Assorted Writings

"If we have been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth... It's simply too painful to acknowledge, even to ourselves, that we've been taken." --Carl Sagan

To easily find relevant information, you may want to use the page search function (Press Ctrl F in most browsers).

For easier linking, clicking any title will take you to that piece's own page. For easier browsing, each piece is also included on this page. Please feel free to link to or repost anywhere(forum, blog, your own site etc) any of the writings listed on this page. I only ask that if you repost a piece, that you include the original author's name if given.

By David Chamberlain Ph.D

Circumcision originated at least 6,000 years ago as a tribal and religious identity symbol in African and Semitic cultures. The ballooning of the practice in 20th century America, however, was the work of pediatricians and obstetricians who gave it new status as a "medical" procedure. Circumcision received a big lift from a nationally prominent physician, John Harvey Kellogg of Battle Creek, Michigan (later a founder of the famous cereal company) who was obsessed with the evils of sex in general and masturbation in particular; he saw the painful ritual of circumcision as a discouragement. Kellogg's book, Plain Facts for Old and Young (1877) urged parents to have their boys circumcised without anesthesia--because the pain would have a "salutary effect upon the mind." Before long, the book was as common as his corn flakes in American homes.

Expressing a sharply opposing view, psychohistorian Lloyd DeMause (1991) finds circumcision one of the numerous acts of genital mutilation and violence perpetrated on infants and children in virtually every culture since the earliest times. Because it involves sexual mutilation in the family circle, DeMause claims it falls into the category of "incest" and should be seen as "an adult perversion." Other modern critics have labeled it a "betrayal of the innocent" and a "breech of trust" (Grimes, 1978; Janov, 1983). Anesthesiologist John Scanlon (1985) simply calls it "barbarism." Nevertheless, a century ago, under medical leadership, circum- cision swept through the male population.

Medical circumcision became a uniquely American phenomenon. About 80% of the world's population never adopted the practice: This includes most of Europe, and populous countries like Japan, China, and Russia. Researcher Edward Wallerstein (1995) refers to circumcision as an American medical "enigma." A urologist estimates that 90% of American males currently living were initiated into life in this violent way. Significantly, for men, circumcision is where sex and violence first meet. Swiss psychoanalyst Alice Miller (1983) sees in this kind of cruelty the roots of social violence.

Leading the crusade for circumcision over a century ago, the physician P. C. Remondino (1891) called the prepuce "a malign influence causing all manner of ills, unfitting a man for marriage or business and likely to land him in jail or a lunatic asylum." According to him, "circumcision is like a substantial and well-secured life annuity; every year of life you draw the benefit....Parents cannot make a better investment for their little boys, as it assures them better health, greater capacity for labor, longer life, less nervousness, sickness, loss of time, and less doctor bills" (Cited in Speert 1953:165). Dr. Remondino claimed that circumcision would cure about a hundred ailments, among them asthma, alcoholism, enuresis, and rheumatism (Wallerstein 1985). People were afraid and gullible.

Another physician of the day (Clifford 1893) enumerated the alleged dangers of the intact foreskin. These included penile irritation, interference with urination, nocturnal incontinence, hernia or prolapse of the rectum (from a tight foreskin!), syphilis, cancer, hysteria, epilepsy, chorea, erotic stimulation, and masterbation. This was the flimsy basis for selling circumcision to America--although none of it turned out to be true. In modern times, dire warnings are still dressed in medical language pointing to the normal foreskin as the source of sexual diseases, cancer, urinary infections, and even AIDS. Yet circumcision neither causes nor cures any of these conditions. The medical compulsion to perform the operation--usually without anesthesia--continues this long legacy of pain as many physicians are still turning a deaf ear to rational arguments from within their own profession (e.g. Grimes, 1978; Wallerstein 1985; Winberg et al. 1989; and Ritter 1992). The American record is unique.

Meanwhile, as the trade flourishes, a humane trend is clearly visible in journal publications. Numerous articles have reported empirical measures of stress during circumcision, and compare procedures and anesthetics for pain (e.g., Kirya and Werthmann 1978; Yeoman, Cooke and Hain, 1983; Pelosi and Apuzzio, 1985; Masciello, 1990). In this professional literature, one can see a growing empathy for infants, full acceptance of their pain, serious doubts about performing circumcisions, and strong recommendations for anesthetics which effectively reduce pain (Williamson and Williamson 1983; Holve et al. 1983; Dixon et al. 1984; Stang et al. 1988; and Rabinowitz and Hulbert 1995). Perhaps this is a harbinger of what is to come, and a sign that the century of denial may be ending.

A mix of cultural forces blur the future. In exploring the extent of physician influence on parental choice for circumcision, one study showed that when the doctor was opposed to circumcision, the rate fell to 20%, but when he was in favor, the rate was 100% (Patel 1966). In contrast, when four pediatricians in Baltimore did an educational experiment with pregnant mothers (Herrera et al. 1982), they were surprised at the results. While half had been taught the medical "risks and benefits" of circumcision and half received no information, virtually all the mothers opted for circumcision. The doctors concluded that deep cultural and traditional issues were working against a change in attitude in their group. Surveys examining parental motives for requesting circumcision have revealed these forces at work.

Parents typically care about "appearances," yield to pressure from relatives to continue circumcising, and believe the propaganda about medical "benefits." They hold a variety of false notions that circumcision is mandated by hospitals, by public health law, or is required for admission into the Armed Forces (Patel 1966; Grimes 1978). And parents are not warned that their infants will endure severe pain and be robbed of a functional part of their sexual anatomy for life! In the United States, while circumcision has fallen below 60% it still touches the lives of over one million baby boys each year.

~*~

Mom, Baseball, Apple Pie and Circumcision

by Donald Morgan

The nonreligious circumcision (NRC) of American males is as American as mom, baseball, and apple pie. In fact, it is a uniquely American custom which is not duplicated in any other country in the world.

While the vast majority of American males are circumcised, the vast majority of the world's males are not. The practice here, for example, contrasts sharply with that of the Scandinavian countries where NRC is not, and never has been, routinely practiced and where it is estimated that less than 5% of all males are circumcised.

The current rate of NRC in the United States is now about 70%, down from its peak in the late 1960s when about 95% of all newborn males who were born in hospitals were circumcised. In some regions, notably the Midwest and the Northeast, the NRC rate remains at almost 90%. In others, notably California, it is considerably less. Still, NRC remains the norm in most areas of the country. This is especially true in the case of white, middle-class America.

Few Americans likely realize that NRC was originally promoted in this country in the last half of the 19th century in an attempt to curb masturbation and the countless ills and dire consequences that were thought to be associated with it. Here is one of the many examples which could be cited reflecting the then current wisdom regarding masturbation:

In all cases which male children are suffering nerve tension, confirmed derangement of the digestive organs, restlessness, irritability, and other disturbances of the nervous system, even to chorea, convulsions, and paralysis, or where through nerve waste the nutritive facilities of the general system are below par and structural diseases are occurring, circumcision should be considered as among the lines of treatment to be pursued. [Charles E. Fisher, M.D., A Handbook on the Diseases of Children ...., Chicago: Medical Century Co., 1895, p. 875]

In fact, there was hardly an illness or disease that could not be, and was not, attributed to masturbation. In addition to those previously mentioned, the list included insanity, blindness, epilepsy, convulsions, tuberculosis--you name it. Often, a drastic circumcision performed without anaesthesia was the preferred "treatment."

Dr. Kellogg, founder of the corn flake company bearing his name, had this to say:

A remedy for masturbation which is almost always successful in small boys is circumcision.... The operation should be performed by a surgeon without administering anaesthetic, as the pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment. [John Harvey Kellogg, M.D., Plain Facts for Young and Old, Burlington, Iowa: F. Segner & Co., 1888, p. 295]

It began to be noticed, of course, that circumcision did not always prevent or cure masturbation and that masturbation did not cause the numerous illnesses and dire consequences that had been attributed to it.

Other medical justification was then found for continuing the practice of NRC. It was alleged, for example, that it made personal hygiene easier, precluded the need for circumcision at a later age, prevented cancer of the penis, lowered the risk of cervical cancer in one's partners, lowered the risk of prostate cancer, lowered the risk of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), etc. The latest alleged benefits are a reduction in urinary tract infections (UTIs) in infant boys and HIV infections in adult men.

The list of alleged benefits has grown so long that the mere presence of a foreskin would seem to be a major health hazard--a ticking time bomb about to destroy its owner and any female that might be unfortunate enough to come into contact with him.

Because of this, it has not always been easy for an intact male to remain that way. Circumcision was and is often recommended by well-meaning physicians, certain that they are doing their patients a favor.

Beginning in the 1970s, the prevailing medical wisdom regarding circumcision began to be questioned on a number of fronts. Many of the alleged medical benefits proved to be completely bogus. Most of the others turned out to be so negligible as to be offset by the disadvantages and risks.

In 1971, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) announced its position that the routine circumcision of newborn males is medically unwarranted. This position was slightly modified in 1989 to reflect the fact that there are potential benefits as well as inherent risks, although the previously stated position that the routine circumcision of newborn males is medically unwarranted remained unchanged.

Nevertheless, the practice of routine NRC was so firmly entrenched in American culture that the AAP's position had only a small impact on NRC rates. Many Americans continued to believe that there were significant health benefits. In addition, new justification based on psychological and cultural considerations was offered and is often used today in support of the continued practice of NRC.

Many parents, for example, feel that it is important for a son to match dad, brothers, cousins, and/or peers. They fear that a boy may be teased and/or feel "different" if he is not circumcised. Many feel that it is simply more "aesthetic" to be circumcised.

Many parents are also convinced that--even if there are no good reasons in favor of NRC--there are certainly no good reasons not to do it. Parents and physicians alike tend to see circumcision as a trivial operation with few if any contraindications.

Unfortunately, most parents, and even many physicians, are unaware of either the frequency or seriousness of complications that are associated with circumcision.

A recent study states that the realistic complication rate is about 5%. Considering that more than 1,300,000 boys a year undergo this procedure in the U.S., this means that every year 65,000 will suffer some sort of complication, and some of those complications will be serious.

Circumcision complications and accidents do not often receive widespread publicity. Many times, nothing at all is reported in the media. For example, here in our own backyard just a few months ago, a La Conner infant (the son of the brother of a friend of the author's daughter) developed a severe infection as a complication of a "routine" circumcision on the fourth day of his life. This resulted in the loss of all the skin between the lower abdomen and upper thighs, inclusive.

This unfortunate child has already undergone several surgeries with many more to come. Extensive pig-skin grafting will be done. There is little chance that he will ever achieve normal sexual function.

This, by the way, is not the worst outcome that has been reported in the medical literature. Loss of a portion of or all of the penis--and even death--are not unheard of.

Though such unfortunate consequences are quite rare, the potential for harm as a consequence of circumcision cannot be easily dismissed.

Even when a circumcision is "normal," there is a loss involved. A recent study indicates that a typical circumcision removes tissue that not only plays an important part in the erogenous sensitivity of the male but is, in fact, more sensitive than that which is left.

The prepuce provides a large and important platform for several nerves and nerve endings.... The glans, by contrast, is insensitive to light touch, heat, cold, and, as far as the authors are aware, to pin prick. Le Gros Clark noted that the glans penis is one of the few areas on the body that enjoys nothing beyond primitive sensory modalities. [The Prepuce, Specialized Mucosa of the Penis, and Its Loss to Circumcision, British Journal of Urology, February 1996, pp 291-5]

Another consideration is the matter of pain. Although it was long believed that infants do not really feel pain, there are now a number of studies which prove otherwise.

Newborn infant responses to pain are similar to but greater than those in adult subjects. [Pain and its Effects in the Human Neonate and Fetus, New England Journal of Medicine, November 19, 1987, pp 1321-1329]

Many adults who have been present at a neonatal circumcision, typically performed without anaesthesia, have been so horrified at the obvious pain felt by the child that this alone has been enough to cause them to decide against NRC for their own son(s).

There are a number of reasons, however, that neonatal circumcisions are usually performed without anaesthesia. There are still a number of physicians who insist that infants do not feel pain. Worse, it has recently been determined that the injection of local anesthesia into free tissue can cause serious and permanent vascular and nerve damage. And general anaesthesia is simply too risky to use in the case of neonates.

In addition to all of these more obvious problems, there is also a human rights issue involved. Human rights activists feel strongly that every child has the right to an intact body. They believe that it is wrong for parents to seek, or physicians to engage in, genital surgery on children in the absence of a clear medical need. To remove normal, healthy, functional, erogenous tissue, from an infant or child who has not given informed consent is seen as a violation of the basic tenets of medical ethics.

In February 1995, the AAP Committee on Bioethics released a statement on informed consent. The Committee stated that medical interventions should only be undertaken in situations of clear and immediate medical necessity, such as disease, trauma, or deformity. The Committee suggested that nonessential treatments which could be deferred without substantial risk should be postponed until the individual's consent can be obtained.

The Committee's statement regarding unnecessary surgical procedures in the case of unconsenting minors seems to conflict with the AAP's position that routine, neonatal circumcision, though not medically justified, is a valid elective procedure that can be performed by its physician members in response to the simple, stated, aesthetic preference of parents.

The human rights issue in regard to circumcision will be thoroughly explored at the Fourth International Symposium on Sexual Mutilations which will be held in August, in Lausanne, Switzerland. The Ashley Montagu Resolution to End the Genital Mutilation of Children Worldwide will be presented. And, for the first time ever, the practice of routine circumcision in the United States will be specifically targeted.

Humanitarians everywhere decry female genital mutilation, and rightly so. It is time to do the same with regard to the practice of unnecessary genital surgery on infants and boys.

[This article was published in the June 1996 issue of Sound Views, monthly newsletter of the Humanists of North Puget Sound, La Conner, WA]

~*~

Onanism: Victorian America's Enemy

by Ornella Moscucci

Unease about masturbation began, as is well known, in the early eighteenth century, when a book appeared entitled Onania; or the Heinous Sin of Self-Pollution (1707-1717) appeared anonymously in Holland and met with great success. By the middle of the century Tissot's famous treatise, On Onania: or a Treatise upon the Disorders Produced by Masturbation (1760), had given a scientific veneer to the new anxiety about the "solitary vice." Drawing on ideas about the wastage of bodily energy, Tissot argued that physical illness resulted from loss of semen, leading to general debility, consumption, deterioration of eyesight, disturbance of the nervous system, and so on. From 1800 onwards, the evils of masturbation were widely discussed in medical and moralistic texts; although attitudes to the practice were not monolithic, much was made of its physically and mentally deterious effects (see Hall; Hare; Engelhardt; Comfort). In essence, masturbation was less a vice than an antisocial activity, an egotistic enjoyment of pleasures that were the proper domain of heterosexual intercourse. (Lacqueur, Making Sex 227-30). Polluting and debilitating for the individual, it had a destabilizing effect on society, as it prevented healthy sexual desire from fulfilling socially desirable ends--marriage and procreation, which was the foundation of the social order.

