A Man And His Foreskin

My attention was drawn this week to the male circumcision debate in America. Being British and from a non-circumcising religion, I’d never really had to think about that sort of thing very much. It’s certainly not a subject men talk about a great deal, in my experience. Of course, everyone knows some guy who’s had some sort of horrific experience – getting it caught on some overenthusiastic girl’s brace, or shut in a train door, or something similarly gruesome – but I don’t think they talk about foreskins (or lack of them) per se. Anyway, my point is that I’ve never really thought about circumcision that much, and it’s always seemed like a very strange thing to do. So I was quite surprised to read in this article that:

• In the USA, the surgery generates heated battles, with those against it referring to it as genital mutilation and a human rights violation, but others arguing for it based on religious beliefs and potential medical benefits.

Really? Potential medical benefits? I mean, I know that soldiers in North Africa in the Second World War would get theirs done for medical reasons (there’s nothing worse than trying to chase Desert Fox across the dunes of Eastern Libya with an itchy penis) but outside sand-based war conditions I’m not sure it’s worth chopping off a piece of your manhood just to save having to wash it when you’re older.

Of course, there’s more to the potential health benefits than that. According to some studies, for example, circumcised men have a significantly lower risk of contracting HIV than their prepuced cohorts. Which is important, of course; but I can’t help thinking that this sort of statistic might have more relevance in those parts of the world where HIV and AIDS are far more prevalent – due in no small part to a lack of basic information and education on the basics of avoiding sexually transmitted diseases – and where any measure that might help in the fight against their spread is to be welcomed.

But in America? Are people seriously touting circumcision as a way of preventing the spread of HIV in a country where public health education and condoms are widely and freely available? It seems strange that people would argue for getting a male baby circumcised because statistics from sub-Saharan Africa show that it can help reduce the risk of a disease that there are many easier and surer ways of avoiding.

So is it really just a religious thing? Are people just using these studies to back up their arguments when they actually just believe it’s what their God wants them to do? Well, neonatal circumcision rates are about 55 percent in the US, and the practising Muslim and Jewish populations make up about 3 percent, which does leave something of a gap.

I think it might be something more basic. I think maybe some men want their sons to be circumcised because they were themselves. Not in a vicarious, “I suffered: so will you” sort of way; but more because they don’t want their sons to be different from them. After all, nobody wants to have to explain a visible difference like that to a curious infant. And even if they don’t realize it, or admit it to themselves, I think some men will just want what’s best for their sons, and the only experience they have in penises is of having a circumcised one, so that’s what they choose. Well, after all, it can’t be for the aesthetic, can it?

Contact the author here: thewhy@morningquickie.com