It’ so confounding, so bizarre that otherwise caring, thoughtful people see nothing wrong with circumcision. Can’t they grasp the fundamental right of a child for wholeness — to possess and keep all the structures that God/nature so exquisitely engineered for his body? Where do they come down presupposing Junior won’t want or need his foreskin? Haven’t they learned the role of the foreskin for protection, mobility, sensitivity, pleasure and sexual mechanics?
I have to keep reminding myself that I have been speaking out against it for 40 years and the issue is not yet on the radar screen of most Americans. They know not. More often than not, they are captives to the tyranny of habit and tradition in condoning the ripoff of the penis. History is full of injustices continuing through centuries, to the astonishment of logic, fairness and outrage. Why does social reform take so long when blatant wrongs are identified generations before? Ignorance, power and the oppression of tradition resist change. And here we have a powerful health industry that has snookered generations of parents to OK a perverse and unethical procedure that bring billions of dollars to them. The immobilized victims are too young to stop it.
All of us in the human rights and social justice movement for the end of circumcision are stinging from the ruling a week ago by a superior court judge in San Francisco who determined a November ballot proposal to ban circumcision of male children within the city violates a California law that makes the regulation of medical procedures a function of the state and not cities. Judge Loretta Giorgi ordered the San Francisco elections director to have the measure removed from the ballot. Earlier in the summer, Lloyd Schofield and his group, “Prohibition of Genital Cutting of Male Minors,” had accumulated more than 12,000 signatures on petitions, far exceeding the 7,163 needed for the ballot. The proposal would make circumcising a minor in the city a misdemeanor offense punishable by a fine of up to $1,000 and up to a year in jail.
OK, there is some logic to preventing individual municipalities from deciding what medical practices are acceptable. There could otherwise be a patchwork of regulations like ancient city states. The California Business and Professions Code triumphed here.
But Giorgi’s ruling cannot, and should not, be interpreted as exonerating the heinous, insidious practice of circumcision. It is still a nasty, body-altering act performed on a non-consenting human beings for no significant medical benefit and with risks of permanent penile injury and death. One estimate put medical deaths annually in the U.S. from circumcision at 229.
After Schofield’s ballot effort was first publicized in the fall of 2010, a howl rose from circumcision defenders. First were Jews, who argued it directly infringed on their ancient practice of the bris — the ceremonial circumcision of male babies on their eighth day by a mohel. Then there were the defenders of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution who contended that not allowing foreskin cutting violated religious folks the freedom to practice their faith. Then there were ignorant Christians who still think circumcision is mandated for them because ”circumcision” is in the Bible and Jesus was cut. Add to that the American Civil Liberties Union, which normally follows common sense, but here came to the defense of religionists to the detriment of the rights of the child. Muslims complained, too, because circumcision is a staunch cultural practice. It is not required by the Quran, though that is often claimed.
The San Francisco measure brought to the American consciousness the human rights issues regarding circumcision for, perhaps, the first time. Many in the media reported on it. Many in the media had a field day with puns, double entendres and tee-hee comments over why so much fuss could be made about a chunk of skin attached to a guy’s intimate parts. Mainstream media have lacked the judgment or courage to acknowledge that circumcision is medically unethical, just as female genital mutilation is. They won’t acknowledge that all humans have the universal right to wholeness and safety from intrusive harm.
Most of us are familiar with the famous quote of Arthur Schopenhauer, which can be applied to how entrenched practices are changed: “All truth passes through three stages: First, it is ridiculed, second, it is violently opposed, and third, it is accepted as self-evident.” The San Francisco ballot experience was a combination of the first two stages. Those who had never before heard the case against circumcision were mostly scoffing, joking and deriding the idea that someone would try to put a stop to America’s most routine surgery. But the “violently opposed” included the Jewish communty, which has tried to justify their cutting practice since the days of Abraham (of course, adopting a tribal practice no way unique to them). It’s been a deeply contentious issue among Jews themselves, who do not universally circumcise and never have. Jews historically have taught to respect the human body. The Torah, for examples, notes this is Leviticuls 19:28: “You shall not make gashes in your flesh for the dead, or incise any marks on yourselves: I am the Lord.”
Several California legislators, alarmed by the San Francisco proposal, rushed to draft a bill in the California State Assembly to protect circumcisions. Meanwhile, a California congressman was working to get a bill adopted by Congress to allow the cutting to continue come what may.
All that aside, circumcision is on its way out. We will see the fulfillment of Shopenhauer’s statement that truth will weather ridicule and violent opposition to be deemed self-evident. Of course, male babies and boys should be left intact.