Belief in the horrors of masturbation was shared by doctors and patients. As Lesley Hall has shown for the later period (the 1920s), a large component of men's "hidden anxieties" related to the sense of disgust and self-loathing induced by masturbation: "folly," "mistake," "disease," were the words employed by men writing to Marie Stopes, the birth control pioneer, when they described their "addiction" to the pernicious habit of self-abuse. Such fears were easily exploited by a variety of groups with interests ranging from the religious to the commercial. Quacks were particularly active in the "treatment" of masturbation: posters, leaflets, handbills, and "anatomical museums" illustrating the dreadful consequences of onanism were widely used as marketing strategies, much to the concern of the medical profession, which was anxious to establish its own claims to the treatment of masturbation. In a letter to Lancet for 1857, for example, an anonymous doctor railed against the "spermatorrhoea imposture" that lay behind the peddling of contraptions such as the "American remedy" recommended as an infallible cure for masturbation. Retailing at two guineas apiece, the device consisted of a metal ring "with a screw passing through one of its sides, and projecting, into the center," which was to be applied to the part affected" at bed-time ("M.D.").

Doctors on the whole favored less heroic means of stopping the habit. Strengthening the sufferer's moral and physical tone was the first line of defense; adjuvants included the avoidance of sexually arousing amusements, and temptations such as lolling in bed in the morning. Sometimes sexual intercourse was prescribed (with prostitutes if necessary) in order to redirect desire toward more constructive heterosexual ends (see, e.g., Cantlie, "Spermatorrhoea," "Masturbation", Copeland; "Quack advertisements" 124-26;159-60; 224-25). Occasionally, however, the severity of the case required a more robust approach. The application of caustics to the urethra was recommended in the mid-Victorian period in order to remedy the consequences of chronic masturbation, such as spermatorrhoea and impotence; vasectomy and castration were also practiced, although such radical therapies appear to have been more popular in the United States than in England. In 1870, the use of blisters was recommended by Lancet as a means of "keeping up slight soreness of the body of the organ...sufficient to render erection painful" ("Quack advertisements" 224).

Interest in circumcision as a treatment for masturbation began to emerge in the 1850s. As the medical discourse on sexual hygiene gathered momentum, attention was focused on uncleanliness as a cause of masturbatory activity. The English physician James Copland, one of the first to advocate circumcision in the Anglo-Saxon world, claimed that masturbation was essentially an attempt to relieve, by friction, the "local irritations" caused by smegmatic accumulations under the prepuce. He recommended circumcision as a means of maintaining genital cleanliness, adding that the great physical resilience of the Jewish people was due to the observance of this "salutary rite" (III, 442; 445). By the end of the nineteenth century, the medical pleas for circumcision had become more insistent. The American physician Remondino, author of the best selling History of Circumcision, pitied the "unlucky and unhappy wearer of a prepuce": this "tight-constricted, glans-deforming, onanism-producing, cancer-generating" appendage, he claimed was an "unknown, undiscovered, and therefore unexplored region for some thousands of years," until the medical profession, venturing at last into this "Darkest Africa," had revealed the malign influence it exercised on its unwary victims (255-56) Parents could not make a "better paying investment" for their sons than circumcision: it was like a "substantial and well secured life-annuity," making for greater capacity for labor, a longer life, less nervousness, and fewer doctors' bills (186).

Physicians such as Remondino had little difficulty in persuading their middle-class readers, who already appreciated the importance of hygiene and moral restraint: it was the observance of regular habits that ostensibly set the middle classes apart from the debauched aristocracy and the degenerate working classes, legitimating middle class claims to cultural hegemony. By the early twentieth century, circumcision had become common among the upper and professional classes in Britain and America. In the 1930s, the earliest period for which statistics are available, two-thirds of public-school boys were circumcised as compared to one-tenth of working class boys; the British royal family employed a Jewish mohel for the purpose as late as the end of 1948. By virtue of its association with filth and sexual excess, the prepuce had become a marker of inferior social status: already by the end of the 1890s an equation was being made in America between being "uncircumcised" and being "uncivilized."

As Ronald Hyam has noted, circumcision was central to the late-Victorian re-definition of manliness in terms of sexual restraint and "cleanness." As the purity campaign gathered momentum in the last quarter of the nineteenth century, the meaning of manliness shifted from the ideals of moral strenuousness and integrity to a cult of athleticism and robust virility. The offensive on male lust and the double standard of sexual morality presented masculinity as a never-ending battle requiring watchfulness and supervision: muscular Christianity was the goal, attainable through strict mental and physical discipline. Widely believed to dampen sexual desire, circumcision was seen positively as a means of promoting both the chastity and the physical health of the custodians of the empire ("Hygienic value," 271).

The emphasis on sexual hygiene no doubt explains why a Jewish ritual like circumcision was adopted by the British ruling elite, notwithstanding the antisemitism of much Victorian culture: at a time of profound concern about the physical decline of British manhood, the resilience of the Jews in the face of adversity and persecution was held up as proof that sexual hygiene was the mainspring of a nations vigor. While George Eliot's Daniel Deronda (1876) opposed the sustaining values of Jewish culture to the shallow conventions of contemporary Victorian society, doctors and politicians noted with envy the longevity and sturdiness of the Jews, testifying to the rarity of venereal disease, tuberculosis, and cancer of the penis in Jewish communities, as well as to the low levels of infant mortality, illegitimacy, and criminality. Over and over again, commentators attributed the physical and moral superiority of the Jews to the religious rituals and prescriptions observed in their culture (Remondino 161-82). In an influential article published in the Contemporary Review for 1903, Major General Sir Frederick Maurice, one the chief contributors to the turn-of-the-century physical deterioration debate, singled out childrearing practices as a factor contributing to the health and longevity of the Jews; although he did not recommend "stereotyped copying" of the Jews, he conceded that the rest of the nation had much to learn from them (Davin 16). The fact that circumcision had biblical sanction probably facilitated the spread of the practice in Christian Britain and America. The language of purity mobilized religious discourse, emphasizing the intimate connection between physical and moral health: circumcision showed that the divine law had scientific validation (Mort 109-12).

WORKS CITED

Cantlie, James. "Spermatorrhaea" A Dictionary of Medicine: Including General Pathology, General Therapeutics, Hygiene, and the Diseases Peculiar to Women and Children. Ed. R. Quain. 2 vols. London: Longmans, Green, 1882, II:144-50.

Comfort, Alex. The Anxiety Makers: Some Curious Preoccupations of the Medical Profession. London: Nelson, 1967.

Copland, James, "Pollutions," A Dictionary of Practical Medicine. 3 vols. London: Longman, Brown, Green, Longmans and Roberts, 1858. III: 441-48.

Davin, Anne. "Imperialism and motherhood." History Workshop 5 (1978):9-66.

Englehardt, Tristam. "The Disease of Masturbation: Values and the Concept of Disease." Bulletin of the History of Medicine 48 (1974):234-248.

Hall, Lesley A. "Forbidden by God, Despised by Men: Masturbation, Medical Warnings, Moral Panic and Manhood in Great Britain, 1850-1950." Forbidden History: The State, Society, and the Regulation of Sexuality in Modern Europe. Ed. J. C. Font. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, 1992, 293-316.

Hare, E.H. "Masturbatory Insanity: The History of an Idea." The Journal of Mental Science 108 (1962).

Hyam, Ronald. Empire and Sexuality: The British Experience. Manchester and New York: Manchester University Press, 1992, 293-316.

Laqueur, Thomas. Making Sex: Body and Gender from the Greeks to Freud. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1990.

"M.D." "The Spermatorrhoea Imposture." Lancet 1 (1867): 25.

Mort, Frank. Dangerous Sexualities: Medico-Moral Politics in England Since 1830. London and New York: Routledge, 1987.

"Quack advertisements." Lancet 2 (1870): 72; 89-90; 124-26; 159-60; 224-25.

Remondino, P.C. History of Circumcision from the Earliest Times to the Present. Philadelphia: F.A. Davis, 1900.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ornella Moscucci took her first degree in sociology at Bristol University and received a Ph.D on the history of British gynecology from the University of Oxford. Between 1987 and 1989 she worked on the history of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists and subsequently held a post as Research Fellow at the Wellcome Institute for the History of Medicine in London. Her research has focused on the history of gender, and on the development of obstetrics and gynecology since 1800. Dr. Moscucci is the author of The Science of Woman: Gynaecology and Gender in England, 1800-1929, and of "Hermaphroditism and Sex Difference: The Construction of Gender in Victorian England" in Benjamin, Science and Sensibility.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Citation:

Moscucci O. Clitoridectomy, Circumcision, and the Politics of Sexual Pleasure. In: Eds: Andrew H. Miller and James Eli Adams. Sexualities in Victorian Britain. Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis 1996: 63-65 (ISBN 0-253-33066-1).

~*~

Back to Contents

In the USA, while involuntary female circumcision never became routine like involuntary male circumcision became, it was promoted and done by some of the same doctors who were doing it to boys.

Clitoridectomy: Nineteenth Century Answer for Masturbation

http://www.nocirc.org/symposia/first/duffy.html

The following six excerpt quotes are from actual American medical journals:

"...that the girl who becomes irritable, disagreeable and hysterical may become charming, interesting and possessed of all feminine graces when her prepuce[clitoral hood] is forcibly peeled away from the glans of the clitoris, and we have made a distinct step forward in civilization..." [Is evolution trying to do away with the clitoris? Transactions of the American Association of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Vol. 5, 1892, pp. 288-302]

http://www.historyofcircumcision.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=50&Itemid=68

“I for one have circumcised as many girls as boys, and always with happy results.” [Circumcision of Girls. Journal of Orificial Surgery, Vol. 7, July 1898, pp. 31-33]

http://www.historyofcircumcision.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=51&Itemid=68

"Many neuroses and even psychoses have their origin in pathological conditions of the hood of the clitoris." [Circumcision in the Female: Its Necessity and How to Perform It. American Journal of Clinical Medicine, Vol. 22, No. 6, June 1915, pp. 520-523]

http://www.noharmm.org/CircintheFemale.htm

"Circumcision will relieve one of the greatest causes of masturbation" [Why not circumcise the girl as well as the boy? Texas State Journal of Medicine, Vol. 14, May 1918, pp. 17-19]

http://www.historyofcircumcision.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=60&Itemid=68

"The same reasons that apply for the circumcision of males are generally valid when considered for the female." [Circumcision of the Female. General Practioner, Vol. 18 No. 3, September 1958, pp. 98-99]

http://www.noharmm.org/circumfemale.htm

"If the husband is unusually awkward or difficult to educate, one should at times make the clitoris easier to find[by amputating the clitoral hood]." [Female Circumcision: Indications and a New Technique General Practioner, Vol. 20, No. 3, September 1959, pp. 115-120]

http://www.noharmm.org/femcirctech.htm

*

Here are three personal experiences:

Where is my clitoral hood?

”The other day I had one of many debates that I have with a particular man in my life. This debate is on how he tried to defend his newborn circumcision and his reasons why all boys should be circumcised. His final argument when he realized none of the standard careworn and overused ones were working?

"You are a woman without a penis so you really have no right to weigh in on this circumcision debate anyway."

It was then that I knew it was time to step forward and to stop hiding. I am thirty years old. I am white, not Middle Eastern or from Sudan or Malaysia or of the Muslim faith. My father is Irish Catholic. My mother is a Jewish woman who converted to Catholicism when she married my father. Both of my brothers are circumcised and my mother is adamant in her defense of their circumcision.

I step out of the shower and I stand in front of the mirror and I look like your average European American, pale skin, red hair, green eyes. I am not your average woman though.

I am circumcised.

I am a white American, non-Muslim woman who was circumcised as a toddler by the same pediatrician that circumcised my brothers and at the same hospital at which I was born. I have no clitoral hood and only a V shaped scar and the tiniest bit of inner labia they were kind enough to leave behind. I always knew something was different. I have a half sister seven years my senior and she had a normal looking vagina. Mine always looked wrong to me but I never said anything because after all, every woman is unique and different.

I also have this vague and disturbing memory from when I was two and the most uncomfortable sexual feeling even at a young age around male doctors. When I married young to my now ex-husband on our honeymoon he said, "I have never seen a vagina like yours! It is amazingly perfect, too perfect, like something is missing." That too perfect vagina was most certainly missing something, and would cause me serious sexual issues that I chalked up to a sexual assault at the age of eighteen. If only I had know that it had been assaulted by a knife long before that perhaps I could have come to terms much sooner.

It was only as I was nearing my late twenties, had been divorced and had other sexual partners all of which commented in some way or another on the difference of my vagina, that I had an uncontrollable urge to dig deeper. Then at a well woman check up with my now favorite Ob/Gyn he told me or rather asked me why I was a circumcised female. He felt awful when he realized that I did not know and he had assumed I had consented to vaginal cosmetic surgery. As an aside I am happy to report that because of my experience and continued dialogue with him he is now against MGM (Male Genital Mutilation) a practice he used to support.

After months of demanding, digging, and putting my foot down I obtained the records from my birth that told me nothing but did lead me to my childhood pediatrician. Those records revealed the ghastly truth of a two-year-old girl circumcised at her mother's request. In sadness I confronted my mother and was adamantly told that she had always done what was best for her children and had no regrets but did not want to speak of it.

I made an appointment to speak to the now retired physician only to have him move away before I could speak with him. I am still searching for him. I know he was an old friend of my parents who also did my brothers' bris. Surely he will know why my mother would request such a thing for her daughter. My father remains largely silent on the issue. "You know your mother," is the only answer I receive from him.

When my son was born I was young, I had familial and societal pressure. But I did NOT allow him to be assaulted with a knife . As a mother all that was in me cried out to truly research and know that genital mutilation is not okay. And now I know that not only as a mother but also as a survivor of FGM (Female Genital Mutilation) every instinct told me not to allow him to be cut.

I will speak out against MGM because just like those innocent baby boys my prepuce has been removed. Can I orgasm? Yes I can. Within about sixty seconds of sexual contact I orgasm. Sounds good right? WRONG. After I orgasm I experience oversensitive raw pain for the duration of the sexual contact. There is no hood to protect my clitoris. I may very well be the only woman out there who is looking for a partner who is a "one minute wonder" to spend the rest of my life with. Even now, years later, clothing, undergarments, contact... all of these irritate my overexposed clitoris. I also have to deal with the fact that if I choose to have a new sexual partner I will deal with the inevitable comments and questions which leave me feeling unattractive and just plain wrong down there.

So I say: I DO have a right to speak out against MGM and I will continue to do so. I know the continued frustration and all that is missing due to being circumcised and no baby, boy or girl, should ever have to live with this choice being forced upon him or her.”

~V. Burns

*

Healing the Trauma of American Female Genital Mutilation

I am a white, anglo-saxon, protestant woman who was circumcised in the USA in the 1950’s. Some women advocate routine infant circumcision for males while decrying FGM in Africa. I cannot advocate cutting anyone, ever, for any reason.

What follows is my story. Thank you for reading it with an open heart.

As far as I can tell, I have scars on my labia set at 90 degree angles where flesh obviously met metal, and a “V”-shaped scar where a clitoris used to be. An expert on female genital anatomy told me I was also missing my clitoral hood.

