22,226
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
update of all web references
*: This argument holds very persistently, often used by women who only know uncircumcised men, but even by urologists who earn a lot of money with [[circumcision]]s and therefore welcome any argument pro [[circumcision]].
*: A common stereotype of this argument sounds like this: "The [[foreskin]] was necessary when we lived in trees and crawled on all fours. The [[foreskin]] then had protected the [[Glans penis|glans]]. Now that we are running on two legs and men no longer grind their genital over the floor, the [[foreskin]] can therefore get away."
*: During the [[Circumcision Debate]] 2012 in Germany, a single Muslim children's surgeon from Cologne was repeatedly quoted<ref>{{REFweb |url=http://www.rp-online.de/panorama/deutschland/arzt-fuerchtet-illegale-beschneidungen-aid-1.2895603 |title=Arzt fürchtet illegale Beschneidungen |trans-title=Doctor fears illegal circumcisions ( |language=German article)] |date=2012-07-03 |accessdate=2019-10-18}}</ref> who railed with exactly this stereotype and other abstruse arguments against an impending [[circumcision]] ban.
*: For many years, the medicine knows that the [[foreskin]] is a very important organg of the body that not only contains a large number of very sensitive nerve cells and is very beneficial for sex, but also protects the [[Glans penis|glans]] against drying, keratinization, and sunburn.
* '''Circumcision supposedly protects against HIV/AIDS.'''
* '''Circumcision supposedly protects against STDs.'''
*: People refer over and over again to a study<ref>{{REFweb |url=http://www.who.int/hiv/topics/malecircumcision/en/ |title=Male circumcision for HIV prevention |publisher=[[WHO]] |accessdate=2019-10-18}}</ref> of the [[WHO]] which should have determined that [[circumcision]] should have a 60% protection against HIV/AIDS. This study is sharply criticized worldwide by experts.
*: A study by [[Bertran Auvert]] is used as a source, which supposedly wants to found an HIV infection risk reduced by up to 60%.
*: There are several comments: Firstly, the study design was already distroyed with the start of the trial. The circumcised control group was circumcised directly at the beginning of the study. This means that the intact control group had a 'contagion lead' of six weeks which were applied until the circumcision wounds have healed. Secondly, the entire study was carried out in the region with the highest HIV rate around the world. Thus the results are not that meaningfull as if the study would have been carried out in areas with 'normal' infection rates. Orange Farm, the village in South Africa, is well-known for the high rate of HIV. A third criticism is that the study of [[Bertran Auvert|Auvert]] comes up with mathematical legerdemain and was also canceled after two years, when the figures threatened to align themselves. Unfortunately, this study is also the basis on which the [[WHO]] performs worth millions [[circumcision]] campaigns with the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
* '''"A cut penis is better protected against infections."'''
*: The opposite is true, because an important protective function of the [[foreskin]] no longer exists after the [[circumcision]].
*: "While the outer foreskin layer is an extension of the penile shaft skin, the inner foreskin layer, which lies flat against the glans, is a mucous membrane. The inner layer is an extraordinarily complex tissue. It contains apocrine glands which produce Cathepsin B, lysozymes, chymotrypsin, neutrophil elastase, cytokines and pheromones such as androsterone. Indian scientists have shown that the subpreputial moisture contains lytic material which has an antibacterial and antiviral effect. The natural oils lubricate, moisten and protect the mucous membranes of both the glans and the inner foreskin layer. The tip of the foreskin is supplied with ample amounts of blood through important blood vessels."