View source for TheDoctorsTV on Circumcision - a critique

'''{{FULLPAGENAME}}''' reflects American [[bias]] in favor of infant [[circumcision]]. Medical science, however, is not to be found.
==Video==
<br>
<youtube>HBrCo5k1K_Q</youtube>

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 Infant Circumcision| routine]] {non-therapeutic) [[circumcision]] for any medical reason.

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

<!-- {{REF}} -->

[[Category:Film]]
[[Category:Film about circumcision and intactivism]]

[[Category:USA]]

[[Category:From IntactWiki]]

[[de:{{FULLPAGENAME}}]]