My parents are both dead so I can’t ask them for details, but I have pieced events together and it seems to make sense that I was cut in two stages: the labia when I was one year old, and the clitoris and hood when I was six. I didn’t find out about it until I was over 50 years of age, so I lived in a bit of hell for many, many years.

My early photos show that I was the happiest of children — until I was in the first grade (see the photos on my website). Then a cloud came over me and after that time photos were full of anger, resentment and rejection. I lived that way for decades. I wanted to be dead. I rejected everyone and everything. I ran away or pushed away everyone who tried to love me… and I had no idea why. I was miserable and thought it was “normal”. I couldn’t understand how people could be happy and love each other. I had few friends. Although I usually had a boyfriend, I was always was exceedingly lonely. I am grateful that I did not turn to alcohol or drugs. A brush I’d had with an angelic voice when I was a little girl let me know suicide was not an option. Eventually, I learned all I could about healing. But nothing seemed to help me out of my own empty anger and grief.

No one could understand me, including myself. And then — a miracle! — I was wondering why most “men” were so different from most women and I realized that most of the men in the United States had been traumatized, when they were just babies, by circumcision. How cruel!. I was shocked, appalled, aghast. Due to my crisis counseling work, I knew that such a terrifying event could ruin an entire life. I felt quite safe around the people I met who were clear about not cutting children and I began to work with them to prevent circumcision. After I’d been involved for a couple of years, through a series of interesting “coincidences,” I discovered that I too had been circumcised. I had lost my clitoris, clitoral hood and labia. All of a sudden, my life made perfect sense. Knowing that I had been traumatized made sense of my feelings and behavior. A year or so ago, I met a wonderful therapist who was safe enough that I could allow myself to think about my childhood and piece together the memories. Healing the trauma came fairly quickly after that. After 50 miserable years, my little black cloud evaporated. I look in the mirror now and I see the happy smile I’d lost at age six. I am happy, at last, to be alive.

I found that I was always good at handling emergencies, so I specialized in dealing with people in trauma… at a crisis center and in private practice as a hypnotherapisst. This gave me a good background for dealing with my own situation when I discovered I’d been mutilated.

My entire life was hell before I found out I’d been cut, so when I found out, a lot of bad old feelings actually went away.. So I am hoping that healing can begin for many of my sisters and brothers who are still unaware that they were traumatized as children. Until they know the horror of it, and until they release the fear and terror around it, they might just be wondering why they kick the dog, throw the cat against the wall, yell at the wife, beat the kids, hate the boss, and frantically accumulate wealth to the detriment of their own integrity.

I hope this blog and my book will plant seeds of hope for your healng and/or compassion for the overwhelming number of people—both men and women—who have had this awful thing happen to them.

I am hoping to find out, by way of a book I wrote (and this blog), how many American women in the United States have been subjected to female genital mutilation. I suspect there are far more than we would ever imagine. I hope, if you were cut, you will get in touch with me. I am sorry it happened to you, and we can support each other in the process of healing the mental, emotional, and spiritual wounds… maybe we can ever figure out, like men have, how to restore our bodies to their original function.

If you would like, you can read more about my book here: http://rapeofinnocence.com/2010/12/17/fgm-circumcision-in-the-usa/. I hope you will enjoy it and it will be of value to you.

*

Missing Pieces of Myself

I am a 57 year old, white, Canadian, Anglo-Saxon woman of Irish/English decent, non-religious but deeply spiritual. My story is still in the rough stages. It has only been a matter of weeks since I became aware that I am missing a couple of genital “pieces”. The new awareness has certainly answered many questions for me, and explained a lot about who I am. I was flipping through a book when I came across a picture of two fingers holding onto a clitoris. Impossible! They were describing the head of the clitoris as a wee button. No way! I got out a mirror and studied myself ever so carefully. I have done self explorations before, and pictures in books never looked like me. My conclusion was always that there was something wrong with the pictures! Not this time. I got onto the web, and studied as many pictures as I could find. I couldn’t find one that looked like me. I called my youngest sister. She was adamant that there was a tangible something in the clitoral region, known as the clitoris. You could touch it. It felt good to touch. Interesting. I called a childhood friend with whom I still talk regularly. She agreed with my sister. I called my other sister—two years younger. She would have nothing to do with any self-exploration, she wasn’t interested, sex had always been painful, could we change the subject, please. I have reason to believe she too endured a “cut.”

Anyway, further research on the net turned up a procedure called a clitoridectomy.From my research I determined that this procedure was quite common in the 1800’s, less common in the early 1900’s, yet still being conducted in North America into the mid-fifties, was covered by Blue Cross until mid ’70’s, and not completely banned in the U.S. until 1996. Although the tone of this paragraph sounds all whitewashed and devoid of emotion, my whole being was coming apart as I dredged up this data.

I was beginning to open the door to a truth which I had somehow managed to bury just under the surface of my consciousness. Flashbacks began. I remembered, as a child of 3 or 4, having “something” I could hold on to down there. Being of insatiable curiosity, I questioned my mother about it—as I did for just about everything that entered my line of vision. She was a staunch Roman Catholic of the extreme variety, hung up on sex and particularly masturbation. Somehow she managed to turn my question around to understand that somehow I was upset, disturbed and did not want this thing I was giving my attention to. She could make me “nice and pretty” and in this manner she solicited my agreement. I recall nothing of the actual procedure, but I have had flashbacks of events after the procedure. I recall sitting on the toilet seat and my mother tending the area, and telling me I was “nice and pretty” now. The “tending” happened over numerous occasions.

At the point I was having the above flashbacks, there was still a place in me which wanted to believe I was making all of this up. However, I had another friend who I had shared my concerns with. She had been sexually abused, and as part of her healing process, she had attended a women’s workshop, where they did shared self-exploration as part of getting to know and love their bodies. So she had seen many clitoris’s and felt that perhaps mine was simply small enough that somehow I just couldn’t find it. We arranged a show and tell. She couldn’t find it either! It seems that the “head” of the clitoris is missing. The rest is still in place. She noticed something else. Part of the clitoral hood was missing! There is no scar tissue, no discolouration …nice and pretty!

That same night, as I was in the place between waking and sleeping, I experienced the most intense pain in the genital area. I could actually feel the places …which are not there! Because this experience was not a fleeting thing, taking nearly a half hour to subside, it left no question that my suspicions were true. I had yet another flashback about trying to tell my mother how much it hurt, and how it hurt to pee. It hurt for the longest time. I remembered confusion, connected to pain, connected to my mother. My mother always used corporal punishment to discipline us and she began her disciplining as soon as we could crawl. I associated pain and my mother with being a bad girl. I believe I spent the rest of her life trying desperately to please her, so that I would never endure this pain again. Then I married her clone and spent 31 years of marriage following the same pattern. Now that the pain has resurfaced, it feels like it has always been there. Anytime I want to direct my attention to that area I can feel the places …which are not there! When I am very tired the pain returns like a nagging headache. I am amazed at the degree of denial I had to exert in order to block the pain and the memory.

Something I do remember vividly is that when I reached puberty, my mother took me to the doctor without any notice or explanation where I was subjected to a visual genital exam. There I was at 12 or 13 years of age, on the examining table, fully displayed for the doctor and my mother. who were at the end of the table, discussing and pointing at my genitals. This was so totally unexpected, I was so embarrassed and humiliated, that all I could hear of their conversation was Charlie Brown’s Blah! Blah! Blah! As we were leaving the doctor’s office I asked her why I had the examination, and she told me it was “none of my business!” I can only conclude that for whatever reason related to puberty there was a need to check up on their handiwork.

I have always been a deep thinker with an insatiable curiosity. So I have noticed a number of things about myself which I could attribute to this early childhood trauma. For instance, I have always noticed myself not being fully present in the moment. Whenever the going gets rough, I get going, right into some sort of comatose-like, dissociative state where I am not fully present, not fully alive. Could this be a learned behaviour from a childhood trauma?

Although I am 57 years old, there is a little girl in me who has never grown up, who is “unsure” of herself, who is easily frightened, who second guesses absolutely everything I do and say. I have done enough personal growth work that I can actually “feel” her. She is ever longing for parental love and approval. So sensitive, always needing reassurance. Years ago, a mentor once said to me how she gave me credit for all my accomplishments, but was very aware of a part of me which was still so childlike. She asked if I could explain it. I knew what she was talking about, but pretended I didn’t because I couldn’t explain it and was embarrassed by it. Can I explain it now? Is it arrested development as a result of childhood trauma? Will I be able to get a handle on it now? It has definitely stood between me and fully coming into my own as an adult.

And sexually speaking? Sometimes one will never know, what one never knew. I wasn’t a tomboy, but I didn’t go through the girly-girly phase either. I had no longing to dress up, make up and strut my stuff. I didn’t understand flirting. I didn’t understand the chemistry thing that happens between teens when their hormones are raging. My ex-husband picked me out of a group of girls I was with, and decided that very night that I would be his wife. I was flattered beyond words that some guy would actually pin point me in this way. I was 21, and there had only been one casual boyfriend in my entire young life. I was in love with love, and we were married a year later. In my limited opinion, he was a highly sexual man. The little girl in me wanted to be everything he wanted me to be. Perhaps that is where the real problem was! Psychologically perhaps, I just never grew up enough to be a sexually mature woman. Like I said, perhaps I will never know, what I never knew.

*

Here are some videos giving an overview and three personal experiences:

~*~

By: Lisa Donaldson

Genital mutilation, both male and female, has been present in society since ancient times. Today it is present throughout the world, with some forms being readily accepted into educated western societies. While cases of female genital mutilation spark public outcries, it is interesting to note that male circumcision does not, despite involving hurting innocent minors, having negative repercussions on the child and, in most cases, providing no medical benefits. In fact there are very few cases where genital mutilation is performed for medical reasons, which contradicts the doctors oath, thus making doctors who perform circumcisions and the like, hypocrites. This, and the fact that it directly contradicts parts of the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, is the basis of many people’s protests about the practice.

Mutilation is defined as being “Disfigurement or injury by removal or destruction of any conspicuous or essential part of the body” (Stedman’s Medical Dictionary, 26th Edition, 1995). This definition includes male circumcision, as many practitioners believe the foreskin is an essential part of the male genitalia. Medical science has recently rediscovered that the prepuce is the principal location of erogenous sensation in the human male and that removal of this prepuce substantially reduces the sensitivity of the area (History of Circumcision, page 1). Only in rare occurrences where the foreskin does not naturally retract is circumcision a medically based surgical procedure (Price, 1996).

Some side effects of circumcision include intense pain, death due to haemorrhaging or infection and loss of sexual pleasure. The pain experienced by babies during circumcision has been described as among the most painful procedures performed in neonatal medicine and of a level which would not be tolerated by older patients. There have been more fatalities linked to circumcision than there have been for penile cancer, which it was once believed that circumcision cured (Price, 1996).

In the case of female genital mutilation, there is no evidence to suggest it might be medically beneficial in any way, and can cause serious medical problems and even death due to complications directly resulting from the procedure (Abdallah, 1982; Dareer, 1982).

The possible side effects of female genital mutilation are numerous. They include urine retention, haemorrhaging, infection, pain, menstrual complications, infertility, loss of sexual pleasure or inability to perform sexual intercourse, death and psychological disturbances. In some cases, babies have been seriously harmed during prolonged labour, due to circumcision, resulting in brain damage or death of the child (Abdallah, 1982).

Genital mutilation is usually performed as either a religious ritual or to gain acceptance within the society. While the UN Declaration of Human Rights states that everyone has the freedom to practice their religion, many people object when the rituals involved in practicing a religion involve hurting another human being, especially a minor.

Mere assertion that ritual circumcision is seen as a religious duty is equally valueless in discharging the burden of proof: it may provide a reason but it does not provide a justification, or in other words it may explain but does not excuse. Price, 1996, page 4

While everyone has the freedom to practice their religion, in the case of doctors and members of society (ie midwives etc) performing genital mutilation on children, several rights as listed in the UN Declaration of Human Rights are denied. One example is Article 5, which states that “No one shall be subject to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” (United Nations, 1998). These are also rights, which are broken according to the 1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. In fact, part 2 of Article 2 states that “States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to ensure that the child is protected against all forms of discrimination or punishment on the basis of the status, activities, expressed opinions, or beliefs of the child’s parents, or family members.” Not only that, but it also contradicts another body of international law and standards:

Freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health, or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Bearing in mind that the practice of genital mutilation breaks at least three international documents listing the rights of every human being, one is forced to ask why medical practitioners still perform male circumcisions. By doing so, they risk labelling themselves as hypocrites for going against one of the fundamental elements of their oath, which they take before becoming doctors. Price quoted it in his research paper on circumcision and renamed it the Hippocratic Oath:

The regimen I adopt shall be for the benefit of my patients according to my ability and judgement, and not for their hurt or for any wrong…. Whatsoever house I enter, there will I go for the benefit of the sick, refraining from all wrongdoing or corruption.

This was labelled as hippocratic as circumcision is not a medically beneficial procedure in most cases.

One also has to wonder why so little action is being taken on this matter throughout the world, and why the practice has remained so widespread. In America 60% of newborn males in 1996 were circumcised and 10% in Australia (History of Circumcision, page 3). Female circumcision rates are well above 70% in some African countries, including Sudan (Dareer, 1982).

While laws may have been passed preventing circumcision and female genital mutilation in some areas, inadequate law enforcement has rendered the legislation irrelevant and useless (Dareer, 1982). Clearly this is an issue which needs to be globally addressed and enforced in order to protect our children.

With the facts stated here, it is my belief that genital mutilation, both male and female, is very much and issue which again needs to be addressed on a global scale, as it was in 1989 with the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Every day this issue goes unaddressed more children are violated and scarred for the rest of their lives, and their rights, as set out in the United Nation Declaration of Human Rights and Convention on the Rights of the Children are violated. It is also my belief that circumcision should be a procedure performed for medical reasons only, unless the person undergoing the operation is legally old enough to decide for himself. It then releases doctors from performing a procedure that goes against their ethics, thus freeing them from the stigma of being labelled hypocrites. Genital mutilation is a matter for global consideration as it is a global problem.

Bibliography

Abdallah R. H. D., 1982, Sisters in Affliction, Zed Press, London

Dareer A., 1982, Woman, Why Do You Weep, Zed Press, London

Female Genital Mutilation Network, 1999, The Basics

Forward USA, 1999, Female Genital Mutilation

History of Circumcision

http://www.cirp.org/library/history

Price C., 1996, Male Circumcision: A Legal Affront [Online, accessed 9 Nov 1999]

http://www.cirp.org/library/legal/price-uklc/

Shanahan J., 1997, Australian Circumcision Rates

http://www.cirp.org/library/statistics/Australia

UNICEF and the Medicalization of Female Genital Mutilation, 1999

United Nations, 1998, Universal Declaration of Human Rights

~*~

By Harriet Washington

When Fauziya Kasinga, 19, of Togo sought U.S. asylum to escape female circumcision, it was impossible not to sympathize with her plight. No one should live in fear of having parts of her genitals sliced off against her will. Yet I was uncomfortable with the ethnocentric tone of those who criticized female circumcision in Africa as "a twisted entry into adulthood." They seemed to forget that nearly 60 percent of the newborn boys in the United States undergo a similar ritual.

