Involuntary Foreskinectomy Awareness _______ Click →
The conditioning and conforming to various social fads or trends of a few years (or the past four decades) is a very powerful force in the decision making process for all sorts of issues which confront parents and individuals. Should people make decisions based upon this force, they are controlled by agents with particular agendas who maintain that control by the perceptions continuously repeated with a goal of making the natural appear unnatural, the abnormal appearing normal. The art of condition, conform and control, "The 3-C's," has been used for millennia, one person or group with a goal of controlling and directing the lives of others.
The power and persuasion of "The 3-C's" is most likely one of the greatest forces which perpetuate the practice of foreskin amputation in the U.S. One "reason" some mothers (and fathers) assent to the trauma, terror, pain, sensual loss and penile restriction caused by circumcision is the personal perception that an exposed glans "looks better." This visual perception, as the rationale to assent, must deny the factual. Unlike the vast majority of women throughout the rest of the world, the majority of women in the U.S. from age 18 to 55 have never seen, manipulated, or had sex with a man with an intact penis. Sexual experiences with only circumcised penises, visual representations of the penis in only the circumcised condition and reading the many of often repeated frauds written by circumcision promoters, result in the "looks better" perception. A "penis perception" is created without examination of the intact penis and conditioning has negated the desire to examine and compare. Conforming has almost reached the extreme of adulation in some areas of the country. How terribly limiting. Those with experience with intact penises have written that the leathery glans and the scar and discoloration on the shaft looks artificial, unattractive, is a visual reminder of damage. They share with us the perception that appearance is much less important than the sadness they feel for the men in their lives who had no choice in their own physical and sexual destiny.
There are important questions that must be asked. Will the owner of the penis like the looks, the mobility, the function and the feelings of a natural penis? Will the owner of the penis dislike or even be angry having his physical and sexual life altered without his consent? Since we don't have the arrogance to believe we know the answer to what he may like, shouldn't the owner be granted the right to decide the fate of HIS foreskin as an adult? The perception that it "looks better" is a very radical "reason" to damage the male's primary sex organ. Will the boy and man have his penis on display all his life, or is the penis a part of the body that will usually not be routinely exposed to others during the lifetime of the individual? A part of another persons body has been amputated because of the aesthetic perception of another, totally disregarding the basic human right to all people to all of their functional, healthy and, in this case, sensual body parts. Should a male decide to divest himself of the most sensuous part of HIS body as an adult and limit HIS penis by removal of HIS foreskin, frenulum and ridged band, it is HIS to do just that. If it were forcibly removed and as an adult HE would like to have what HE was born with, the important questions were never considered.
Yes, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. But does any person have the right to alter by amputation the body of another to satisfy what is perceived as pleasing to their eye? No. Do we change the appearance of eyes, ears, noses, chins, hands or any body part which is always visible to satisfy another's perception of beauty? No. We are considering the most personal, most erotic, most identifiably male part of the anatomy and altering it. One wonders if people with such perceptions have had much exposure to the world's great art treasures which glorify the beauty of the natural human body with all its wonderful parts including the intact penis. Please, let him decide if he wants his foreskin removed. One of the reasons circumcision is performed upon infants and children is that they are helpless. Almost all older males will not allow it to be done when they have the voice and the power to reject it. Give them all the choice over their bodies and sexual free agency.
~*~