16,715
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Add date.
|pages=379-80
|accessdate=2021-08-04
}}</ref>
==Twentieth century==
Sir [[Jonathan Hutchinson]] (1900) opened the twentieth century with an article advocating male circumcision as a way to decrease the pleasure of sex, and hence to discourage sexual immorality.<ref>{{REFjournal
|last=Hutchinson
|first=Jonathan
|init=J
|title=The advantages of circumcision
|journal=The Polyclinic
|date=1900-09
|volume=3
|issue=9
|pages=129-131
|url=
|quote=
|pubmedID=
|pubmedCID=
|DOI=
|accessdate=2021-09-04
}}</ref>
|accessdate=2021-09-04
|note=
}}</ref> The practice of male circumcision was well established in the United Kingdom as the nineteenth century ended. ==Twentieth century==Sir [[Jonathan Hutchinson]] (1900) opened the twentieth century with an article advocating male circumcision as a way to decrease the pleasure of sex, and hence to discourage sexual immoralitybegan.<ref>{{REFjournal |last=Hutchinson |first=Jonathan |init=J |title=The advantages of circumcision |journal=The Polyclinic |date=1900-09 |volume=3 |issue=9 |pages=129-131 |url= |quote= |pubmedID= |pubmedCID= |DOI= |accessdate=2021-09-04}}</ref>
[[R. W. Cockshut|Cockshut]] (1935) published a letter in the ''British Medical Journal'' that urged circumcision of all male infants because the "glans of the circumcised rapidly assumes a leathery texture less sensitive than skin." The advantage, according to [[R. W. Cockshut|Cockshut]], is that masturbation would be reduced.<ref name="cockshut1935">{{REFjournal
''Gillick'' affirmed the right and duty of parents to protect their child.
Sebastian Poulter, a legal writer, in a book entitled ''English Criminal Law and Ethnic Minority Customs''(1986, stated:
<blockquote>
"The basic right to bodily integrity which everyone possesses under the English common law means that any unlawful interference in this right amounts to an assault or battery, at the very least, and might in appropriate circumstances entail the statutory offence of grievous bodily harm. The question raised in cases of circumcision, excision or infibulation is whether the operation can be justified as constituting lawful as opposed to unlawful interference with this right."