K. Anthony Appiah, professor of African-American Studies and philosophy at Harvard, agrees that notions of cultural superiority may be at work but says that-acknowledging that doesn't necessarily imply support for other cultures' traditions. "...I think you can agree that there is ethnocentrism there while still thinking [female] circumcision is a bad idea."

Atlantic Monthly magazine smugly described female circumcision as "the sort of problem that until now Americans have never had to confront, " which must surely be news to the thousands of men in the burgeoning U.S. movement against male circumcision. Bills barring female circumcision on U.S. soil and barring trade with African countries that allow it have been presented, and African women are portrayed as helpless victims on whom barbaric violations are perpetrated. But one observer tells how women in northern Sudan successfully opposed men's attempt to change their type of female circumcision to a less severe form.

"People complain about the practice without asking women themselves the obvious questions such as `What does it feel like?'" Appiah points out. "Also, the arguments against female circumcision focus on sexuality rather than medical problems such as infections and infertility. In many of these cultures, the focus on orgasms strikes people as overdone."

Ifeyinwa Iweriebor, formerly of Black Women in Publishing Inc., sums it up: "The language and tone of the outcry in most cases reflect a total lack of respect for the culture of other peoples."

News stories refer to "female genital mutilation," a judgmental term that lumps together many different types of female circumcision. For example, in clitoridectomy, the clitoris is nicked; in excision, the clitoris and labia majora are cut off; in infibulation, the labia majora are cut off and the sides are stitched together, leaving a small opening for urination. Before the wedding night the woman's genitals have to be cut open.

"Infibulation is really horrendous. But in the politicization of female circumcision, all operations are reduced to that," says Corrine Kratz, of the Institute of African Studies at Emory University. She says that the Okiek women in Kenya with whom she has worked and lived "are not circumcised until after they reach sexual maturity and are often in a position to compare pre-and post-circumcised sex."

Yet circumcised women "speak of sex with relish." Some women insist that female circumcision enhances sexuality.

Muslims, Christians and Jews in 28 African countries practice female circumcision, and it was performed in Andean, Australian, Bedouin, Malaysian, Indonesian and ancient Roman cultures, says Asha Samad Matias, director of Women's Studies at the City College of New York.

Twenty percent of the world's males are circumcised -- the prospect appalls many of the rest. There are no medical reasons for male circumcision, and although removing an infant's foreskin is much less radical than infibulation, critics decry a loss of sexual sensitivity and the risks of infection, mutilation of the penis and even death. They also are concerned about an early association of pain with sexuality. But we in the U.S. tend to associate male circumcision with normality, sexual presentability and cleanliness -- exactly the reasons offered by some defenders of female circumcision.

How can we cast aspersions on their cultural rituals without questioning our own bloody rites? An old adage about stones and glass houses comes to mind.

An FGM researcher compares MGM cultural justifications:

http://www.fgmnetwork.org/intro/mgmfgm.html

Human Genital Mutilation Classification Chart:

http://www.icgi.org/hgm_classification.htm

Female Circumcision and Male Circumcision, Is There A Difference?:

http://www.compleatmother.com/articles3/femalecircumcision.shtml

Common Denominators between Male & Female "Circumcision":

http://www.noharmm.org/comparison.htm

Underlying Justifications in the US and Africa:

http://www.nocirc.org/symposia/third/hanny3.html

Side-by-side Comparison of official AAP positions:

http://www.circumstitions.com/AAP.html

Contrast and compare FGM and MGM:

http://www.circumstitions.com/FGMvsMGM.html

America's Forgotten History of Female Circumcision:

http://sites.google.com/site/completebaby/female

~*~

Female genital cutting or circumcision (FC) is a cultural practice that is widely disputed around the world. More controversially, it is referred to as FGM (Female Genital Mutilation). It is practiced mostly in Muslim African countries and has been banned by law in many countries around the world. (Dietrich) FC was also common in Victorian England (Henslin 275). FC can involve any alteration of the labia or clitoris in carrying degrees ranging from a ritual pinprick of the clitoris to removal of the clitoral hood (or prepuce) to full infibulations involving the removal of all external genitalia and the suturing of the vagina (Dietrich). American society and the societies of other industrialized nations generally find FGM barbaric and strive to eliminate this heinous act.

In the US, the alteration of a female’s genitals to any degree without her consent is illegal and punishable by jail time and a fine (US Federal Law 18.1.7.116). However, male circumcision (MC), more controversially termed MGM (Male Genital Mutilation), is legal and accepted, even though it involves the alteration of the genitalia, specifically the removal of the male foreskin (or prepuce). Doctors or rabbis perform male circumcisions in America. Contrary to popular belief, FC is also often performed by a doctor or religious figure, but the recent intolerance of female cutting has brought about more family or home cuttings (Hayford). The non-consensual removal of the prepuce is illegal for females, yet legal and accepted in the US for males. Some people may think that the two practices are performed for different reasons, making male circumcision justifiable and female circumcision unjustifiable. However, the social and cultural ideas surrounding female circumcision in countries that practice it bear striking resemblance to those surrounding male circumcision in the U.S.

"Circumcised parts are cleaner and more attractive"

This is a common way of thinking in regards to both male and female circumcisions in the US and Africa. Eric K. Silverman notes in an article that a common rationale for FC is that "Uncircumcised female genitals are unclean and impure." (421).This is congruent with America’s general view of uncircumcised men. There is a stigma surrounding the foreskin, and many believe it to be dirty or a carrier of disease. As a result, many infant boys are routinely circumcised for assumed reasons of cleanliness. Routine MC is the most common surgery in America, and only 10% are done for religious purposes (Watterstien, 126). Many Americans consider it a preventative surgery as they are convinced that their child will have problems with their foreskin and need to be circumcised as an adult. However, less than 1% of intact men require a circumcision for medical purposes as adults ("Summary"). Studies on the history of MC and FC also show that both practices were implemented in several different cultures to mark a child or adolescent with femininity or masculinity. The removal of the clitoris marks the removal of female parts that can represent or correlate to male genitalia. The suturing of the vagina feminizes the womb and is believed to retain the freshness of the woman to be pure for her husband and for child-bearing (Lightfoot-Kline). In males, the removal of the foreskin also marked the shedding of all things feminine on the male body, the separation from the womb and from the mother, and showed masculinity in the remaining scar. The exposed glans is considered a symbol of manhood (Silverman).

In FC nations, women often feel adamantly about having their infant girls operated on. They feel that if the girl is left natural, she will suffer for life because no man will want her as her external genital tissue is considered unfeminine (Hayford). They also feel that the tradition should be continued, and if the mother has been circumcised, so should the daughter (Fourcroy). American parents feel strongly about having their infant boys operated on, for similar reasons. They feel that he will suffer in finding a mate and desire the boy’s genitals to resemble his father’s. Both cultures cite tradition as reasons to perpetuate ancient rites. The society involvement on both sides is tremendous, since it is believed in both cultures that the non-circumcised individual will have social hardship with the opposite sex due to their intact genitals. Both cultures also believe that the surgery is relatively painless and that their children will not remember the procedure. In a comparison chart composed by Hanny Lightfoot Kline, the view on clitori..omy is "She loses only a little piece of the clitoris, just the part that protrudes. The girl does not miss it. She can still feel, after all. There is hardly any pain." The comparison chart also displays the American view on routine infant circumcision: "It’s only a little piece of skin. The baby does not feel any pain because his nervous system is not developed yet."("Comparison") The chart also displays views on cleanliness in both societies

Circumcision as a means of control

Sometimes the practice of MC is downplayed when compared to FC since a common view is that FC is used as a means of male control over women. It ensures that a woman is a virgin when she marries, and clitori..omy reduces sexual pleasure (Henslin, 275) This was thought to increase a woman’s faithfulness to her family and keep her mind clear of "unnecessary" things, such as personal pleasure. While these reasons may have initiated the practice, FC in some societies has become so common that the initial purpose is only a memory. The practice perpetuates because it is "normal" and socially accepted. For example, 97 per cent of women in Egypt are circumcised (Henslin, 274). This may seem outrageous, but consider that 60% of American males are circumcised as well (Grossfeld). While this number has dropped from its early-70’s percentage of 95 (Grossfeld), it is still high considering the world circumcision rate is only 15% (Watterstein).

We rarely associate MC with control over boys, but the history of routine circumcision in the US shows otherwise. Circumcision was virtually unheard of among non-Jewish Americans until the late 1800’s. A popular and respected doctor of the time, John Harvey Kellogg, wrote an article about the rising problem of sexual deviancy and masturbation. In this article, he wrote:

"A remedy for masturbation which is almost always successful in small boys is circumcision. The operation should be performed by a surgeon without administering an anesthetic, as the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment. In females, the author had found the application of pure carbolic acid to the clitoris an excellent means of allaying the abnormal excitement." (Kellogg 295)

In the 1970’s, a urological textbook called Campbell’s Urology recommends circumcision as a means to control masturbation. (Darby) Other popular beliefs in America in the 1800’s were that foreskin caused degenerative disease, reflex neurosis, and that the ejaculation of sperm was a life-threatening disease. To prevent these conditions, doctors readily performed circumcision with no anesthesia. There is much evidence that MC became popular in the US as a means of sexual control. (Darby)These theories and beliefs about the therapeutic effects of circumcision have long since been disproved by science and laughed at by modern Americans. Yet the practice continues, even though female genital alteration has been not only forgotten, but made illegal in the US.

Medical Benefits and Risks

While it is difficult to impossible to find medical benefits of FC, a quick search of the internet will give you several benefits of MC. There have been suggestions that FC, like MC, reduces urinary tract infections in the first year of life. But the AAP specifically states that data regarding the benefits of infant MC are not strong enough to recommend the procedure as a routine surgery. (Rose) Many state Medicaid programs and insurance companies have even removed routine MC from the list of procedures covered; making it an elective, cosmetic procedure ("Summary").However, unlike FC, MC is still legal in the US.

FC nations believe that the clitoris and unsutured vagina can cause everything from impotence in their men to poisoned breast milk. American journalists have also uncovered many "health risks" to having a foreskin, such as causing cervical cancer in their women. (Lightfoot-Kline).Many people also believe that there is a huge risk for penile cancer to intact men, and that both penile and cervical cancers spontaneously arise simply from the presence of foreskin. Yet the routine circumcision of infants is still not recommended by any medical organization in the world because there is not enough evidence that the benefits outweigh the risks.

The risks for both surgeries are almost identical. Besides the obvious loss of healthy tissue, risks for FC include shock, bleeding, infection, infertility, and death. (Henslin 274). Risks for MC (besides loss of healthy tissue) include shock, bleeding, infection, penile necrosis (complete death of the tissue of the entire penis, making it non-functional), and death (Milos, Macris, 92s).

Placing FC and MC Side by Side

Ask any American what he or she thinks of FC and the answer will most likely be that it is disgusting or barbaric. For most of us, everything we know about the practice is what the media shows us. This is interesting, because for most of us, the only things we really know about MC is what the media shows us. We don’t consider that our reasons for perpetuating MC are almost identical to those that perpetuate FC. After all, we are a "civilized nation", and we would never do anything as disgusting as FC. The fact is that both practices are violations of human rights, whether done religiously or culturally. The US prides itself on religious freedom and bodily freedom, yet we routinely infringe on the religious and bodily rights of our male children. How can we fight for the bodily freedoms of women and girls in FC nations if we continue to exert our idea of normalcy on our own boys without their consent?

While there are new studies being published almost daily regarding HIV studies and circumcision, cancer and circumcision, infection and circumcision, none of these studies hold enough weight to change the recommendations of the AAP, the AMA, and the WHO. None of these major medical groups implement a policy of prescribing preventative circumcision. Yet small risks such as urinary tract infection and penile cancer are blown up and made the center of the debate. The fact is that circumcision reduces the risk of UTI in the first year of life, but the odds are still very small. The risk of UTI for an intact child is 1 in 100, while the risk for a circumcised child is 1 in 1000. Baby girls have an even higher risk of UTI because of the placement of the urethra, but rather than circumcise them, doctors prescribe antibiotics (Summary). Why the dualism? Why can we not recognize our primitive traditions and eradicate them as we are attempting to eradicate the primitive traditions of other cultures? If we can’t take a step back and realize that our own practices are just as bad as the ones we condemn, how can we consider ourselves a civilized society? Recent movements against MC are met with hostility and stubborn clutching on to tradition, much like movements and legislation against FC is met by the people who traditionally and religiously practice it.

There really are only two solutions to this problem. Americans have been thrown into their beliefs about MC by it’s evolution in society. We forget or ignore the outrageous reasons it became popular, and perpetuate the practice for the same reasons FC continues in Africa and Indonesia. Much like we attempt to educate these nations on the truths to FC, we need to make an active effort to do the same in our own country regarding MC. Until we do that, we have no place judging and placing our patriarchal hand over the beliefs and practices of other societies. It is very much the "pot calling the kettle black" kind of situation. So if what’s good for the goose is good for the gander, to continue the cliché’s. The only ways to display our civility and an attitude of monism and consistency in regards to genital cutting are to either ban MC or legalize FC. If we are to frown upon FC, logic, reason, and the history of both practices dictate we should hold that frown upon MC as well.

Learn more by visiting these links:

An FGM researcher compares MGM cultural justifications:

http://www.fgmnetwork.org/intro/mgmfgm.html

Human Genital Mutilation Classification Chart:

http://www.icgi.org/hgm_classification.htm

Female Circumcision and Male Circumcision, Is There A Difference?:

http://www.compleatmother.com/arti cles3/femalecircumcision.shtml

Common Denominators between Male & Female "Circumcision":

http://www.noharmm.org/comparison.htm

Underlying Justifications in the US and Africa:

http://www.nocirc.org/symposia/third/hanny3.html

Side-by-side Comparison of official AAP positions:

http://www.circumstitions.com/AAP.html

Contrast and compare FGM and MGM:

http://www.circumstitions.com/FGMvsMGM.html

Bibliography

Darby, Robert (2003). The masturbation taboo and the rise of routine male circumcision: A review of the historiography. Journal of Social History, 36(3), 737. Retrieved March 1. 2008 from Platinum Full Text Periodicals database. (Document ID 376493961)

Dietrich, H.L. (2003). " FGC Around the World". Retrieved March 1, 2008 from FGM Network:http://www.fgmnetwork.org/intro/world.php Fourcroy, Jean L (1999). Female Circumcision. American Family Physician, 60(2) 657-8 Retrieved March 1, 2008, from Platinum Full Text Periodicals Database. (Document ID: 44110387)

Grossfeld, Stan. "Controversy over Circumcision Heightened in US After Report" The Boston Globe. 25 July, 1999 (A1).

Hayford, Sarah R (2005). Conformity and Change: Community Effects on Female Genital Cutting in Kenya. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 46(2), 21-40. Retrieved March 2, 2008, from Platinum Full Text Periodicals database. (Document ID: 858901361).

Henslin, James M. Essentials of Sociology, A Down-To Earth Approach. 7th Edition Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville. (274-75).

