category:USA]]

@@ Line 8: / 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.
-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?
@@ Line 17: / Line 17: @@
 [[Foreskin]] feels REALLY good. HIS body HIS decision.
+{{SEEALSO}}
+* [[Bias]]
+* [[Foreskin restoration]]
+* [[The Doctors]]
+* [[United States of America]]
 <!-- {{REF}} -->
@@ Line 22: / Line 27: @@
 [[Category:Film]]
 [[Category:Film about circumcision and intactivism]]
+[[Category:Promoter]]
 [[Category:USA]]