Ad hominem attacks on circumcision fetishists?

I’ve seen this too many times to let it slide any longer. The circumcision fetishists on twitter continually use the phrase, ad hominem. I think it is their pitiful attempt to make themselves look smarter than they actually are, but it basically means they are being attacked and their delicate feelings hurt. For those majority who don’t use or even know what this phrase means, it is basically when someone uses unrelated character flaws in an attempt to win an argument. When I call these perverts, who sexually enjoy babies being circumcised, circumcision fetishists, they cry “ad hominem attacks”.

To clarify this situation, these sickos support circumcision because it is their sexual fetish, so they will support any bogus statistic or study that other circumfetishists comes up with solely because they don’t want their fetish to go away. After all if all circumcision is made illegal, they can only fantasize about the babies being tortured, they can’t know it’s being performed any longer. And the majority of men who grow up with their intact penises will eventually shove these perverts down where they belong, in their own sick underground where they can trade ancient videos of this barbaric practice.

So when I and other intactivists say the reason these guys are in support of circumcision is because they have a sick fascination with it, that is NOT an ad hominem attack, because it is VERY related to the argument at hand. Again, do your research before you speak (or type), fetishists.

It’s not easy being an intactivist

Ignorance is NOT bliss. Before I had my son, I was ignorant about what circumcision really was. Luckily, I was pointed in the right direction before he was born, so he was spared having his foreskin ripped away from him before he was old enough to consent let alone know what he was losing. Since it was so easy for me to see why the procedure is barbaric and cruel, I naively thought it would be easy to convince other people how awful it is.

I was wrong!  Infant circumcision is so deeply rooted in tradition and misinformation that most parents refuse to see it for the child abuse it truly is. They don’t want to watch the procedure or even a video, because they don’t think it’s something a parent should see.  It escapes their understanding that if it’s too traumatic for them to watch, then it’s certainly too traumatic for them to subject their baby to.

There are too many excuses these types of people use, and I’ve heard them all.  ”Oh, it’s better when they are younger and won’t remember the pain.”  The thing is that if they don’t have it as an infant, the chances are very slim that it will ever get done.  Only a small percentage of men get circumcised as adults, and it’s usually because doctors convince them it’s the only thing that will solve their penile issues.  Too each his own, though, as long as it’s his decision.  I don’t care if a man is obsessed with circumcision and wants to watch other men get it done, or even fantasize about it being done to other men. But they cross the line when those fantasies involve infants.

Yes, there are plenty of sick men (and some of those men are doctors) who fantasize about baby boys being circumcised. They look for any excuse to push the idea of making infant circumcision compulsory.  There are two doctors from Johns Hopkins who are currently making the rounds by getting their distorted opinions published in many online newspapers and magazines.  I guess they feel that the more times they say it, the more it will be believed.  Unfortunately, there are many ignorant people out there who do believe them.  They’re told that crushing and slicing the most sensitive part of their son’s body will protect him from sexually transmitted diseases, and they believe them…because they’re doctors.  It doesn’t matter that they are also men who might have a perverted desire to maim their children.  After all, it was done to them, so they naturally feel it should be done to all males.

I just did a quick search on Google for doctors who are also sexual predators.  Here are just three of those links: Doctor? Sexual abuser? Or bothAngels of Death: The DoctorsDoctor on sex-offender list too much to stomach

There are thousands of links to similar stories. Going to medical school does not make a person a saint.  So it makes sense that some of these twisted men who have a circumcision fetish would also be doctors. Here is one such circumfetish doctor who even runs a website where he posts his lies and propaganda, and the fetishists on twitter freely endorse it.  I won’t link to the site but it is medicirc dot org, and it should be avoided by anyone who is serious about learning more about what circumcision really is.