Kellogg, John Harvey, MD. "Treatment for Self-Abuse and it’s Effects". Plain Fact for Old and Young. Burlington, Iowa, Segner and Co, 1888. (295)

Lightfoot-Kline, Hanny (2003). Similarities in Attitudes and Misconceptions toward Infant Male Circumcision in North America and Ritual Female Genital Mutilation in Africa. The Female Genital Cutting Education and Networking Project. Retrieved March 1, 2008 from FGM network: http://www.fgmnetwork.org/intro/mgmfgm.html

Milos, Marilyn, and Macris, Donna. "Circumcision: A Medical or a Human Rights Issue? Journal of Nurse-Midwifery. 27 (1992): 87s-96s

Rose, Verna L (1999). AAP updates its recommendations on circumcision. American Family Physician, 59(10), 2918-2923, Retrieved February 28 from Platinum Full Text Periodicals database. (Document ID: 41839893)

Silverman, Erik K (2004). Anthropology and Circumcision. Annual Review of Anthropology, 33, 419-445. Retrieved February 25 from Platinum Full Text Periodical Database. (Document ID : 749595851).

"Summary of General Circumcision Information". Circumcision Resource Center. Date Unknown. Retrieved March1, 2008 from

Watterstein, Edward. "Circumcision: The Uniquely American Enigma". Urologic Clinics of North America . 12 (1985) 123-132. Circumcsion Reference Library, Dec 2005. Retrieved Feb. 23, 2008 from http://www.cirp.org/library/general/wallerstein

~*~

Back to Contents

By Harper Jean Tobin

Last December, South African newspapers reported that the nation's Human Rights Commission was considering legislation to regulate "corrective" surgery on intersex children. Pediatricians and adults who had had such surgeries told the Commission that, while intended to make intersex children cosmetically "normal," are irreversible and may not be in the best interests of children. (The South African Justice Department was also considering amending civil rights legislation to include intersexuality in the statutory definition of "sex."

While intersexuality -- any of a variety of conditions where children are born with mixed sex characteristics -- is not usually associated with serious physical health risks, beginning in the 1950s some doctors began to view intersex births as a "social and medical emergency." They presumed that such children would be mocked by peers, rejected by parents, plagued by identity problems, and unable to have a normal sex life. Their solution was to surgically alter infants' genitals to make them appear like "normal" boys or girls -- usually girls. This treatment model that infants' gender identities are a "blank slate," and they could therefore be assigned to whatever sex was most surgically convenient.

This treatment model has come under increasing attack from doctors, social scientists and an emergent intersex rights movement as lacking meaningful empirical support. Reports at a recent conference of the American Association For The Advancement Of Science outlined mounting evidence that gender identity is unalterable from birth. Thus, some intersex people have grown up intensely unhappy with their assigned sex, and as adults undergone gender transition.

"Corrective" genital surgery has often been performed on young children in an atmosphere of urgency and secrecy, with parents presented with no other real options but to consent to the surgery and to conceal if from their child. Performing this kind of surgery on small children may limit or destroy sexual function and sensation in adult life. While some intersex people are sterile from birth, these treatments can destroy reproductive capacity for others. The repeated operations often required may result in medical complications and have dubious aesthetic results. Sociologist Sharon Preve's recent study Intersex and Identity suggests that despite the intent to bestow "normality," treating intersexuality as a dangerous, pathological secret can leave children feeling suspcious and freakish.

Even before attracting official attention in Capetown, this issue came before the Colombian Constitutional Court in 1999. In short, the Court held that parents could not consent to cosmetic genital surgeries for children over five years of age, and applied a heightened informed consent standard parents of children under five. Basing these holdings on an implied constitutional right to define one's own gender identity, the Court called for dialogue among doctors and society, "to open a space to these people, who until now have been silenced."

In the US, there is now a vigorous debate among doctors, activists and legal scholars about intersex surgeries. Some have called for a complete moratorium on such surgeries before individuals can consent for themselves. And there has been considerable speculation as to the legal implications:

Will today's surgical candidates be tomorrow's plaintiffs? While we define medical negligence by the standard of professional consensus, here it is appears that that consensus is breaking down, rendering a definition of malpractice difficult at best. The question also arises whether parents should be able to consent for their children in these cases, when they may be reluctant to consider their child's future sexual and reproductive interests. There are indications that many parents have not been fully informed as to the risks or uncertainties involved. Should these operations be subject to the same heightened judicial scrutiny as involuntary sterilization of mentally impaired children?

A recent article by Kate Haas in the American Journal of Law and Medicine suggested that, when performed in a publicly-owned hospital, these operations could implicate Fourteenth Amendment rights. The right to bodily in integrity is the most clearly relevant, but the right to reproductive choice can also be involved. Inasmuch as sex assignment determines whom one can marry, the right to marry is also implicated.

Haas even suggested that some operations could fall under the 1996 Criminalization of Female Genital Mutilation Act, which makes it a crime to circumcise or excise any part of the labia or clitoris of a minor unless it is necessary to the minor's health. In contrast to the well-established evidence of the benefits (and sometimes the life-saving value) of reassignment surgery for many transsexuals, there is little if any evidence that surgery for intersex children is medically necessary. In that light, these procedures could even be considered medical experiments conducted on unconsenting children in violation of the international Nuremburg Code.

But this truly is all speculation: there appears to be no recorded US case law on these matters. Inevitably, there will be. Our law, which to date has not recognized the existence of intersexuality, must in time address these issues. Hopefully, it will "open a space" for intersex people in our society as well.

Intersexuals Fight Back:

http://www.alternet.org/story/10672/

The Tyranny of the Aesthetic - Surgical Violations:

www.ontheissuesmagazine.com/1998summer/su98coventry.php

First Do No Harm:

https://sites.google.com/site/completebaby/igm

A mainstream news article calls for an end non-consential surgical intervention:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6994580/

Sex Police:

www1.salon.com/health/feature/1999/04/05/sex_police/index.html

Making the Cut:

http://www.msmagazine.com/oct00/makingthecut.html

Learn about the academic fraud at the heart of Doctor's rationalizations:

http://www.reason.com/links/links052404.shtml

An academic analysis of the current situation to date:

www.hawaii.edu/PCSS/online_artcls/intersex/intersex00_00.html

Intersex Society of North America:

http://www.isna.org/

~*~

Have you ever wondered what happens to all of those foreskins after circumcision? Would you be surprised if I told you that hospitals have been selling discarded foreskins to private bio-research laboraties and pharmaceutical companies? You will be even more surprised when I tell you exactly where that precious, densely innervated tissue ends up!

Human foreskin is in great demand and equals multi-million dollar profits for bio-medical research and pharmaceutical companies. Why? Human flesh is a required raw research material for bio-medical companies in order to create many medical products from growing new tissue to use as skin grafts for burn patients, to creating new eyelids and used in the production of insulin. Foreskin is an ideal tissue because the young flesh grows better, is likely to be free of disease, and is a consistently and readily available resource.

Human foreskin also contains all of the things that we lose as we age, growth factors, amino acids, proteins, collagen, elastin and hyaluronic acid, and there is an endless stream of companies ready to capitalize on that fact. It has become the active secret ingredient in many face creams as well as used for collagen for those lovely plump kissers you see on many models and actors. That's right, the next time you see that youthful glow and ample pout, you'll know that baby penis made it all possible.

The key ingredient in SkinMedica's 'fountain of youth' anti-wrinkle cream, which is called TNS recovery complex, has been highly touted by Oprah and many other celebrities. I bet. On a mothering.com discussion, it was asked, "If the cream was made from the bi-product of baby Afro-American clitoral skin, would Oprah still be promoting it?" I doubt it. When asked of the smell, Barbara Blair says, "It's disgusting. It's got a sour smell to it that makes you want to gag, but you get used to it."

Now that you know the motive behind the cutting of your children's foreskin, it is important for you to know what's at stake. Circumcision removes about 50% of the skin of the penis, with that, he loses length and circumference and the mechanical action of being able to 'slide' in and out of itself, a highly pleasurable function for a man and his partner. It also removes the frenar ridged band which is the primary erogenous zone of the male body along with meissner's corpuscles and branches of the dorsal nerve, 20,000 fine-touch receptors and specialized erotogenic nerve endings. Rich with sexually responsive tissue, loss of this reduces the fullness and intensity of sexual response. The circumcised male also loses part of his immunological system and function in the soft mucosa which produces plasma cells, these cells secrete immunoglobulin antibodies as well as antibacterial and antiviral proteins, including the pathogen killing enzyme lysozyme. Langerhans cells, a special immunological set of cells that are a front line of defense against disease and has recently been shown to produce langerin, which actually kills HIV, is also, you guessed it, lost. The lost list includes but is not limited to: frenulum, dartos fascia, lymphatic vessels, estrogen receptors, apocrine glands, sebaceous glands, natural glans coloration, blood vessels, and sometimes even the entire penis.

According to norm.org, circumcision performed during infancy disrupts the bonding process between child and mother. There are indications that the innate sense of trust in intimate human contact is inhibited or lost. It can also have significant adverse effects on neurological development. Additionally, an infant's self-confidence and hardiness is diminished by forcing the newborn victim into a defensive psychological state of "learned helplessness" or "acquired passivity" to cope with the excruciating pain which he can neither fight nor flee. The trauma of this early pain lowers a circumcised boy's pain threshold below that of intact boys and girls. Too often, some boys even lose their lives as a result of circumcision... it only takes a small amount of blood lost in such a tiny body to send the newborn in shock. Recently, a boy died from heart attack and loss of oxygen he experienced during the procedure.

So what do YOU get out of this? Big pharma gets big profits, the child gets tortured in an unimaginable way, stripping him of the best part of his body, and YOU actually PAY for it! Whether you think you do or not, if you pay taxes, you are paying for circumcisions! What? Yes, you heard me right, you or your insurance company pay the doctor (if not directly, you will end up paying indirectly!) to strap down newborn baby boys while their foreskin is brutally ripped away from the glans and sliced off, with little or no effective pain relief, then the foreskins are sold for the production of miracle wrinkle creams and collagen injections that earn BILLIONS of dollars in profit each year. And that poor baby, well, he TOTALLY gets shafted, er... shall I say, DE-shafted, in this deal... all that profit on his loss and he doesn't even get so much as a trust fund for college or a way to pay for a surgical restoration. He doesn't even get a SAY! Heck, even the models and actors make money out of this deal... that fresh, ageless skin and juicy lips help earn them an extra killing out of the additional ten years of work. (If it is true that it takes 10 years off!)

Circumcision is big business, when considering that a SINGLE foreskin can bring in $100,000 in profit, there is no question about why circumcisions are still being performed in America despite the fact that no major medical association in the world recommends it.

As Paul M. Fliess MD states in the Case Against Circumcision, "Parents should be wary of anyone who tries to retract their child's foreskin, and especially wary of anyone who wants to cut it off."

IF YOU ARE NOT ENRAGED, YOU ARE NOT PAYING ATTENTION!!

Face Cream's secret ingredient:

www.nbc10.com/health/1808693/detail.html

Harvesting Foreskins for commercial use:

www.alternet.org/envirohealth/47421/

Human Foreskins are Big Business for Cosmetics:

www.associatedcontent.com/article/146761/human_foreskins_are_big_business_for.html

"Dr. Wexler told us the factors are engineered from human foreskin!"

www.oprah.com/health/beauty/health_beauty_treatments.jhtml

Abstract of a research paper on using foreskins

"...fibroblast cultures are established from freshly harvested neonatal foreskin tissue"

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11858954&dopt=Abstract

Where do all the foreskins go?

www.norm-uk.org/where_do_foreskins_go.html

Foreskins for Sale:

www.foreskin.org/f4sale.htm

Near the bottom of the page - "Injectable collagen derived from newborn foreskin":

www.msnbc.com/modules/cosmetic_surgery/injectables/content.asp?p=all

Buy your own culture of Epidermal keratinocytes derived from neonatal foreskins:

ccr.coriell.org/Sections/Search/NHFK.aspx?Ref=NHFK&PgId=202

This commercial biomedical company sells foreskin-derived cell cultures(Search for Foreskin):

www.cascadebio.com/

*

Here are some additional companies that use infant foreskin(compiled by Joseph Lewis on Times Live NZ http://www.timeslive.co.za/ilive/2011/08/10/interest-in-circumcision-more-than-foreskin-deep)

Organogenesis

Organogenesis is a corporation based in Canton, MA.[1] They profit from Apligraf, which is a synthetic skin created from harvested foreskins.[1] Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. has global marketing rights to Apligraf.

Call for increase of foreskin harvesting

"WE MUST BE ABLE TO OBTAIN ADEQUATE SOURCES OF SUPPLY We manufacture Apligraf for commercial sale, as well as for use in clinical trials, at our Canton, Massachusetts facility. Among the fundamental raw materials needed to manufacture Apligraf are keratinocyte and fibroblast cells. Because these cells are derived from donated infant foreskin, they may contain human-borne pathogens. We perform extensive testing of the cells for pathogens, including the HIV or "AIDS" virus. Our inability to obtain cells of adequate purity, or cells that are pathogen-free, would limit our ability to manufacture sufficient quantities of our products."

-- Organogensis, 2001 Annual Report (Delaware: Organogenesis, 2001), p.8.

References

↑ 1.0 1.1 "Headquarters". Organogenesis.http://sec.edgar-online.com/organogenesis-inc/10-k-annual-report/2001/04/02/Section2.aspx Retrieved 2011-03-06. "The corporate headquarters and manufacturing facility are located in Canton, Massachusetts."

Dermagraft-TC

Dermagraft-TC which is an artifical skin created from harvested foreskins from infant circumcision.[1] It is made and sold by Advanced Tissue Sciences (ATS), which is a corporation based in La Jolla, CA. Dermagraft-TC is FDA approved,[2][3] and it sells for about $3,000 per square foot; one foreskin contains enough genetic material to grow 250,000 square feet of skin.[4]

References

1.↑ "Dermagraft-TC: Overview". Advanced Biohealing, Inc..http://www.dermagraft.com/about/overview/. Retrieved 2011-03-06. "Dermagraft is manufactured from human fibroblast cells derived from newborn foreskin tissue."

2.↑ "Dermagraft-TC". MediLexicon.http://www.medilexicon.com/drugs/dermagraft-tc.php#GeneralInformation. Retrieved 2011-03-06. "...fibroblast-derived temporary skin substitute for the treatment of partial-thickness burns that has been approved for marketing by the FDA."

3.↑ "Advanced Tissue Sciences' temporary wound covering Dermagraft-TC approved for marketing by FDA". Transplant News. 2007-03-28. http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-47248437.html. Retrieved 2011-03-06. "...the Food and Drug Administration has approved Dermagraft-TC for marketing, making it the first human fibroblast-derived temporary skin substitute to be approved."

4.↑ Circumcision. Daecher M. Icon 1998;2(2):70-3.

Apligraf

Apligraf is a synthetic skin created from harvested foreskins.[1] It is FDA approved,[2] and it is made and sold by Organogenesis, which a corporation based in Canton, MA. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. has global marketing rights to Apligraf.