Better educated, sophisticated, sensitive parents are rejecting circumcision. They are repulsed, and they buck tradition because they recognize their sons should not be sexually altered to conform to quack medicine. They recognize that most of the rest of the world — Europe, Asia, Latin America and great parts of Africa — never adopted it and find America’s obsession with a skinless penis some weird cultural fetish.
A Centers for Disease Control study found the rate of circumcision in the U.S. fell from 56 percent to 32.5 percent between 2006 to 2009. Thankfully, here in the American West, the rate is lowest. It has been helped by the decision by health service departments in 18 states to drop Medicaid coverage of circumcision because it is not medically necessary and is essentially cosmetic surgery.
The days are numbered for circumcision. Those who worked to block the ballot measure in San Francisco should take no comfort. The are on the wrong side of history. Those seeking to perpetuate male genital mutilation on the helpless for whatever reasons have no case. Like slavery, child labor, discrimination against gays, minorities and women and voting inequality, the time is now on the American agenda for ending circumcision. It will happen because of lawsuits, public education, picketing and protests, politics, medical funding cuts and the work by such groups as Mothers Against Circumcsion, Attorneys for the Rights of the Child, IntactAmerica.org, NOCIRC.org and Doctors Opposing Circumcision.
Check out the July 28 protest by Jews opposed to circumcision outside the San Francisco courthouse. Put the knives down, doctors. Stop funding circumcisions, insurance companies. Shut down the circumcision rooms, hospitals. Respect the body integrity of your sons, parents. Wake up, folks.
My son and grandsons are intact. Yours can be, too.

5 comments
August 3, 2011 at 2:25 am
kotfrank
I’ll add “with the help of SFMGMbill.org and Bay Area Intactivists (both www & Facebook).
Yes this looks like the way it went down but really the driving force is not told here because it is not self evident. One has to dig a little:
The DOC did not get their brief in on time. No Lloyd is not an attorney. In typical cases of being challenged, the SF district attorney would represent Lloyd or those who did everything right to get on the ballot. It is almost unheard of for as district attorney to represent the challenging plaintiffs because the initiative already went through the city process of qualifying for the ballot. The plaintiffs two religious families had help from the Religious Council had the always ready Jewish Anti Defamation League plus the ACLU Northern California Chapter. Bringing the lawsuit whenever they want would of course net them more time to prepare briefs. And they had many seasoned attorneys. So here we have San Francisco suing in San Francisco Court against San Francisco. (City Attorneys Office suing the Dept. of Elections).
Judge Giorgi worked in the City Attorney’s office from 1985-2006, with City Attorney Dennis Herrera, who opposes the circumcision ban initiative and has potentially worked with her for five years, from 2001-2006.Herrera has screened himself off from any election-related matters so as to avoid an appearance of a conflict of interest given that he’s running for Mayor. Stewart (his replacement) has worked as the City Attorney’s chief deputy from 2002 to the present. Judge Giorgi worked in the City Attorney’s office from 1985-2006, so from 2002-2006, Stewart and Giorgi both worked in the City Attorney’s office, perhaps together on some cases (?). Now Giorgi will be making a decision on a case where a brief was filed by Therese Stewart, a former co-worker. This still doesn’t smell right to me. It’s a little too cozy.
The judge created an entirely new class of “medical” procedures with her ruling. She basically said that the non-indicated cutting of children’s genitals is OK if parents and doctors say it is OK. To distinguish these from genuinely medically-indicated surgeries, it is proposed, and I agree, that these henceforth be known as “Giorgi”. As in:
“I have no objection to legitimate surgical interventions, but most American boys have a Giorgi at birth for purely cultural reasons. There is no reason my son or any boy had to endure a Giorgi, because he was healthy and whole at birth.”
“I resent my Giorgi, and I can’t forgive my parents or the doctor.”
“The United States Congress stepped in to criminalize the Giorgi of girls in 1996, but thanks to a San Francisco judge the Giorgi of boys is alive and well.”
So, non indicated circumcision+medical=”Giorgi” the new&improved term to cut.
Lloyd Schofield’s SFMGMbill.org initiative allowed only for medical circumcisions, knowing the state rule that only the state can regulate medical. Because the pro-circ extremists are funding (from such likes of Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation) and creating pro circ seemingly medical studies, this is what was submitted in mass to the judge. Judge Loetta Giorgi was presented mass of procirc “Medical” studies developed from Smoke & Mirrors! Heres how http://tinyurl.com/4yhfg3d .