It’s disheartening to visit twitter and see some of the ignorant tweets regarding circumcision.  Naturally people will post links to all the articles spouting nonsense about how cutting healthy tissue will prevent babies from getting diseases that only affect men.  They say those babies will someday become men who will need the protection that circumcision affords. They can’t even see how stupid they are when they say that. Removing the foreskin does not turn the penis into a shield. Only a condom can do that.  Cut men who sleep around and don’t practice safe sax have the same chance of getting diseases as intact men.  Yes, I know what the African studies say, but they were funded by proponents of circumcision, so naturally their findings would be what they wanted them to be. But even if they were true, that doesn’t condone strapping an infant to a board and taking something from him that he had a right to keep.

Intactivists are not trying to convince anyone to do anything.  We are merely trying to keep parents from doing one thing that will negatively impact their sons.  Leave your kids the way they were born. Why is that such a hard concept to understand? Why do you get so ugly with us on twitter or in your comments on blogs and facebook?  Naturally we fight back, because we are disgusted by anyone who refuses to open their eyes and see circumcision for the barbaric practice it really is.

Here are 40 compelling reasons to say NO to infant circumcision!

A known circumfetishist negates the term circumfetish

While searching online, I stumbled upon this gem, written by known circumfetishist Ben Winkie (not his real name, of course): http://thelittlesnip.nibblebit.com/2008/10/15/does-circumfetish-actually-exist/  What makes this funny is that this pervert epitomizes what a circumfetishist is, but he is making a pathetic attempt to negate the term  (he considers himself a circumsexual).  Here is a link that shows Ben (apparently, it’s not him, but a picture he posted on his site to point out what a true “circumsexual” AKA circumfetishist looks like) masturbating over a circumstraint (the boards they strap helpless infants to so they can slice off their foreskins): http://www.circleaks.org/index.php?title=File:BenWinkie.jpg

It is sick people like this who keep the myths going on how infant circumcision is supposedly beneficial, instead of the barbaric practice it truly is.  The next time someone tells you that you should circumcise your baby, just think of the above picture.  That could be the man doing the surgery.  If that is OK with you, then seek immediate psychiatric help, since your innocent son deserves better than that.

http://www.circleaks.org/index.php?title=Circumfetish

 

Circumfetish – sexual fetish of males being circumcised!

I feel a rant coming on, so bear with me. It just literally makes me sick to my stomach when I’m on twitter and read ignorant comments such as the following:

@TheCircDecision Smart people can see through your lies #i2 RT @TheWHOLENetwork: Trying to educate others about circumcision can be very discouraging

And this gem:
@TheCircDecision I want to protect parental rights to child health care choices, #i2 wants to obsess over their foreskin fetish – quite the difference

TheCircDecision (AKA Circinfo AKA AParentsChoice and possibly ProCirc) is a classic example of a circumfetishist. He gets turned on by the idea of baby boys (or even grown men) getting strapped down and struggling as a grown man chops off his foreskin. The fact that people such as him even exist is nearly enough to keep me up at night. I’m actually surprised I don’t have nightmares of men like him finding my innocent intact son and forcing circumcision on him. I shudder at the thought.

But for this pervert to dare say that it is people like me (the #i2 hashtag is the anti-circumcision movement)that have the foreskin fetish is just beyond comprehension. He is the one who likes little boys genitals to be maimed and damaged for his own purposes. People like me want to protect boys and tell doctors to keep their hands to themselves. It takes a warped mind to call us the fetishists. And that is what they are, barely a step away from being pedophiles.

Many people in the #i2 movement think that the man behind these twitter accounts is a known circumfetishist (I have removed his name for legal reasons, but it is listed among others on circleaks – link above as well as link at bottom). So the next time any parent sees a tweet by TheCircDecision and/or Circinfo, ask yourself if you really want to take any advice from a man who probably masturbates to the idea of your son being circumcised! If you really care about your son, listen to your own maternal instincts. Your baby will be born perfect, and that is the way he should remain! Don’t take the chance that the doctor who cuts him might be a circumfetishist. Here is more info on circumfetishists.

His Body, His Choice!

