Site hosted by Angelfire.com: Build your free website today!
"Tradition will accustom people to any atrocity."
--George Bernard Shaw

Advocates of circumcision will something claim that since circumcision has been practiced by men for thousands of years and is still being done today that must mean there's something good about it. I'm not going to try to deny that male circumcision has been going on for this long, because it's an indisputable fact that's been proven by anthropology. What I will dispute is that the fact that the procedure is this old has anything to do with whether it should still be performed today.

To start off, this argument is a logical fallacy called the Argument from Tradition, where it's stated that because something is old that must mean there's truth behind it. Michael C. Labossiere has written a list of fallacies that is well known around there Internet, and on the Argument from Tradition he says "This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because the age of something does not automatically make it correct or better than something newer. This is made quite obvious by the following example: The theory that witches and demons cause disease is far older than the theory that microrganisms cause diseases. Therefore, the theory about witches and demons must be true. "1

There have been a number of reasons why circumcision may have been performed among various cultures around the world throughout history. For the vast majority of it's practice, circumcision has remained a ritual and has been mainly restricted to groups or tribes that believe it to be an important ritual while it's ignored by the rest of the world. Even today only about 18% of men worldwide are circumcised. A number of reasons why circumcision may have been performed by various cultures at different times have been suggested, and the truth is that very few of them would apply to men today. In a book dealing with bodily mutilation in anthropology and psychology, Armando R. Favazza writes:
"Mutilation of the penis is an extremely ancient practice which takes different forms, ranging from the simple slicing of the foreskin to the splitting of the penis from the tip to the urethra. The reasons for this practice are quite diverse and include such notions as sanitation, substitute for human sacrifice, symbolic castration, desire to be like women, elevation of status of manhood, sexual differentiation, enhanced fertility, contraception, resolution of identity conflict, permanent incorporation into a social group, control of sexual urges, a mark of caste, a test of endurance, a covenant with God, and so on.
"From studies of structurally simple societies some anthropologists hold that penis cutting results in minimization of sexual difference between males and females; an example is [Bruno] Bettelheim's idea that the mutilation represents the desire of males to obtain female genitals… [Theodore] Reik (1975), a psychoanalyst, theorized that a man projects his unconscious hostility toward his father onto his son and therefore symbolically castrates his son through penis cutting in self-defense. In light of Reik's theory, [R.B.] Graber (1981) hypothesized that cultures with patrilocality (a residence pattern that brings fathers and their adults sons into continuous interaction) and enough political development to impede group fission and freedom of movement would have high rates of penis cutting. Examination of data from 250 paleos (primitive societies) supported Graber's hypothesis."2
On why circumcision has been practiced among Jews, Favazza writes:
"The multiple theories about the origin of circumcision have been discussed previously. Early theories focused on hygiene. However, most Jewish writers have presented purely religious arguments, for example that the ritual is an act of faith. In addition, Moses Maimonides (A.D. 1135-1204) wrote in part 3, chapter 49, of his famous The Guide of the Perplexed that circumcision is done to weaken the penis and decrease sexual intercourse. "The bodily pain caused to that member is the real purpose of circumcision…It is hard for a woman with whom an uncircumcised man has had sexual intercourse to separate from him; in my opinion, this is the strongest reason for circumcision."3
I highly doubt that very many men would cite any of these as reasons to circumcise. It's especially interesting that Maimonides advocated circumcision for the purpose of weakening the sex drive, which most men today would not consider to be a good thing. This is not the last time circumcision would be advocated for this reason.

Male circumcision as we know it today is but one form of male genital mutilation that's been practiced historically. Another form of circumcision that's been practiced by Arab tribes in Yemen is called salk, and it involves removal of all the skin of the penis and abdomen from the abdomen from the umbilicus to the scrotum. This procedure was always carried out without anesthesia and any man who did not go through it was deemed unfit for marriage. Another form of male genital mutilation is called subincision and practiced among Australian Aborigines. In the procedure a boy is first circumcised, and later has penis flattened and his urethra split open. Yet another form is male infibulation, where holes are punched in the foreskin and it is stitched up, making foreskin retraction either impossible or very painful. Even castration was sometimes practiced all around the world.