John Taylor died last November and no one has taken his place to do research and studies of the penis and foreskin. Taylor was last working on the healthy relationship between the Glans and Prostate as a hydraulic system and the foreskin’s nerves activation on it.
Religious circumcisions were not given exemption because it is illegal to single out religion. (Of course all should be protected including females: note SFMGMbill is not sexist in that it doesn’t say boys). Read though how the SF District Attorney office twisted this around for the protection of parents.
Concerning the state bill AB768 to legally codify circumcision of MALES ONLY (Talk about sexist) pictured here of the dog and pony show (Fiona Ma and Mike Gatto), with so many serious budgetary problems facing the state of California, why are a few California state legislators worried about what initiatives local people get to vote on at the local level? Don’t they have greater problems to deal with at the state level?
Ma representing the largest community of Russian Jews and Gatto representing Burbank 40% Jewish, is it right that religious people should be writing into law?! (BTW the first step to this goal was SF’s pro- circumcision court case.) Ma and Gatto took no questions even though this was touted as a discussion. Ma and Gatto were joined by Senator Mark Leno who is Jewish and promoting federal protection of circumcision and equally sexist too, HR2400. (photos at (fb) Bay Area Intactivists)
What AB768 & HR2400 bills will do is codify into law circumcision so no one can sue- NO ONE! Even those who are botched or dead. Especially it is an end run around those cut 18year olds born in 1997 who have standing to sue the feds. for not being equally protected from genital cutting. That’s in 4 years. If such 18 year olds sue and win then it can be argued that it should apply to all males and thus circumcision would be outlawed or female circumcision would be legalized. What happened in SF court hearing throwing SFMGMbill off the voters ballot is the first step to creating circumcision as medical meaning therapeutic., meaning good for everyone, meaning mandatory circumcision for all. Until now non therapeutic circumcision has never been legally associated with health. Again this is what has prevented recommendation of circumcision. So I suggest taking the senate poll of HR2400 at POPVOX.
August 3, 2011 at 11:47 pm
Anderson
Great article!!! All children deserve genital integrity.
August 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm
A Jewish Male Opposing Circumcision
There is a growing Jewish movement that is rejecting circumcision. We’ve stopped stoning adulteresses long ago, and there is discussion and movement in our communities to turn the bris from a surgery into a blessing.
The Judaic Movement to End Circumcision: Part 2
http://intactnews.org/node/105/1311886372/jewish-voices-current-judaic-movement-end-circumcision-part-2
Israeli Association Against Genital Mutilation (in Hebrew)
http://www.britmila.org.il
Kahal: Giving Up Brit Milah (in Hebrew and English)
http://www.kahal.org
Interview with Jewish Intactivist Miriam Pollack
http://www.beyondthebris.com/2011/07/defying-convention-interview-with_27.html
Jews who believe that circumcision should be against the law.
http://intactnews.org/node/103/1311885181/jews-speak-out-favor-banning-circumcision-minors
August 4, 2011 at 5:23 pm
A Jewish Male Opposing Circumcision
There is a growing Jewish movement that is rejecting circumcision. We’ve stopped stoning adulteresses long ago, and there is discussion and movement in our communities to turn the bris from a surgery into a blessing.
Brit Shalom Celebrants by Mark D. Reiss, M.D.
http://www.circumstitions.com/Jewish-shalom.html
Brit B’lee Milah (Covenant Without Cutting) Ceremony
http://www.nocirc.org/religion/Naming_ceremony.php
One Rabbis’ Thoughts on Circumcision by Rabbi Nathan Segal
http://www.rabbinathan.com/writings/circum.shtml
A Case for Bris without Milah.
http://www.circumstitions.com/Jewish.html
Jewish Voices: The Current Judaic Movement to End Circumcision: Part 1
http://intactnews.org/node/104/1311886091/jewish-voices-current-judaic-movement-end-circumcision-part-1
August 6, 2011 at 9:09 am
Rood Andersson
I find it particularly compelling to learn that after hearing a tape of the rape of a 12 year old girl by Warren Jeffs, that a jury in Texas condemned Jeffs for sexually assaulting children. In effect the jury rejected Jeff’s sole defensive strategy: religious freedom. But here we have a California judge defining genital mutilation as a medical procedure, despite the fact that the suit on which she ruled was brought by religious groups, crying “religious freedom”. Perhaps the California judge needed to hear the screams of a boy being put to the knife.