22,335
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
adjust <page>/<pages> values
During the late XIX century -in English speaking countries, the theory of irritation and reflex neurosis led to the development of many forms of genital mutilation.<ref>{{REFjournal
| last=Gollaher | first=David L. | date=1994 | title=From ritual to science: the medical transformation of circumcision in America. | journal=Journal of Social History | volume=28 | issue=1 | pages=5-23 | url=http://www.cirp.org/library/history/gollaher/ | accessdate=2018-11-01
}}</ref>
Circumcision of the male, infibulation of the male foreskin, castration, clitoridectomy, circumcision proper of the female (removal or reduction of the clitoral hood), removal of the nymphae (labia minora), application of irritants to the genitals, enemas, hysterectomies. The purpose was to reduce excessive sexual desire and its manifestations, such as [[masturbation]], which were suspected to be the cause of many diseases.
}}</ref>
and Ap Morgan Vance MD<ref>{{REFbook
| last=Vance | first=Ap Morgan | year=1900 | title=Surgical Fanaticism | url=http://www.circumstitions.com/Chronology.html | editor= | edition= | volume= | chapter= | pages= | location= | publisher= | isbn= | accessdate=2018-11-01
}}</ref>. But by changing the rationale for the procedure, circumcision survived the transformation from the reflex neurosis theory to the germ theory. What started as circumcision of children, became newborn circumcision during and after the World Wars.
In the UK, an article by [[Douglas Gairdner]] led the NHS to stop coverage of circumcisions in 1949.<ref>{{REFjournal
| last=Gairdner | first=Douglas | date=1949-12-24 | title=The fate of the foreskin | journal=Br Med J | volume=2 | issue= | pages=1433-71437 | url=http://www.cirp.org/library/general/gairdner/ | accessdate=2018-11-01
}}</ref>. Ironically, the prevalence of circumcision in the United States kept growing, with rare opposition.