Idiot’s Guide to Circumcision (or Circumcision for Dummies)

Honestly, there are idiot guides to everything else under the sun, so why not circumcision (AKA circ and cut)?  There are obviously people who are still totally in the dark about this ancient barbaric practice, so why not?  Probably because it would cause the medical profession to lose all the money it makes from strapping down baby boys and chopping off nearly half (or more) of the skin of their penises.  I have written several articles regarding this controversial (yes, amazingly controversial) topic, including one on debunking the myth that it’s just a snip of skin.

I recently read an article that was linked on Facebook from the group, Saving our Sons, which detailed a new mom’s nightmarish encounter with almost losing her son due to a botched circumcision (I’ve read so many of these stories lately).  Not only that, but he is forever maimed and probably won’t ever be able to enjoy physical intimacy.  There are so many bad things that can happen due to being cut.  The least of which is less sensitivity, and the worst is death, but there are many degrees of awful between those two extremes. One is what happened to that woman’s son.

The incompetent doctor cut all the shaft skin instead of the “normal” amount they remove.  The poor kid nearly bled to death until a surgeon finally had to sew the glans to the base to prevent anymore loss of blood.   Of course this required two more corrective surgeries when the boy became a toddler.  Even still, you have to imagine this boy no longer has any of the nerve enriched skin, so it is doubtful he will ever receive any pleasure from sex.  And supposedly this happened after the new mom was told something so awful, it convinced her that her son would hate her if she didn’t have him cut.  So a woman who proclaims to have been against cutting changed her mind due to one idiotic person.  But the question remains, who was the bigger idiot? The person who told her such nonsense or her for believing it?  Can I get a show of hands?

Her story made me feel sick.  I couldn’t feel sorry for her. She did the research and knew it was wrong. She didn’t even have the guts to reveal what she was told, merely that it still haunted her.  Of course it did, because her decision has doomed her son to a celibate life, not to mention the possibility of more corrective surgeries to fix something that should never have been done.  Will her story save other new moms from doing the same thing to their boys? Maybe, but maybe not.  This woman did the research, and yet she still let some stranger with a knife near her innocent baby.  I didn’t even know as much then as I do now, when I told the doctor I didn’t want my son cut.  I knew idiotic women who told me that they would never be with a man who was intact.  I didn’t care about their opinions, because I had those same feelings when I was younger.  I was brainwashed into thinking all men should be cut.  I believed it should be done, and that it was neater and more attractive.  Well, I’ll tell you what. After changing and cleaning my intact son now for almost three years, I think his little winky is the cutest one I’ve ever seen.  I would physically do damage to anyone who tried to mutilate that perfect little thing (well, one day it won’t be so little :))  and damn the consequences.

For all of you who continue to believe the hype that cutting reduces the risk of getting STDs and HIV. Here’s a new flash: it’s  total bull.  Only abstinence and condoms prevent that.  I know plenty of people who have acquired STDs from their cut boyfriends.  And since America has the highest rate of cut men as well as the highest rate for HIV, where is the correlation? If we hardly have any intact men, then who is getting HIV?  That’s right, the circumcised men.  It’s simple math, people.

The study in Africa supposedly showing a decrease in HIV from those who were cut?  Well, can any of you men imagine wanting to have sex after you’ve just had half your dick cut off? Those studies didn’t take into account the healing time, which would affect those men’s sex drives.  I think it takes about 6 weeks for a man to fully heal from having his foreskin chopped off.  Don’t quote me on that, since I didn’t check, but common sense tells you that they weren’t out there having sex right after the surgery.  And from what I’ve read recently, the rate of HIV is now increasing for those cut men.  Yep, because they’ve now had plenty of time to heal and jump back into the fray. Afterall, they are so ignorant they believe that since they’ve been cut they no longer need to use condoms. They believe the hype that circ’d men don’t need to use them.  I still don’t understand how that myth even got started.  Besides all that nonsense, let’s go back to cutting baby boys.  From what I understand not too many infants are out there having sex, so that supposed “benefit” is moot.