<ref>{{REFweb |url=https://www.bvkj.de/presse/pressemitteilungen/ansicht/article/stellungnahme-drmed-wolfram-hartmann-praesident-des-berufsverbands-der-kinder-und-jugendaerzte/ |title=Stellungnahme Dr.med . Wolfram Hartmann, Stellungnahme Präsident des Berufsverbands der Kinder- und Jugendärzte, zur Anhörung am 26. November 2012 im Rechtsausschuss des Bundestageszum Gesetzentwurf der Bundesregierung zur Beschneidung |trans-title=Statement Dr. med. Wolfram Hartmann, President of the Professional Association of Paediatricians, to the hearing on 26 November 2012 to the bill of the Federal Government on circumcision |language=German |date=2012-11-18 |accessdate=2019-10-18}}</ref>*: The [[foreskin]] is naturally equipped with multiple defense mechanisms against infection. The [[foreskin]] in the infant and toddler has a pronounced peak with a sphincter, which is formed by a vortex of muscle tissue, and remains closed to keep foreign substances out there, but opens to allow the outflow of urine. The sub-preputial moisture contains lysozyme, a secretion that destroys harmful microorganisms. The [[foreskin]] contains Langerhans cells, provide protection against HIV infection. Fleiss, Hodges, and Van Howe<ref>{{REFjournal |url=http://www.cirp.org/library/disease/STD/fleiss3/ |title=Immunological functions of the human prepuce |last=Fleiss |first=P.M. |author-link=Paul M. Fleiss |last2=Hodges |first2=F.M. |author2-link=Frederick M. Hodges |last3=Van Howe |first3=R.S. |author3-link= |journal=Sexually Transmitted Infections |date=October 1998 |volume=74 |issue=5 |pages=364-367 |accessdate=2019-10-18}}</ref> explain the immunological functions of the [[foreskin]] in detail, as well as Cold and Taylor.<ref>{{REFjournal |url=http://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/cold-taylor/ |title=The prepuce |last=Cold |first=C.J. |last2=Taylor |first2=J.R. |author2-link=John R. Taylor |journal=British Journal of Urology |volume=83 |issue=Suppl. 1 |pages=34-44 |date=January 1999 |accessdate=2019-10-18}}</ref>*: "The [[foreskin]] has a number of tasks and functions. The glands which can be found in the inner [[foreskin]], produce a secretion that keeps the [[Glans penis|glans]] soft and supple. The so-called smegma is used to obtain a stable bacterial flora in the genital area of men and to protect them from diseases. It protects against infection, which may also affect the urethra, since its task is the natural hygiene of the [[Glans penis|glans]]."<ref>{{REFweb |url=http://symptomat.de/Penisvorhaut#Funktion_.26_Aufgaben_der_Penisvorhaut |title=Penisvorhaut: Funktion: Aufgaben der Penisvorhaut |trans-title=Penis foreskin: Function: Tasks of the penis foreskin |language=German |date=2019-06-19 |publisher=MedLexi.de |accessdate=2019-10-18}}</ref>
== Hygienical arguments ==
* '''"Babies feel no pain yet, therefore should be circumcised at an early stage."'''
*: This assertion is completely obsolete and refuted in many studies. The discussion is also quite schizophrenic. It is fiercely debated whether embryos that are to be expelled, should be stunned before. But you can easily cut off a body part without anesthesia on born babies because they do not feel pain? The reserch situation is however quite differently here: boys who were circumcised as infants, show even stronger reactions to pain (e.g. vaccination)) as intact ones.<ref>[{{REFweb |url=http://english.alarabiya.net/en/life-style/healthy-living/2015/04/21/First-infant-MRI-study-finds-babies-feel-pain-like-adults-.html |title=First infant MRI study finds babies feel pain ‘like adults’] |date=2015-04-21 |accessdate=2019-10-18}}</ref><ref>[{{REFjournal |url=http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(96)10316-0/abstract?cc=y Taddio et al: Effects |title=Effect of neonatal circumcision on pain response during subsequent routine vaccination] |last=Taddio |first=Anna |etal=yes |journal=The Lancet |volume=349 |issue=9052 |pages=599-603 |date=1997-03-01 |accessdate=2019-10-18}}</ref>
* '''"[[Circumcision]] is comparable with ear piercing or other piercings."'''
* '''"If we ban it here, it is done illegaly or abroad."'''