References

1.↑ "Apligraf: How Is It Made?". Organogenesis.http://www.apligraf.com/professional/what_is_apligraf/how_is_it_made/. Retrieved 2011-03-06. "Human keratinocytes and fibroblasts are derived from neonatal foreskins"

2.↑ "Apligraf". Organogenesis.http://www.organogenesis.com/products/bioactive_woundhealing/apligraf.html. Retrieved 2011-03-06. "Apligraf® is the first bio-engineered cell based product to receive FDA approval (in 1998)."

AlloDerm

AlloDerm(R) which is a skin graft created from harvested infant foreskins.[1] It is approved by the FDA[2] and it is made and sold by LifeCell Corporation (Nasdaq:LIFC), which is a corporation based in Branchburg, NJ.[3]

References

1.↑ "LifeCell Research Demonstrates Potential". Business Wire. 1995-05-16.http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-16828845.html. Retrieved 2011-03-06. "...the culturing of human neonatal foreskin keratinocytes..."

2.↑ "AlloDerm®Tissue Matrix defined". LifeCell Corporation. http://www.lifecell.com/alloderm-regenerative-tissue-matrix/95/. Retrieved 2011-03-06. "...screened and tested according to FDA regulations..."

3.↑ "Index". LifeCell Corporation. http://www.lifecell.com. Retrieved 2011-03-06.

Advanced Tissue Sciences

Advanced Tissue Sciences is a corporation based in La Jolla, CA. They are the makers of Dermagraft-TC, which is an artifical skin created from harvested foreskins from infant circumcision.[1] They are also the makers of NouriCel, another product made from harvested foreskins,[2] and one of the main ingredients of SkinMedica's TNS Recovery Complex product.[3]

Earnings

Dermagraft-TC is FDA approved,[4][5] and it sells for about $3,000 per square foot and one foreskin contains enough genetic material to grow 250,000 square feet of skin.[6]

Advanced Tissue Sciences has sold about $1 million worth of cultured dermis to Proctor & Gamble, Helene Curtis, and other such businesses for pre-market testing. Advanced Tissue Science's foreskin-derived merchandise held a $32 million stock offering in the beginning of 1992.[7]

In 1996 alone, Advanced Tissue Sciences could boast of a healthy $663.9 million market capitalization performance.[8]

References

↑ "Dermagraft-TC: Overview". Advanced Biohealing, Inc..http://www.dermagraft.com/about/overview/. Retrieved 2011-03-06. "Dermagraft is manufactured from human fibroblast cells derived from newborn foreskin tissue."

↑ "The Foreskin Mafia". Acroposthion.com. http://www.acroposthion.com/acroposthion_019.htm. Retrieved 2011-03-06. "TNS contains... NouriCel-MD which is... a combination of Natural Growth Factors, matrix proteins, and soluble collagen. Human Growth Factors extracted from cultured cells of foreskin..."

↑ "SkinMedica Introduces TNS Recovery Complex". SkinMedica. 2002-02-12.http://www.corporate.skinmedica.com/press/2002/skinmedica-launches-tns-recovery-complex. Retrieved 2011-03-06. "TNS Recovery Complex is the only product containing a professional concentration of NouriCel®, a new cosmetic ingredient from leading tissue-engineering company Advanced Tissue Sciences."

↑ "Dermagraft-TC: General Information". Advanced Tissue Sciences. MediLexicon International Ltd. 2011. http://www.medilexicon.com/drugs/dermagraft-tc.php#GeneralInformation. Retrieved 2011-05-07. "Dermagraft-TC is the first human, fibroblast-derived temporary skin substitute for the treatment of partial-thickness burns that has been approved for marketing by the FDA."

↑ "Advanced Tissue Sciences' temporary wound covering Dermagraft-TC approved for marketing by FDA". Transplant News. HighBeam Research. 1997-03-28. http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-47248437.html. Retrieved 2011-05-07. "the Food and Drug Administration has approved Dermagraft-TC"

↑ Circumcision. Daecher M. Icon 1998;2(2):70-3.

↑ Julie Pitta. Biosynthetics. Forbes 10 May 1993: 170-171 Note: The 32-page Advanced Tissue Sciences, Inc. 1997 Annual Report refers to "fibroblasts" but does not contain the word "foreskin."

↑ Biotech's Big Discovery. Hall CT. San Francisco Chronicle. October 25, 1996: E1, E4.

LifeCell Corporation

LifeCell Corporation (Nasdaq:LIFC) is a corporation based in Branchburg, NJ.[1] The profit from the creation and sale of AlloDerm(R) which is a skin graft created from harvested infant foreskins.[2]

References

↑ "Index". LifeCell Corporation. http://www.lifecell.com. Retrieved 2011-03-06.

↑ "LifeCell Research Demonstrates Potential". Business Wire. 1995-05-16.http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-16828845.html. Retrieved 2011-03-06. "...the culturing of human neonatal foreskin keratinocytes..."

~*~

By Suzanne Cook

When you make the choice not to circumcise your newborn son, you are giving him the opportunity to grow up with his God-given sexuality. Unfortunately, many American boys are not given this right because their parents are misinformed into believing circumcision is necessary for health, cleanliness or social reasons. Some parents will honestly admit that they personally prefer a circumcised penis and subject their normal and healthy newborn baby to surgery to have his penis altered to suit their own tastes. Some have their own hang-ups in regards to an intact penis such as the way it looks or the fear that they might actually have to teach their sons how to retract and clean his own penis. Circumcision has become a culturally accepted and sometimes expected surgery for newborn boys here in America but the tides are changing. Parents in the new generation are realizing that what they have been told about circumcision was based on myths. They realize that their sons are supposed to have foreskins and more and more babies every day are being left intact.

Raising an intact son can be an interesting experience in our circumcising society. Parents of circumcised sons don't realize how different their sons are from their intact peers. I've heard parents joke about how their sons pee across the room...or in the parents face! I've since learned that this seems to be related only to circumcised boys and my theory is that the foreskin helps channel the flow of urine downward, the way it is normally supposed to go, rather than straight out like a circumcised boy. Also, with the foreskin removed, the urethral opening tends to narrow slightly and this also contributes to a "squirt gun" type flow of urine in circumcised boys.

I've also noticed that many parents of intact boys do without the "splatter guard" that can be attached to many potties for potty "training". This is also related to the above statement about the squirting effect of circumcised boys.

One common myth of an intact boy is that a parent must retract and clean under his foreskin then teach their son how to do it when he is old enough (and make sure he does it). This is a very bad myth and a potentially harmful one! Boys are born with their foreskins firmly attached to the glans (head) of their penis, similar to how our fingernails are attached to our fingers. The newborn foreskin does not and should not ever be retracted!! Erections, growth and normal curiosity help dissolve the connecting tissue (synechia) and the foreskin will naturally separate from the glans and become retractable on its own. Care of Intact Boys

NEVER attempt to retract your son's foreskin and NEVER allow anyone else to retract it, including medical professionals. Forced retraction can cause pain and bleeding as the foreskin is literally torn from the glans. The foreskin will then heal back to the glans and scar tissue can develop. A condition called "acquired phimosis" is caused from forced retraction. With acquired phimosis, the foreskin will have difficulty retracting or will not retract at all. This does not mean that a circumcision will be necessary. There are non-surgical alternatives to help the foreskin retract including steroid creams and manual stretching. If your son becomes a victim of forced retraction, leave his penis alone to heal and report the offended to the proper agency so another intact boy is not harmed. My son Clayton

The proper care of an intact child is to simply leave it alone. An intact boy's penis is self-cleaning during infancy and childhood. Nothing gets under the foreskin that isn't supposed to be there and it gets "flushed out" through urination. When taking a bath, you merely need to clean the outside of his penis with plain water.

Avoid baby powder on both baby boys and baby girls since it can irritate their genitals. If your son's foreskin becomes retractable on it's own, just leave it alone. If you find that it has retracted and the glans is exposed (from rubbing on a diaper or playing nude), gently pull the foreskin back over the glans and leave it alone. Some boys with "short" foreskins become retractable before boys with longer foreskins. This is perfectly normal. There is no set age when a foreskin is supposed to retract, though most will become retractable by adolescence. You will probably not know when your son's foreskin becomes retractable because he will be at an age when he is caring for his own body and such personal questions are usually off limits to Mom and Dad.

Some parents worry that their son will be teased because he is not circumcised like some other boys. There will always be differences among children and always something to tease another about. If it's not the look of his penis, it will be the color of his hair, his freckles, the size of his ears, his name... you name it. If boys are in a locker room situation where they are nude, most will not make comments about another's penis because to make such comments means he had to look at it...and many boys do not want to admit that they were looking at another boy's penis (that could cause some other kind of teasing all together). Girls are equally at risk for teasing when it comes to breast size. If your daughter has small breasts and is teased about it, should you pay for breast enlargement surgery so she will "fit in" with her peers? No, of course not. To consider genital surgery for your son to make him fit in is equally absurd. The situation today is that your son will be amongst intact and circumcised boys alike.

By explaining circumcision to your son, he will be better prepared if he ever faces a situation with other boys when questions about his penis arise. It would not be polite to teach your son to tease circumcised boys since they had no choice in the matter of whether they were circumcised or not. Many circumcised boys don't realize that something was cut off their penis when they were born. Most parents of circumcised boys do not discuss this issue with their sons. I know I would much rather explain to my sons why they are not circumcised than why I had something cut off their penis when they were born.

I don't think it's healthy either to teach your intact sons that they are better than boys who are circumcised. While it may be true that they have the advantage of having their whole penis, circumcised boys are a victim of unnecessary surgery perpetrated upon them when they were a vulnerable baby. It would be unfair and cruel to hold this against them. It's not their fault they are circumcised. If anything, we should teach our sons to have compassion for their circumcised counterparts. Circumcised fathers tend to circumcise their own sons out of ignorance and anger about their own circumcision. Children seem to accept and understand issues sometimes better than adults so it's important that circumcised boys realize that what happened to them does not have to happen to their own sons, once they become fathers. Many circumcised fathers today are raising intact sons. The excuse to circumcise a boy because his father is circumcised is incredibly lame and narcissistic. Whether both father and son are circumcised or intact, there will be many differences merely because of age (size, hair). There is also no one look of a circumcised penis and no one look of an intact penis. Everyone is created differently and no two circumcisions look exactly alike. The only similarity a circumcised father and a circumcised son will have is the fact that they both underwent painful unnecessary genital surgery as babies and both are missing their foreskins as a result. Fathers and sons don't stand around comparing penises! If they do, then they have more issues than circumcision to deal with!!

If a father is circumcised and his son is left intact, a simple explanation about when his father was born, circumcision was thought to be necessary for health reasons but now that they know it's not, they didn't want to put their newborn son through surgery. Some parents will also add that the surgery is painful and they know their son needs his foreskin. Those are some of the reasons parents give to their intact sons to explain why they are not circumcised and their father is (if the issue ever comes up to begin with).

Raising an intact son has also inspired circumcised fathers to begin foreskin restoration to reverse some of the damage that their own neonatal circumcision caused. Men who have done this report vastly improved results, both physically and emotionally.

If you are the parent of a circumcised son, you may have feelings of guilt and regret. You were not informed when you made the decision to circumcise your son but now you know better. Now it's time to heal. Apologize to your son and help educate those around you so other parents will know the facts before any harm comes to their son.

If you are expecting a baby, make sure your midwife, doctor and nurses at the hospital you are going to give birth in know that you do not want your son circumcised. Carefully read any papers you are asked to sign and clearly mark on the paper that you don't want your son circumcised. Submit a birth plan to your doctor and the hospital and be sure to verbally remind them at the time of delivery. It would be wise to arrange for someone to be present to advocate for you if you cannot and to make sure the baby is not "accidentally" circumcised, especially in larger hospitals where "assembly line" circumcisions occur and circumcision is considered routine for all boys. Room-in with your baby if possible. If your baby must be taken to the nursery, make sure someone who knows about circumcision accompanies him. Accidents do happen and it would be unfortunate for it to happen to your son. Be sure to remind everyone not to retract his foreskin as well.

If you are the parent of an intact son, congratulations! Whether you realize it or not, you have spared your son from the pain and trauma of the circumcision surgery and post-surgical healing period and have allowed him to enjoy his body the way it was intended to be.

~*~

by Glenn Epps

~*~

Contrary to some common misconceptions, the prepuce (foreskin) is not just a double fold of “skin” covering the glans penis. The foreskin is an organ of touch, an anatomically unique structure with its own complex vascular and neural systems and separate attachments to its parts and to the penis. Skin is for containment, attached to the tissue beneath and cannot move independently. The foreskin is the separate and distinct tissues fore (before) the skin of the penile shaft. The following description of the foreskin is that of the flaccid (non-erect) penis as the structural dynamics of the foreskin changes dramatically as the penis proceeds through tumescence to erection.

The foreskin consists of the outer foreskin, an extension of the shaft skin from the back of the sulcus to the foreskin opening, not attached nor part of any other structure which makes the underside of the outer foreskin unique from any other skin found on the body, turns beneath itself at the mucocutaneous juncture where the inner foreskin begins. The inner foreskin mucosa begins at the mucocutaneous junction and is specialized and separate tissue which continues from this junction, traveling between the outer foreskin and the glans, attaching to the penis at the back of the sulcus beneath the end of the shaft skin and beginning of the outer foreskin at the top of the penis (about 10mm to 25mm, 3/8 to 1 inch, behind the back of the glans). The inner foreskin continues toward the glans at the sides and transitions into the frenulum toward the bottom.

The Frenulum

The frenulum is the structure traveling down the inner foreskin and connects the inner foreskin to the penis between the hemispheres of the glans below the meatus (urethral opening) at the bottom of the glans and toward the sides and proceeding down the midline of the shaft. Many of the tactile nerve endings of the penis are found in the frenulum. This is similar to the glottal frenulum attaching the tongue to the bottom of the mouth. The ridged bands (small corrugations of tissue, like mountain “ridges”) are behind the mucocutaneous juncture and when the foreskin is retracted appear behind the attachment at the sulcus. This area also contains many of the tactile nerve endings of the foreskin’s neural system.

The foreskin’s neural system contains hundreds of feet of nerves and thousands of tactile nerve endings, most of which are concentrated in the frenulum and frenar bands. Tactile nerves are sensuous nerves sensitive to pleasant sensations and almost all present in the penis are found within the foreskin. Comparatively, the nerve endings found in the glans are Free Nerve Endings, or nociceptive nerve endings, which are sensitive to cold, pain and unpleasant sensations. The foreskin’s vascular system is also quite complex. The blood is supplied by the frenar artery and small and larger veins are present throughout the foreskin and travel down the top of the penis. The abrupt ending of penile veins where they were crushed around the circumference of the penis just behind the area cut off can be seen on a circumcised penis. The tissue and blood vessels over the glans on the top must also be crushed prior to the dorsal cut to prevent hemorrhage and if a circumcision is to be allowed, special care must be taken to thoroughly crush the frenar artery as hemorrhage is very difficult to control.

Some of the function of the foreskin may be fairly obvious after this short narrative on the anatomy, but there is much more to learn about the functional foreskin in the next part.