And though I’ve avoided discussing the religious aspects, I won’t hold back anymore.  Adults pick their religions, not children.  To force your son to make a pact with a God he knows nothing about is wrong.  Let him decide when he’s older if he wants to make such a personal and intimate pact. Maybe he will follow a different path.   For those who refer to the old testament of the Bible, where it allegedly says God wants all boys to be mutilated on the 8th day of their life, SO WHAT?  There are plenty of things in the Bible that are morally wrong, like girls having sex with their fathers.  Do you support that too, since it is in the Bible?

It all boils down to a human right’s issue, and babies are humans. They have a right to bodily integrity, and no parent (or doctor) should have the right to remove a fully functioning organ. Yes, the foreskin is an organ. Don’t believe me?  Look it up.  After all, don’t you know what the biggest organ is in the human body?  Yep, it’s our skin.  And for those who say that only internal organs count, at least half of the foreskin IS an internal organ. “The intact penis has a glans penis that is an internal organ,” quoted from doctorsopposingcircumcision.org (see link at bottom of page).

For those who think that babies can’t remember what was done to them, there can be psychologic complications:

The patient has experienced, according to experts, “excruciating pain, the perinatal encoding of his brain with violence, an interruption of maternal-infant bonding, the betrayal of infant trust, and must suffer the risks and effects of permanently altered normal genitalia. In addition, he has lost his basic human right to a sexually intact and functional body.” Milos MF, Macris D. Circumcision: a medical or human rights issue? J Nurse-Midwifery. http://www.cirp.org/library/ethics/milos-macris/

Just because we’ve done it for hundreds or even thousands of years does not make it right.  We used to stone people.  We used to burn people at the stake if we thought they were witches. We used to think that leeches cured fever.  We are supposed to be more enlightened.  So how come we still practice this ancient barbaric ritual?

Oh, and one last thing I should mention.  Many people who are in support of routine infant circumcision do so because it is their sexual fetish. They are turned on by the idea of someone inflicting pain on a baby’s genitals.  Don’t believe me again?  Well, this time I did the research for you, http://circleaks.org/index.php?title=Circumfetish, as well as  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=djiTpV__qR4. Be sure to check out the reference links given near the bottom of the circleaks.org page!!  Do you want to be in the same camp as these perverts?  Here’s another news flash for you.  Some doctors who perform circumcisions ARE circumfetishists.  So before you hand your baby over to someone willing to chop off his foreskin, ask yourself if he could be one of them.  They are able to handle a baby’s penis and abuse it without fear of reprisal.  How is this not a problem for everyone?

Hopefully this Idiot’s Guide to Circumcision will shed some light for those of you looking for answers.  Unfortunately, for every article written against cutting, there is one written saying how wonderful it is.  Just question anyone’s motives when he/she tells you that you should intentionally inflict pain and abuse on your baby son. He was born with it for a reason. It does not cease to be important once your son is born.  It will benefit him his whole life, and it is incredibly easy to clean.  So for those other idiots who say it stinks?  Take a damn shower!! It’s called soap and does amazing things to dirt and grime.  Just imagine our fingernails if we never cleaned under them.  I suppose they should be removed at birth too?  How about behind our ears?  That can get pretty nasty without proper cleaning. Should we slice those off too to avoid the trouble?  Do you see where I’m going with this?  Stop missing the forest for the trees (or rather stop throwing the baby out with the bathwater), and take your whole baby home from the hospital.  If you truly feel he was perfect the way he was born, then PROVE it!

Oh, there is one last thing I’d like to add. I recently read an account of a man who had a circumcision in his 20′s. He apparently had a tight frenulum, so an erection was uncomfortable for him. Instead of fixing the problem, he had his entire frenulum cut off as well as getting circumcised. Reading his account literally made me sick to my stomach, but it did remind me of something very important. When a baby is circumcised, he cannot tell the doctor how much of his foreskin to remove. The doctors usually remove all of the loose skin. When an adult male has a circumcision, he is free to tell his doctor how much or little to remove. So if a man is born with an overly long foreskin or a tight frenulum, he can choose to have some of the foreskin removed or have his frenulum fixed. There is no such civility for a newborn baby. Just another reason why routine infant circumcision is WRONG!!

Further reading: Foreskin facts & Doctors opposing circumcision