*: This so-called 'backyard' argument can be applied to almost all statutory, punitive bans and is just absurd. It is also listed in debates about drug addiction, abortion and [[FGM|female genital mutilation]]. During the [[Circumcision Debate]] 2012 in Germany, the author [[Harald Stücker]] has explained in a recommended article<ref>{{REFweb |url=https://evidentist.wordpress.com/2012/11/19/beschneidung-im-hinterhof-legalize-it/ |title= |trans-title=Circumcision in the backyard: Legalize it?! ( |language=German article)] |last=Stücker |first=Harald |date=2012-11-19 |accessdate=2019-10-18}}</ref> why the backyard argument is not accessible. *: Cases are already on record in Germany, in which courts have eluded parents the right to determine residency of their children when it was to expect that they wanted to take a child abroad for a [[circumcision]] and the court ruled for the benefit of the child.<ref>{{REFweb |url=https://dejure.org/dienste/vernetzung/rechtsprechung?Text=XII%20ZB%20166/03 |title=Rechtsprechung BGH, 15.12.2004 - XII ZB 166/03 |trans-title=Case Law BGH, 15.12.2004 - XII ZB 166/03 |language=German |publisher=dejure.org |accessdate=2019-10-18}}</ref>
*: They who still want to do something legally prohibited, will not be quenched by law at all. Arguing that legal banning would lead to dodging into illegality, should result in a situation where all criminal laws could be abolished.
* '''"There is no internal Jewish debate about circumcision."'''
*: The many [[Intactivists|Jewish movements]] against the ritual [[circumcision]], founded in the Internet age, which also search for [[Brit Shalom|alternative rituals]], clearly show that an intra-Jewish debate exists very well.
*: But the ritual was repeatedly questioned in inner-Jewish debates even earlier. [[Walter Otte]] wrote about it in the [[HPD]]: "The combination of medicine and religion refers to the great decade-long intra-Jewish debate of the 19th century, brought in mainly Jewish doctors objection made against the circumcision of boys. In the middle of the 19th century, there were Jewish reform groups, Jewish doctors and rabbis, who entered intense discussions, which dealt with religious but also to health aspects of the Prepuce [[circumcision]] of boys. In debates or reform Rabbi and Jewish doctors (which even claimed the abolition of the [[FGM|Boy circumcision]]), the hospital doctor [[Gideon Brecher]] called the procedure a "bloody operation". The Dessau doctor [[Adolf Arnhold]] presented extensive arguing why [[circumcision]] is outdated as a "binding ritual of the Jews". He was based on religious considerations, called the biblical circumcision formations only of importance for "unbiased believers" and came to the conclusion that the material act of [[circumcision]] had become "a redundant and useless shell of the mentally bare core". [[Philipp Wolferts]] from Lemförde and the Hamburg doctor [[Moritz Gustav Salomon]] emerged with medical arguments, where Salomon came to the conclusion that [[circumcision]] was not religious but merely a political meaning in the 19th century at all."<ref>{{REFweb |url=http://hpd.de/node/14033?nopaging=1 |title=Verunglimpfungen statt Argumente? |trans-title=Slurs instead of arguments? |language=German |last=Otte |first=Walter |date=2012-09-24 |accessdate=2019-10-18}}</ref>
=== Islamic religion ===
* '''"Circumcision has been recommended by the Prophet Mohammed."'''
*: This argument is brought by the Muslim communities, with respect to a Hadith of one fellow of the prophet where the male circumcision is required. The Quran itself neither mentions nor requires the [[circumcision]]. Although Ibrahim (Abraham) himself is mentioned in the Quran at least 67 times, his [[circumcision]] is not mentioned there. Instead, many places in the Quran describe that Allah created man "in great shape" <ref>(Quran 95:4)</ref>, "completed" <ref>(Quran 27:88)</ref> and "complete" <ref>(Quran 32:7)</ref>, and "made your bodies perfectly" <ref>(Quran 40:64)</ref>. "No mistake you can see in the Creation of the Most Gracious." <ref>(Quran 67:3)</ref> The [[circumcision]] itself would have to be an insult for Allah.<ref>{{REFweb |url=http://www.quranicpath.com/misconceptions/circumcision.html |title=Circumcision - Does the Qur'an Approve it? |publisher=Quranic Path |accessdate=2019-10-18}}</ref>
*: The recommendation for [[circumcision]] goes back to [[Abū Huraira]], who reported that the Prophet should have said: ''"To fitrah (at creation of man) five things are required: The [[circumcision]], the shaving of pubic hair, the short-cutting of the mustache, cuttin the (finger and foot) nails, and plucking the armpit hairs."'' <ref>[BUCHARI:1216]</ref>
*: Since this is five body treatments that have to do in the broadest sense with hygiene, one can understand even in temporal and spatial context of Islam in the 7th century AD, that [[circumcision]] was mentioned, too. But nowadays, [[circumcision]] is unnecessary for hygienic reasons. Hygiene can be no religious argument, too.