Physical and Sexual Functions

Due to lack of understanding, interest or purposely, the many physical and sexual functions of the foreskin have been ignored as no other part of the human anatomy. This is incredible considering the vital role the penis plays in life of the male, his mate, his sexual sensuousness and natural sexual gratification. During the life of the male the functions of the foreskin change, slightly to profoundly. Due to these changes we will first examine the years of infancy and childhood and then puberty, adolescence and adulthood.

At birth the infant boy’s foreskin is almost always fused to his glans as his penis is not fully developed and one function of the foreskin is to keep feces and other foreign substances from the meatal opening and the urinary tract of the infant and toddler. That is why the only care for the intact penis is to leave it alone, completely alone. No doctor, nurse, parent or any other care provider should ever investigate, probe or examine his foreskin, especially any forced retraction which will tear foreskin from glans. The undisturbed glans and inner foreskin mucosa is uncontaminated and any such trespasses may introduce that which the foreskin is designed to keep out. His foreskin will naturally separate from his glans and he should be the only one to touch or retract it. When it separates, he will know and he will be retracting his own foreskin. No other person should interfere with this natural process. His foreskin, on average, will represent about 60% to 80% of his penile coverage for additional reasons.

The vascular system of his foreskin protects his glans from cold. As the temperature drops his foreskin will curl toward his glans, thickening and assuring warmth. The near surface nerve endings in his glans are very concentrated, similar to the female’s glans clitoris, until his glans greatly expand at maturity when these nerve endings are more sparse, disbursed over a greater area. The foreskin protects the nerve endings from abrasive action of friction on clothing and without this protection about 75% of these near surface nerve endings will be destroyed by adolescence. In addition, the very delicate covering of the glans must be protected as it is only about two cells thick and without the foreskin must grow nerveless skin for protection, thirty to forty cells thick. This callousness is called keratanization. Of great importance is the fact that the boy’s longer foreskin of infancy and childhood is there for his penis to grow into during the explosive penile growth during puberty. The adult foreskin will be proportionately less than the childhood foreskin, but will still average 40% to 50% of penile coverage which is needed for natural erection – for an unlimited, unencumbered and moveable penis.

The child’s foreskin will naturally separate and retract at different ages and the size of the foreskin is as varied as penis sizes. Some boys are born with a foreskin which is not fused to his glans, some are born with a foreskin that does not cover all of his glans, but these are uncommon. About 60% will separate by age 3 and 80% by age 6. The remaining will separate between 6 and teen years. This is normal, natural, is not phimosis and there should be no intervention with this natural process. All boys and girls are different and on different physical time tables. Physical maturation of the genitalia may begin by age 9 in one boy and another not until age 16. Because the average age of this process begins at age 12 there is no cause for worry or concern if sexual maturation begins a couple of years earlier or later. Such are the individualized variations of foreskin separation.

For the pubescent and adolescent boy a visual as well as physical change will occur. He will notice that his foreskin no longer extends as far in front of his glans nor has the tube-like appearance of his childhood years. His penis grows proportionately larger than his foreskin during this short time span. This is the moment in his life when the marriage of the physical and sexual occur. It is the onset of a voracious appetite for sexual knowledge, interest, investigation and exploration. The natural penis with the sensuous, moveable foreskin is of vital importance from this time onward.

Masturbation must be addressed as the dynamics of the foreskin during this virtually universal practice is very important. Puberty is the time the boy learns about his own feelings, sexuality and explores the workings of his penis. He will find which foreskin motions, the stretching and relaxing of his frenulum, rolling back and forth over his glans and friction in different areas feel best to him. He is a sexual apprentice learning about himself prior to sharing himself with the opposite sex and new learning experiences. Many young men enter relationships with little knowledge about their own sexuality causing these relationships to suffer.

Parents should be able to talk to their sons at this time about masturbation. The intact boy should have real education about his penis and foreskin. He should be informed that it is best to masturbate with his foreskin going back and forth entirely over his glans as this will serve as a dilator should his foreskin be a bit snug. During later intercourse the foreskin of most men will remain behind their glans as most will have very little coverage or a bare glans when erect. But almost all boys begin to masturbate before penile growth and penile maturity so the penis has relatively more foreskin at this time than the later years. At what age does masturbation begin? Again, a large variation from age 8 to 16, most beginning by age 12 (average 11.5 years). Only pulling his foreskin forward and always over his glans when pleasuring himself may result in a rather snug opening. It is also important that the boy distinguish and separate different feelings from different parts of his penis at this time and the reason will be explained in the next section. Of profound importance is the fact that this communication will protect the boy from feelings of shame or guilt associated with sexual self pleasuring and the door will be open from that time onward for honest and open dialogue between the boy and his parents. Sex is natural, his sexuality normal, and his penis is as normal and natural as any other part of his body and should be treated as such.

The sexually active intact male will experience separate and very distinct sensations during intercourse. Most men, however, have not thought to distinguish these unique sensations and their brains have been wired to receive but one impulse, a false perception of pleasure from a singular source. The next section will describe the workings of the intact penis during intercourse and the separation of the sensations that will add to the male’s sensuousness many times over.

The Foreskin During Intercourse

Most intact men are unaware of the many separate and distinct sensuous feelings which originate from the various parts and attachments of their remarkable foreskin. This is due to the neurological wiring of penis and brain which gives the male the perception of a singular center of sensuousness. This one wire perception and not being cognizant of the separate and distinct sensations emanating from the dynamics of motion and tensions can be separated and his sex life will be enhanced remarkably. Instead of the one sensation wiring experienced by most males, and accepted as the totality of their sensuous sexuality, an intact male can enhance that wiring by adding several more wires to his sexual neurology. All that is required is some concentration and delightful practice to consciously segregate and distinguish the various unique feelings of the most sensuous parts of the penis.

The tactile nerve endings of the outer and inner foreskin and concentrated in the frenulum and ridged (corrugated) bands are not only excited by the applied friction of the vaginal walls during motion, but the stretching, relaxing and friction upon these structures must be separated to be thoroughly enjoyed. The male can change this psycho/sexual oneness into a psycho/sexual mosaic with a multitude of delightful, separate sensuous feelings. We will investigate the dramatic entrance, often missed by most men; the motions and frictions of the entire inner and outer foreskin as well as the extension down the shaft and accumulation behind the glans; the stretching and relaxing dynamics of the frenulum and the frenar band; and glans with its very delicate covering (protected).

It must be emphasized that the foreskin comes in many different lengths and when the penis becomes totally erect may naturally retract completely to the shaft or cover some or all of the glans. For the slight majority of intact men, contrary to some sources, once the foreskin is retracted at erection or insertion it will remain behind the glans until withdrawal or until erection is lost. In most instances the foreskin will accumulate behind the glans on the out-stroke creating a larger diameter ring that keeps the natural vaginal lubrication within. Men with a longer foreskin will find that their foreskin may pop onto the glans at the end of the out-stroke, also making the diameter much larger and also keeping the lubrication within. In the former example the glans and vaginal walls are constantly in contact, in the latter the foreskin acts as a sleeve within a sleeve at the end of the out-strokes. Regardless of positions used it is urged that the foreskin be completely forward when entering, allowing the vaginal opening to retract. One man said that he and his wife always retracted his foreskin before entrance and when told to try it as far forward as possible said, “It was the best sex we had ever had. I realized that I had the best of both worlds.”

Separating all of these wonderful sensations will be a very delightful experience. The help and understanding of your partner is important. It is suggested that she take the top position facing you and allow you to orchestrate her movements, the depth and the speed while you concentrate. First, ask her to take your penis in slowly to total penetration and concentrate on your foreskin only – the total retraction and movement down your shaft, perhaps all the way to the base of your penis. If you have foreskin on all or part of your glans prior to entrance, feel your foreskin rolling over your glans during entrance and then down your shaft. Try to ignore the stretching or friction on your frenulum or anywhere else. Ask your partner to go all the way up without withdrawal and all the way downward slowly and deliberately and concentrate on the location of your foreskin during these long strokes and how it feels as it stretches downward and relaxes as the out-stroke progresses. Talk about it. You will know if your foreskin bunches up behind your glans or pops over,how it feels rolling off and on the corona of your glans if it does, or the friction on the accumulated foreskin at the end of the out-stoke. Is she feeling your foreskin as it accumulates or if it pops over your corona and the rolling off and on? This is the easiest part of finding the various feelings and not too much time need be spent on this part. After a few moments at the tip of the out-stroke, concentrate on the bottom of your penis only as she goes to full penetration again and ask her to position herself so that the bottom portion has the most vaginal contact. This concentration may take more than one love making session as the entire dynamics of your frenulum will offer more than one particular sensation.

Try to ignore everything but the underside of your penis. You will feel your frenulum stretching down your shaft on the in-stroke as the attachment to your inner foreskin will pull it downward. The attachments between the hemispheres of your glans and the shaft will also feel such stretching as your frenulum is attached to a stationary and a moving part. If the frenulum is severed from the inner foreskin, it is not possible to enjoy this phenomena. After concentrating for some time on the stretching and relaxing of your frenulum, do deep short strokes and shallow short strokes as well as full stroking. The varieties of tension applied to your frenulum will give different sensations. Then concentrate on the friction of the vaginal wall against your frenulum when stretched downward, relaxed, in between. You will find different messages from the tension applied and the friction against your frenulum. This may take several sessions to separate and appreciate and you will also be cognizant of the motion of your entire foreskin at the same time. Talk about what you are feeling with your partner and ask what she is feeling. When the different sensations offered by your frenulum become recognized and separated, ask her to position herself where most of the vaginal friction is now on the top of your penis.

The sensuous feelings from the ridged or frenar band on the top of your penis (about half an inch behind your glans and proceeding downward toward your glans and making a transition into your frenulum) may be more difficult to distinguish due to location. Try to disregard the sensations of foreskin movement, friction on your frenulum and the frenar stretching and concentrate on the friction upon the top and sides just behind your glans and also the stretching and relaxing of this area. Being aware of the other dynamics by this time may make this area more difficult to concentrate on and distinguish, but your concentration will separate these sensations. Most of the sensations will be found at the beginning of the change from your relaxed foreskin and the stretching downward.

The only part remaining to distinguish different sensations is your glans. By this time you will not be surprised that your glans, compared to the foreskin and its parts, actually gives the least of all the sensuous sensations offered by your penis. As pathologist Dr. John Taylor observed (his research in the British Journal of Urology,February 1996, “The Prepuce: specialized mucosa of the penis and its loss to circumcision”), compared to the foreskin the glans is a dumb organ.

If all of the distinct sensations have successfully been separated and identified you can now enjoy sexual intercourse with a new “oneness” with a bundle of wire instead of the singular wiring. As one man summed-up his adventure, “I wish to thank you for real sex education. The journey is now so much more exiting that I don’t think about the destination and it has not only enhanced my sex life but my wife enjoys my much longer duration and the frequency of her orgasms has at least doubled. I cannot imagine sex without my erogenous foreskin. Why has it been so successfully hidden from men in this country?”

It is a sad state of sexual affairs when men do not experience or are unable to experience all the joys of sex that Nature intended. Over the centuries an oft repeated reason given for removing the foreskin was the idea that human males were incapable of managing so much natural sensuality, could not withstand the enormous amount of sexual gratification afforded by a complete penis. It would cause men to spend too much time thinking of sex, engaged in sexual pursuits or self-pleasuring. Sex was just too “bad” to be enjoyed so much.

The intensities and areas of most sensuality will vary from man to man because of foreskin variety – long, medium or short; long, medium or short frenulum; tight, snug or loose. After taking this excursion please e-mail your experiences and thoughts to the address on the home page.

An interesting added note is the fact that the relatively large area of tissue on the underside of the penis from the foreskin opening to the shaft skin (containing the inner foreskin, outer foreskin and frenulum)is shared by the foreskin, shaft skin and scrotal skin. If this is removed the testicles may be brought quite high at erection as there is no tissue to move downward displacing tissue needed during that large increase in size.

~*~

By Geoffrey B.

Anatomy

The penis has a number of structures that you should know. The head of the penis is called the glans. The foreskin is also called the prepuce. It is attached under the pee hole or meatus by a y-shaped piece of skin called the fraenulum or frenulum. The frenulum is similar in structure to the one under the tongue and has an important sexual function. The fraenular band is the tight bit at the foreskin opening that is being stretched in this case.

Phimosis

Phimosis may be mild or severe. Some men can retract their foreskin easily when their penis is flaccid (soft) but experience difficulty when erect. In others the opening is so tight that they can only see a tiny bit of their glans when they pull back on their foreskin.

Why Bother to Stretch

Although some men manage to live with phimosis there are some disadvantages to having a non-retractable foreskin. Firstly it is hard to clean and may smell. The body produces a white substance called smegma that collects under the foreskin and in the folds of female genitalia. Smegma usually does no harm but it is susceptible to infections that can cause pain and/or odours. Secondly having sex with the foreskin forward reduces sexual sensations. Thirdly many men with tight foreskins complain that sex without a condom is painful as the foreskin may be forced back during sex.

Betamethasone

You can ask your doctor to prescribe Betamethasone 1% ointment. A tiny amount of this ointment can be applied to the tight part of the foreskin. It will speed up the stretching process but won’t do anything on its own, without stretching. Stretching will still work without the ointment, just more slowly.

Stretching Technique One

If the foreskin is very tight the simplest method is to pull back on the skin (easiest with an erection) so that the opening feels tight without real pain. Hold that for a few minutes and repeat a few times. Do this a couple of times a day. Soaking in a warm bath will make the skin easier to stretch. If the opening becomes sore, or develops splits, stop and let things heal up. Going at it too fast will only slow things down in the end. Once the opening is big enough to just fit over the rim of the glans when erect the foreskin is at risk of getting stuck behind it. If this happens paraphimosis may develop. Stretching technique two avoids this risk.

Paraphimosis

Paraphimosis occurs when the foreskin gets stuck behind the glans of an erect penis, trapping the blood that causes the erection in the glans and causing swelling of the foreskin itself. If the foreskin becomes stuck squeeze the head of the penis firmly to force the blood out and try and ease the foreskin forward. If after many tries you still can’t do this see a doctor or ER fast. This is uncommon but you should be warned.

Stretching Technique Two

You can either grab each side of the foreskin opening (with the foreskin forward) and gently pull on each side of the opening or, even better, insert the ends of two fingers, even the little fingers and pull them gently apart. Stretch the opening in this way until it feels uncomfortably stretched but not actually painful. Hold and repeat as for method one. Once again this is best done after soaking in a warm bath.

Sensitivity

As you stretch and are able to expose more of the glans you may find that it is very sensitive or even painful to touch. You will find it less painful the more you expose and use it and gradually the over-sensitivity will lessen. A gentle way to start touching the head is by using the shower spray. Also use lube when touching the head directly.

Smegma Build-Up

As you stretch and are able to expose more of the head you may discover a build up of smegma. This may even contain hard lumps that are hard to remove. Soften them with a light vegetable oil or a non-scented, oily cream such as sorbolene or vitamin E cream. The smegma and softening agent can then be removed with a mild non-scented soap followed by a thorough rinse with plain water. A number of applications over a period of time may be necessary before the build up is cleaned away. Once it is then simple rinsing with plain water every day is enough to keep most penises clean and fresh. Some men can use soap daily but others find it upsets the natural balance and can actually cause infections or irritation.

