Originally posted on Intactivists of Australasia:
On 22 February this year Bendigo councillor Elise Chapman tweeted a photo in what has been largely interpreted as an attempt to highlight the issue of female genital mutilation, and to make a tenuous link between the practice and the proposed development of a mosque in her area.
The Councillor has been a vocal objector the mosque since a proposal for it’s development was approved by Bendigo City Council last June.
The tweet, which can be seen below, was in response to a tweet to her from a supporter of the proposal to build the mosque.
If by tweeting this photo Councillor Chapman was attempting to highlight a disturbing cultural tradition, then we agree. These customs and traditions have no place in any modern society. Although as far as we are aware, there is no evidence to suggest that anyone involved with the proposed mosque practices or supports female genital mutilation.
What the media…
View original 230 more words
Originally posted on Matthew Tontonoz:
The recent decision by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to endorse circumcision as a prophylactic measure against disease has once again drawn media attention to America’s most controversial surgery. In draft guidelines issued in December, the CDC emphasized that the most up-to-date medical science indicates clear health benefits of circumcision—including a 50%-60% reduced risk of female-to-male HIV transmission, a 30% reduced risk of transmission of the human papilloma virus (HPV), and lower risk of urinary tract infections during infancy. On the basis of these data, the CDC is recommending that health care workers counsel uncircumcised adolescent boys and men, as well as the parents of newborn males, on the potential benefits and risks of circumcision. The guidelines are currently undergoing a 45-day review period, during which the CDC is actively soliciting feedback.
According to the CDC, roughly 80% of American men are circumcised.
The CDC guidelines follow similar…
View original 3,137 more words
Originally posted on Intactivists of Australasia:
Last month, Australian doctor, TV medical commentator and former ‘The Block’ winner Dr Andrew Rochford presented a report on circumcision on Channel 7’s news ‘The Healthy Truth’ segment, which was also packaged as a story on ‘Today Tonight’ in Adelaide.
The sentiments expressed in this latest report were significantly different to those expressed in Dr Rochford’s piece on circumcision on Channel 10’s ‘The Project’ in 2010.
This earlier report was in response to the publication of a journal article which suggested that circumcision should be promoted to lower the rate of HIV transmission in Australia. Much of the TV report showed the doctor repeating the opinions expressed by others, with most statements prefaced with phrases such as ‘some people believe’ or ‘some experts claim’.
Comments on the report on the station’s website and social media sites quickly highlighted the fallacies in many of those opinions, including the following:
- A number of issues with the African…
View original 193 more words
It seems that yet another organisation has emerged with the intent of putting circumcising doctors out of business.
This group calls themselves ‘The Australasian Institute of Genital Autonomy‘, and are a little different from the typical anti-circumcision or ‘intactivisit’ groups. Rather than being anti-circumcision, they claim to be pro-choice, and think that when they are old enough, boys should be able to decide if they want to have any part of their bodies removed.
They also suggest that all babies and children should be treated equally when it comes to cutting (or not cutting) their genitals, so that if it is wrong to cut the genitals of our female children, then it is also wrong to cut the genitals of our male and intersex children.
We all know that cutting a baby girl’s genitals is mutilation, but why is it that some are now saying that cutting a baby boy’s genitals is mutilation as well? Can we use gender alone to determine what is ‘mutilation’ and what is ‘circumcision’?
The Practical Ethics blog from Oxford University explores this issue. Read the blog post here.
Is circumcision a surgery best performed in infancy? If he’s going to get it done, isn’t it better done sooner rather than later? The WHOLE Network answers your questions.
Many parents believe that circumcising their son in infancy is a kindness. They assume getting it done sooner will save him the pain of having to endure the procedure later on in life, but what we’ve found is that the opposite is true.
While the mainstream media, and other special interest groups in Australia, may report that an increasing number of parents are returning to the ritual of infant circumcision, the facts show that actually there has been a dramatic drop since 2009, from more than 13% to 10.82%.
Male Births for 2013 not available at time of posting. Projection based on 2 year moving average trend.
Sources: Medicare, Australian Bureau of Statistics
This recent drop joined the dramatic decline from the 1970s, when it was estimated that 90% of baby boys were circumcised. Below we put forward some possible reasons for the drop:
- An increased awareness of the 16+ protective and sexual functions of the foreskin.
- An understanding that caring for an intact baby requires less effort than for one who is circumcised. No special post-surgery care is required; cleaning involves only wiping the outside – never retract (the boy does this himself when ready).
- An understanding that even if there were a slightly increased risk of UTIs from an intact penis, leaving your boy intact, in the past this was most likely caused by forced retraction of the foreskin, and, in any case, infections can be treated the same way we treat our girls – with antibiotics.
- An increase in breastfeeding, and with that, an understanding that circumcision surgery disrupts breastfeeding and bonding.
- Many Australian men are voicing their resentment at being circumcised as babies.
- A greater awareness of the immediate risks of the circumcision surgery itself.
- An appreciation of the concept of autonomy. That is, all humans should have the right to self-determination over their own bodies.
- A recent groundswell of opinion from around the world from medical authorities, political parties, and other institutions, declaring that infant circumcision is unnecessary, harmful, removes healthy, functional tissue and breaches a child’s human rights.
- With circumcision rates now at 10.82%, ‘fitting in’ can no longer be used to justify the decision to circumcise.
- The proliferation of social media, which has provided wide exposure to stories of botched circumcisions, regretful parents, and resentful men.
- A realisation that the purported benefits are marginal at best, are better achieved by basic hygiene, safe sex practices, and less invasive medical treatment. These “benefits” have been promoted by those with a monetary or other interest in circumcision, and are insignificant when balanced against the above points.
Has your doctor told you about the 28 identified complications of circumcision? If not, read about them here, and become more informed than the average Australian doctor.
Danish physicians declare that circumcision without medical indication is mutilation.
Originally posted on Just a Snip - against genital mutilation aka circumcision:
Circumcision without medical indication is mutilation. The message from the Danish Society of Family Physicians is unmistakable: electory surgery on non-consenting minors must end.
The statement has been put forward in connection with a hearing by the Danish National Board of Health about guidelines regarding circumcision of minors.
The full wording is: “The National Board of Health has sent Guidelines Regarding Circumcision of Boys into hearing. DSAM (Danish Society of Family Physicians) has debated the issue and agreed that circumcision may only be performed when medical indication is present. Circumcision in the absence of a medical indication is mutilation.”
The stance against circumcision from DSAM is the latest in a series of clear statements from respected Danish and Scandinavian organisations.
Soon the Danish National Parliament will have no option than to ban genital mutilation of healthy boys. Adults who understands the consequences and risks regarding the procedure should of course…
View original 15 more words
“A lot of people think it’s easier to keep a circumcised penis clean, but it’s actually not. With a circumcised penis, you have a post-surgical circumcision wound in a dirty diaper. You have to worry about keeping that clean, pulling the remaining foreskin back so it won’t readhere, applying vaseline so the raw skin won’t stick to the diaper, watching for infection, watching for adhesions and skin bridges, meatal stenosis…. the list goes on. You don’t have to do any of that with an intact baby. You just wipe and you’re done! No need to pull anything back. Parents who have both intact and circumcised sons in the home report that intact boys are hands down the easier of the two to keep clean.”
~ The Whole Network
Read more about post-circumcision care…