http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,2045021,00.html
The gist of this article: The UN calls for mass circumcisions in Africa to slow the AIDS epidemic after weighing evidence indicating that circumsicion reduces infection rates dramatically. The AIDS pandemic is overwhelming in many parts of Africa, often resulting in multiple families living under one roof due to the death of family heads.
Now I’m conflicted about this… 1. The evidence is conclusive: Circumcision dramatically reduces infection rate for males who have sex with infected females. It doesn’t stop the men from transmitting the disease, nor does it appear to have any effect on men who have sex with men, but it reduces their chance of infection.
2. I can’t help but wonder if there isn’t a bit of “correlation is not equal to causation” going on. Is it possible that circumcised males tend to come from a different sexual tradition than the uncircumcised? What I mean is, is it possible they tend more towards monogamy?
3. I’m generally opposed to mandatory circumcision. My boys aren’t circumcised. I’m leaving that to them as a decision they can make on their own as a teen or adult. Mainly, this is due to my bad experience with the procedure at 7 years old (which I won’t go into) and my feelings that baby circumcision is a barbaric, unnecessary procedure.
If there is strong scientific evidence that circumcision reduces AIDS infection rates by 60%, should it be mandatory — or near-mandatory — like inoculations are in first-world countries?
P.S.: I am immensely entertained by the name of the doctor advocating this course of action: Kevin de Cock. I’m so immature.
Causation
Okay, this is gonna get kinda gross.
I think circumcision is an extremely good idea.. and I am an advocate for newborn circumcision.
I was able to observe the procedure as part of my training, and the most “barbaric” thing about it was the contraption they use to keep the baby from moving.. which really upset the baby more than anything else. Babies don’t like to be held still.
So this procedure is essentially a doctor giving a novocaine shot that works immediately and then snip, its done. Its healed in a week or two (Liam’s showed no problems after day 6). The baby never rememebrs it – can’t yet form long term memories from single events (I don’t remember mine, and I am GLAD about it.)
The benefits? Well, socially, there is a lot less to explain in the locker room, or later in the bedroom. the fact is, we’re a society of circumcised men. Kids tend to make fun of the person who is different. Also, statistically speaking, even if a child is ever only with one woman (unlikely, sorry) she will likely have seen a few herself (sorry, again) either through experience, art, or porn – and it could lead to some strangeness. Its not a part of my body I would want to feel bad about.. and it could be a dealbreaker for her.
Also, hygenic. The fact is, I’ve learned from Nursing, that these things DO get infected. They do ulcerate, they do get crud in them.. and I have seen some really really gross stuff related to this subject.
So.. yeah, it seems possible that if the body fluid with HIV gets caught in there that you could have an increased chance of contracting something.
Visit the Official Justin Timpane Website Music, Acting, and More! http://www.timpane.com
I’m inclined to agree. If
I’m inclined to agree.
If scientific evidence is brought forward that show a causal relation between circumsision and an even 50% lower rate of HIV infection, then absolutely make it mandatory, particularly since we’re talking about a continental society whose very existence is threatened by the disease.
I’ve heard stories of men who have developed Post-Circumsion Stress issues, usually later on in their adulthood. (The story usually goes of a group of men who feel that their parents wronged them by circumsizing them as children.) Even if we give full credence to these issues, say that there is 1 in a million men who ends up being partially traumatized by the event, that is still well within the limits of acceptable human rights. There’s probably more people with panic-inducing fear of needles than there are with serious circumcision issues, and we still force them to take vaccines.
Reversing a circumcision…
In fact, you can reverse a circumcision. It apparently takes about a year of wearing weights attached to the foreskin. Hooray for Penn & Teller’s “B.S.”. Now millions of Americans are aware of this fact 😉 (They have an episode on circumcision where you watch a circumcision… the baby screaming so hard that he is shaking is kind of chilling. And later on, they have a dude on who claims to have grown a new foreskin.)
Interestingly, it appears there is no correlation between the rate of STDs and circumcision in US studies, but there is such a correlation with AIDS amongst African males according to the study cited by the original article. I don’t know which to believe at the moment, since I haven’t read them both.
I strongly suspect, however, that there may be unacknowledged bias affecting these results. Either that, or AIDS is a “special case” STD where circumcision has an affect on infection rates compared to others.
Regardless, there is another title for circumcision: “ritual male infant genital mutilation”. It sounds much worse when you don’t use the euphemism for it, though. And the fact that it was used in America after puberty as a punishment for masturbation doesn’t help its rep…
—
Matthew P. Barnson
Euphamism.
Matt, “eating a ham sandwich” is not a euphamism for “ritual grinding of dead animals to mix with spit and swallow.”
See my post above. 🙂
Visit the Official Justin Timpane Website Music, Acting, and More! http://www.timpane.com
infant sexual mutilation
is their anywhere I can go where children are protected?