Epispasm: Difference between revisions

Line 19:

}}</ref>

Hodges (2001) reported, ''Lipodermos'' is the name given by the Greeks to the condition of having a deficient foreskin.<ref>{{REFjournal

Hodges (2001) reported, ''Lipodermos'' is the name given by the Greeks to the condition of having a deficient foreskin. According to Hodges:

Through the development of the concept of ''lipodermos'', Greek medicine gave to Greek civilization a scientific reinforcement of its disapproval of the violations of genital integrity occurring in the Near East. This ethos posited not only that a circumcised penis is a deviation from the natural—although that is of real importance—but that a circumcised penis is a defective and disfigured penis, one that can be repaired by medical treatment. Medicine and law thereby entered into a mutually supportive relationship: circumcision was against the law because it mutilated its victims, but, taken to the next logical level in this medico-ethical argument, it was also against the law because it necessarily inflicted a state of ''lipodermos'' on its victims.<ref name="hodges2001">{{REFjournal

|last=Hodges

|first=Frederick M.

Line 40:

Line 42:

|DOI=10.1353/bhm.2001.0119

|accessdate=2020-07-17

}}</ref>

}}</ref></blockquote>

Hall (1992) reports that a surgical operation was necessary.<ref name="hall1992" />

Hall (1992) reports that a surgical operation was necessary to restore the missing foreskin.<ref name="hall1992" />

Schultheiss ''et al''. (1998) report that, in an alternative to the surgical procedures, a weight made of bronze, copper, or leather, called the ''Pondus Judaeus'', was attached to the residual foreskin that pulled the skin downward and stretched it which resulted in [[tissue expansion]].<ref name="schultheiss1998">{{REFjournal

@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 }}</ref>
-Hodges (2001) reported, ''Lipodermos'' is the name given by the Greeks to the condition of having a deficient foreskin.<ref>{{REFjournal
+Hodges (2001) reported, ''Lipodermos'' is the name given by the Greeks to the condition of having a deficient foreskin. According to Hodges:
+<blockquote>
+Through the development of the concept of ''lipodermos'', Greek medicine gave to Greek civilization a scientific reinforcement of its disapproval of the violations of genital integrity occurring in the Near East. This ethos posited not only that a circumcised penis is a deviation from the natural—although that is of real importance—but that a circumcised penis is a defective and disfigured penis, one that can be repaired by medical treatment. Medicine and law thereby entered into a mutually supportive relationship: circumcision was against the law because it mutilated its victims, but, taken to the next logical level in this medico-ethical argument, it was also against the law because it necessarily inflicted a state of ''lipodermos'' on its victims.<ref name="hodges2001">{{REFjournal
   |last=Hodges
   |first=Frederick M.
@@ Line 40: / Line 42: @@
   |DOI=10.1353/bhm.2001.0119
   |accessdate=2020-07-17
-}}</ref>
+}}</ref></blockquote>
-Hall (1992) reports that a surgical operation was necessary.<ref name="hall1992" />
+Hall (1992) reports that a surgical operation was necessary to restore the missing foreskin.<ref name="hall1992" />
 Schultheiss ''et al''. (1998) report that, in an alternative to the surgical procedures, a weight made of bronze, copper, or leather, called the ''Pondus Judaeus'', was attached to the residual foreskin that pulled the skin downward and stretched it which resulted in [[tissue expansion]].<ref name="schultheiss1998">{{REFjournal