Tight Fraenulum

Sometimes the cause of difficulty in retracting the foreskin is not a tight foreskin opening but a short fraenulum (frenulum), also known as fraenulum breve. This can also be stretched though it is sometimes more difficult to do this. You can grab the underside of the foreskin opening and pull out away from your body until you feel the fraenulum stretching. Or if your foreskin opening is large enough you can pull back on the foreskin until you feel the fraenulum stretching. Hold and repeat as in the foreskin opening stretching methods. If the fraenulum can’t be stretched then an alternative to circumcision is a frenuloplasty. It is a simple operation that does not remove any tissue but fixes the problem with minimal healing time.

Keep At It

Keep stretching for a while once you get to the diameter of foreskin opening you want. If you stop too soon it is possible for things to tighten up again. So just keep doing the exercises for a week or two after everything is loose enough to work properly.

~*~

By Glenn Epps

Please note that the conditions outlined in The Intact Handbook (TM) also apply to the circumcised penis. This further illuminates that circumcision, in most cases as a prophylactic or preventative measure, is not a proper method of dealing with conditions of the penis.

Lack of information and misinformation abounds respecting the anatomy, function and treatment of the structures of the male penis. At the slightest sign of "trouble" or "problem" with a males foreskin the suggested treatment is often circumcision. Circumcision is an invasive form of treatment and most radical. The Intact Handbook is here to help. If you have a foreskin related problem you'll likely find information that will allow you to avoid circumcision.

As we all become more cognizant of the structure, function and purpose of the complete structure of the male penile anatomy it is important that we make available various forms of treatment that preserve the integrity of these important structures. Circumcision should be seen as a last resort, and truly, almost all foreskin related problems DO NOT require circumcision--alternative treatment methods exist. It is these alternative treatment methods that should become the primary focus for treating various problems that a male may experience. This methodology for treatment is not new. This methodology is employed with respect to almost all medical conditions and problems.

It would be misleading to suggest that the intact penis does not befall to certain medical conditions--this is true of the circumcised penis as well. All parts of the body, whether one is male or female has the potential for befalling to various aliments or problems. It is generally accepted and expected that treatments will be conservative and that surgery is relied upon only as a last resort or where no choice exists. This principle should strongly be adhered to when we are talking about the genitals--male or female--every male and female is entitled to the benefits afforded by such structures lest there being some compelling reason that requires and necessitates surgical intervention. More and more doctors are familiarizing themselves with proper treatment methods for conditions of the penis/foreskin--if your doctor has not--perhaps you can provide him with information or seek a doctor that is up-to-date with current medical treatment methods.

The sections of The Intact Handbook provides some basic information related to some of the more common conditions and problems of the foreskin and also those conditions that have more commonly in the past resulted in treatment by way of radical surgical intervention, namely circumcision.

Attempts have been made, throughout The Intact Handbook, to use wording that is not too technical, medically or otherwise. However, there is a need to use various medical terms and terminology. Definitions to common medical terms used are provided below the Sections.

Sections:

Phimosis and/or Tight Foreskin

Restricted Foreskin Movement

General Irritation and Infection

Reddened and/or Irritated Foreskin

Redness/Swelling of the Glans

Inflammation of the Glans

Phimosis and/or Tight Foreskin:

SUGGESTIONS TO BE DONE IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR DOCTOR

If men who have been circumcised can stretch a new foreskin (known as foreskin restoration or skin expansion), it surely must be possible for a man to stretch the opening of his foreskin to allow for retraction. Surgical intervention, and that of circumcision, should generally be considered a last resort.

BASIC POINT ON STRETCHING: Stretch without pain. If you produce pain, you may be tearing tissue, which can then scar, making matters more difficult. Stretching has to be done slowly, over time.

First, lets assume that the frenar band (essentially the tip of the foreskin) is too tight, there are no preputial adhesions, no rare pathological phimosis (usually balanitis xerotica obliterans-- lichen sclerosus et atrophicus). It should not be too difficult to stretch (dilate) the opening (lateral stretching only).

Soak the end of the penis in warm water and apply a good lubricating cream (i.e. Vaseline or another lubricant which is non-irritating ) and insert two blunt objects about a quarter inch or so within the prepuce and apply some outward pressure so-in-that the foreskin opening has pressure on it. One will need something that can apply outward pressure and not just sit or stand there holding it. Something like large tweezers that open quite widely would be good (insert closed and release), be very careful not to cause injury to any of the penile structures.

If nothing is available to do that, one may stretch it as far as possible over a lubricated short dowel (drill a hole in it for urinating) and slowly increase the size of the dowels. A good place to find doweling materials at a hobby supply store, or the local lumber shop. This may sound a bit unusual but it might be the solution for some.

Stretching should be gradual. There is no need to hurry the process, and in fact if one does try to stretch too quickly it may lead to complications and possibly complications that would then necessitate surgical intervention of some manner. It may be somewhat uncomfortable and one should be on the lookout for any splitting of the foreskin and resultant scarring. If that happens, one may have a fibrotic disease (physiological phimosis). Remember, stretching does not occur overnight. This is not a quick results program.

During the time of stretching, one should occasionally try to retract one's foreskin over the glans, but not past the corona until one is comfortable with the opening having been enlarged enough not to get 'stuck' behind the corona (paraphimosis). One should also try to ascertain, at the time of retracting to the corona, if there are any adhesions. Such adhesions might be indicative of premature retraction at an earlier age. Such adhesions (the foreskin 'fused' to the glans) may require separation by a doctor. Given that there are no major adhesions, the separating of such adhesions should not be difficult for a doctor to do.

Michel Beauge, M.D. (faculty of medicine, Saint-Antoine University in Paris), in his paper working with young men with tight foreskins, uses therapeutic masturbation procedures of which he has reported a terrific success rate.

If one has generally masturbated by stroking the glans through the foreskin in the usual way, but pulls the skin toward the tip of the penis rather than that of pulling it back toward the pubis, one's foreskin may well be similar to that of many of Dr. Beauge's patients, i.e., the presence of a long tubular foreskin as seen in infants (this is normal in infants) and a tighter opening due to it never having been stretched during normal masturbatory experiences.

In his report it is noted that, "Some boys roll the penis between two palms or between one hand and another surface. It is usual in these cases for the raphe on the underside of the penis not to be in the midline but more or less displaced to one side or even spiral; the preputial orifice is often displaced." Further, "It is of course essential that the preputial opening be stretched round the circumference of the fully erect glans. This technique meets the requirements of the kinesitherapy of soft tissues, gradual stretching. In some cases I have recommended instrumental dilation with the use of a dilator in patients who agree to this procedure, or I have advised the introduction of two fingers into the opening of the foreskin to stretch it." Also, "Thus the boy can progressively expand his foreskin until the diameter is equal to that of the erect glans, allowing him subsequently to proceed to sexual intercourse without risk of paraphimosis."

People tend to want quick results, but again stretching should be done slowly and with patience. If the conventional stretching methods are not working well (give them time) one may want to approach their doctor to prescribe Temovate (clobetasol propionate cream 0.05%) If you are using such cream, apply the cream sparingly on the narrowest portion of the foreskin as one gently retracts on a daily basis. Then, after a few days, one can use the erect penis (the glans itself) as a dilator (or other methods mentioned), gently stretching the foreskin, but not past the point of pain, because that could introduce tearing. It is recommended that the cream not be used for more than two weeks at a time because of systemic side effects of cortisone-like substances.

NOTE: Using a topical steroid (0.05% betamethasone cream) has been shown to have excellent results in the treatment of phimosis. [Z. Colubovic, D. Milanovic, V. Vukadivovic, I. Radic and S. Perovic, The Conservative Treatment Of Phimosis In Boys, British Journal Of Urology, 1996; Vol. 78: pages 786-788.] It should be emphasized that there should be great hesitancy of a doctor to diagnosis phimosis, particularly in young boys. However, if so diagnosed, there are very effective treatments which do not require circumcision. In any event, z-plasty (prepuital plasty) will preserve most of the foreskin if surgery is required. Prepuital plasty (where a small incision is made vertically, then closed horizontally so as to widen the opening) is a particularly effective means of dealing with many of the problems for which circumcision is often employed. In an alternative only a small portion of the tip of the foreskin need be removed (in most cases) to resolve phimosis thereby successfully leaving almost all of the foreskin intact.

Sometimes stretching alone does not always work. The frenulum should be considered in an exam. For example, a short frenulum may restrict the ability of the foreskin to retract partially and even in some cases fully. It should be noted again, men's penises vary greatly. It should be remembered that the degree of retractability varies from man to man; this is all normal. What is not normal is for men to experience pain during normal sexual activities. For more information on conditions related to the frenulum see the section "Restrictive Foreskin" in the Intact Handbook.

If there are adhesions found after successful stretching one may advise (seek) his physician that he would like to try the EMLA (Eutectic Mixture of Local Anaesthetics) cream inserted in the foreskin and left there for about an hour and then the adhesions separated. Many doctors are quick to recommend circumcision at the first sign of adhesions. Some physicians recommend against this at any age so again, it would be extremely beneficial to find a foreskin friendly doctor knowledgeable about the natural penis (difficult to find in North America) and any of the rare problems that may occur would be most helpful.

You should keep in mind that if stretching achieves the desired result you may need to employ a regular method of stretching if you find that tightening begins to occur.

OTHER INFORMATION

Sometimes what happens is that the foreskin will tighten either around the head of the penis or in most cases behind the glans (head of the penis). No need to worry. DO NOT PANIC! If this ever happens, just grasp the head of your penis in your fingers and apply constant pressure. This pressure will force the blood out of the glans (head) and you should then be able to slip the foreskin back over the head. One might want to get a lubricant, like KY, and smear it all around the area where the foreskin is lodged and the rest of the glans. If left alone, or if taken to a doctor, circumcision is likely as many doctors still do not understand that there are good reasons for trying to preserve the penile structures, particularly the foreskin.

Consider an alternative to soap; certainly this is not always necessary but it is something to consider. Alkali in soap is the leading cause of irritation that looks like infection. (balanitis (among the circumcised and intact) and balanoposthitis). It causes non-specific dermatitis. Intact (and circumcised) children should be taught to wash their penises with water -- omit the soap. If in a bath, wash the intact penis (one that has naturally retracted) first so the water is clean and there will be no soap residue. Otherwise, one may wish to shop around and find a soap that is alkali-free.

If these options have been non-responsive, surgical intervention maybe necessary. Once again one should seek out a doctor who has knowledge of the penis and not just circumcised penises. Circumcision need not be performed. A procedure, which a well-informed doctor ought to know about, called a Z-plasty will almost certainly alleviate the problems that are non-responsive to less invasive treatments. A Z-plasty (the stitched up incision take the form of a z) removes essentially no tissue and allows a 'widening' of the foreskin. This is an invasive surgery, less radical than a circumcision, and should be sought if less conservative measures are not successful.

Restrictive Foreskin Movement:

SUGGESTIONS TO BE DONE IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR DOCTOR

Depending on exactly the brevity (shortness) of the frenulum or its attachment to the glans, may result in various methods of treatment. Most treatments are very simple surgical procedures which do not ablate (remove) the foreskin or the frenulum. The type of surgical procedure will depend on the manner in which the frenulum is causing a restriction of movement. Generally, most or all of the frenulum can be saved and need not be removed to correct the brevity, so be clear that you and your doctor are fully aware of what exactly is going to be done. Remember, that the frenulum is considered the most sensitive part of the penis; ensure you seek out a knowledgeable medical doctor.

You should also keep in mind that the frenulum can be stretched and if stretching relieves any breve condition that may exist you should make sure that you continue to stretch the frenulum or you may find that it becomes rather taut again.

General Irritation and Infection:

SUGGESTIONS TO BE DONE IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR DOCTOR

Apply some lotrimin lotion on the foreskin to ease the inflammation. The help restore the natural bacterial/flora balance ensure that the boy eats food that contains lactobacillus and other helpful bacteria, if he is not allergic. These might include live culture yogurt, or any juice with lactobacillus added.

If the condition arises during the antibiotic treatment one may want to increase the frequency of bathing (i.e., once a day) using warm water to gently wash the genitals.

This is a temporary imbalance for which circumcision most certainly is not needed.

Ammonia Dermatitis:

SUGGESTIONS TO BE DONE IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR DOCTOR

May be alleviated by treating the diapers with an antiseptic (mercuric chloride) which inhibits the ammonia-producing bacterium. Frequent diaper changes can also help alleviate this problem.

Infants skin can be very sensitive and react to a number of agents. Alkali in hand soap's can be the cause of irritation. Simply bathing with warm water may alleviate the irritation--with patients and time the redness will disappear. Alkali in laundry detergents may be the source of irritation particularly if one is using cloth diapers. You may want to find both a bathing soap and a laundry soap which is alkali free.

Surprisingly the diaper itself may be the agent causing irritation; switching of brands may eliminate irritation.

Other things to watch for are reactions to bubble bath soaps, reactions to chlorine, this maybe particularly evident if you take your child to public swimming pools. Certainly not all the problems will affect your son, whether circumcised or not, but in some cases these are do have a bearing on children and in many cases also that of females as well.

Often when the foreskin reddens it shows that it is doing is job of protecting the glans. Meatal ulceration (the opening at the tip of the penis) is seen in 30% of circumcised boys. This can be a most painful condition and lead to meatal stenosis and in many cases requiring surgical intervention to enlarge the urinary opening. Meatal ulceration is almost non-existent in intact boys. Meatal ulceration is considered a complication of circumcision but of which is hardly ever told to parents by doctors.

Note: Ammonia Dermatitis and Eczema are quite frequently found with the circumcised penis. The problems are more particularly exacerbated by the exposed glans. Remember, the foreskin is essentially like a protective glove. We often wear gloves to protect our hands when dealing with cleaning solutions (ammonia, Javex) and to protect against abrasion, i.e. raking grass/leaves.

Balanitis:

SUGGESTIONS TO BE DONE IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR DOCTOR

Balanitis may be treated by bathing in hot water and local washing; a saline solution might be advisable. One can get this from a pharmacy or make it yourself with 4 teaspoons of salt in 1 liter of clean water Application of an emollient cream may also help ease this condition.

One should BOIL their undergarments for at least 20 minutes then wash them and rinse them three or more times. There have been cases where the problem was washpowder on the underpants which irritated the penis and gave the impression of an infection. After this one might want to make sure that they are using a laundry detergent which is not harsh and alkali free.

In some cases broad spectrum oral antibiotic is required as the problem can be 'inside' rather than 'outside' the person. But depending on the cause one may need injected penicillin if there are certain specific problems.

One may also want to ensure that they are not "over-bathing." Constant washing of the irritated area can sometimes cause further irritation.

Note: In most cases balanitis is that of Nonspecific Dermatitis (NSD) and is treated with emollient cream and the restriction of soap usage and that 90% of all cases respond well to this very simple treatment.

Balanoposthitis:

SUGGESTIONS TO BE DONE IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR DOCTOR

Sample cultures should be taken to identify any offending organism(s) and then by appropriately treated with antibiotics.

~*~

Back to Contents