Despite the fact that circumcision has been practiced for purely ritualistic reasons by a minority of the world for the vast majority of it's existence circumcision advocates still believe that this means there must be something good about it. During the mid-19th century circumcision for the first time was being practiced for non-religious reasons but for medicine. Doctors at the time believed that masturbation was the cause of all kinds of illnesses, including but not limited to epilepsy, blindness, insanity, paralysis, hip trouble, urinary incontinence, sloth, headache, clubfoot, bladder inflammation, spinal curvature, lameness, clumsiness, hysteria, malnutrition. They also believed that they could prevent masturbation by circumcising.
"A remedy for masturbation which is almost always successful in small boys is circumcision. The operation should be performed without administering anesthetic, as the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutory effect upon the mind, especially, if it is connected with the idea of punishment, as it may well be in some cases."
--John Harvey Kellog4

"In all cases of masturbation circumcision is undoubtedly the physician's closest friend and ally... To obtain the best results one must cut away enough skin and mucous membrane to rather put it on the stretch when erections come later. There must be no play in the skin after the wound has thoroughly healed, but it must fit tightly over the penis, for should there be any play the patient will be found to readily resume his practice, not begrudging the time and extra energy required to produce the orgasm. It is true, however, that the longer it takes to have an orgasm, the less frequently it will be attempted, consequently the greater the benefit gained... The younger the patient operated upon the more pronounced the benefit, though occasionally we find patients who were circumcised before puberty that require a resection of the skin, as it has grown loose and pliant after that epoch."
--E.J.Spratling5

"The prepuce is one of the great factors in causing masturbation in boys. Here is the dilema we are in: If we do not teach the growing boy to pull the prepuce back and cleanse the glans there is danger of smegma collecting and of adhesions and ulcerations forming, which in their turn will cause irritation likely to lead to masturbation. If we do teach the boy to pull the prepuce back and cleans his glans, that handling alone is sufficient gradually and almost without the boy's knowledge to initiate him into the habit of masturbation... Therefore, off with the prepuce!" --William J. Robinson6
This marks the second time in recorded history that circumcision has been recommended for some form of sexual reduction. Circumcision continued to be performed for the purpose of masturbation for the next several decades, and was even recommended by the American Medical Association for this purpose in 1928. Eventually it became known that circumcised men still masturbated, and masturbation did not cause any the maladies it was blamed for but by that time circumcision had become an established practice among upper-class Americans. Circumcision was viewed as a symbol of status and the uncircumcised penis was thought of as dirty. Circumcision was just viewed as the American thing to do, and it's then that circumcision made the jump from pseudo-medical procedure to tradition.

In this area male circumcision has a lot in common with female circumcision/female genital mutilation (FGM). Most westerners have the idea that FGM has traditionally been practiced in Middle Eastern cultures to control female sexually, although they may not be aware of the similar origins of male circumcision (or "MGM") in the U.S. Another fact that many westerners are not aware of is the way FGM is now being promoted in those countries as a tradition, by women. Hanny Lightfoot-Klein, one of the world's leading anti-FGM activists and educators says:
"Contrary to all my expectations, I discovered that this ancient custom as adhered to and defended most resolutely not by men, but by its survivors, the women elders. It was these women that insisted most vehemently on its perpetuation and it was they who also wielded the knife.

"Among the elite, the mutilation was often plotted by "the grandmothers," and carried out at the first unguarded moment that presented itself, in spite of all efforts that the child's educated parents had exerted in order to prevent it.

"To nearly all the population, male and female alike, the mere idea that a girl should not be "circumcised" was altogether unthinkable. Not only would such a girl find no one who would marry her, but it was generally believed that all sorts of evils in respect to her sexual behavior, her health, and even more importantly in these cultures, the health of her husband and babies, would inevitably follow."7
What kind of a tradition is infant circumcision? For the majority of American males they were circumcised as an infant in a hospital because their parents were lead to believe that it needed to be done. This is not a tradition but an outdated medical practice. The only reason it's still being done so much is because it's been done in the past and not enough people are questioning it. Sometimes change may be difficult but it's necessary, and just because something is old does not make it good. It's time to start questioning what traditions are worth carrying on.
References:

1.) Dr. Michael C. Labossiere, Fallacy Tutorial Pro 3.0 (The Nizkor Project)

2.) Armando R. Favazza, M.D., Bodies Under Siege: Self Mutilation in Culture and Psychiatry (The John Hopkins University Press, 1987) 152-153

3.) Ibid., 157

4.) John Harvey Kellog, Treatment for Self-Abuse and Its Effects, Plain Facts for Old and Young," Burlington, Iowa: P. Segner & Co. 1888, p. 295. This reference was obtained from Historical Medical Quotes on Circumcision

5.) E.J.Spratling, Masturbation in the Adult, Medical Record, vol. 24. (1895): pp. 442-443. This reference was obtained from Historical Medical Quotes on Circumcision

6.) William J. Robinson, Circumcision and Masturbation, Medical World, vol.33 (1915): p.390. This reference was obtained from Historical Medical Quotes on Circumcision

7.) Hanny Lightfoot-Klein, Erroneous Belief Systems Underlying Female Genital Mutilation in Sub-Saharan Africa and Male Neonatal Circumcision in the United States: a Brief Report Updated. Presented at The Third International Symposium on Circumcision, University of Maryland, College Park, Maryland May 22-25,

BackBack to Yuki's Intactivism Resource