Medical tools historically used for circumcisions. (Curious Expeditions)
Few Jews are aware that circumcision violates international laws enacted by the United Nations. Article 6 of The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, published on December 16, 1948, just a few short years after terrible human rights abuses against Jews necessitated these words, reads: “Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law [and not just as an extension of the parent].” Additionally, in the United Nations Conventions on the Rights of the Child, published on November 20, 1989, a day after I was born, Article 8 and Article 24 part 3, read respectively, “States parties undertake to respect the right of the child to preserve his or her identity,” and, “States parties shall take all effective and appropriate measures with a view to abolishing traditional practices prejudicial to the health of children.”
As the descendent of an Auschwitz survivor, I take human rights very seriously. Circumcision is a topic very, very deeply embedded within the Jewish culture, and not merely just a religious act, but a societal and familial one as well. When first researching this topic, I expected to run into obstacles of the facts being muddled in opinion, or worse yet, myth. But there is no escaping that at its core, circumcision is the willful mutilation of powerless children and has no place in modern society.
Historically, circumcision appears to have been a practice adopted by the Semitic peoples of antiquity from a religious rite based in the Egyptian culture. There it was an offering to deities descended from the blood of their sun god that occurred when a boy was considered a man.
Today, it is both a religious rite and a common medical procedure. But when consulting doctors, many parents who are considering circumcision for their children are misinformed, or at the very least, informed negligently concerning the procedure. Few are told how a circumcision vastly reduces the number of nerve endings in the penis, and thus the ability to enjoy intercourse. (Today there are both surgical and nonsurgical methods to restore the foreskin, but it is impossible to regenerate the lost nerves and sensitivity.) Few are told specifically about the high rate of infection, or how it can mentally disable or even blind a child, as one Alaskan couple claims. In addition, illnesses related to circumcision often go vastly underreported to the general public while others, “caused by the foreskin” are hyped up.
Fortunately, the procedure is rarely fatal, with fewer than two or three deaths per year. But still, the question should be raised: if death is possible, even if it is unlikely, is the religious rite worth the life of the newborn?
One may also wonder that if the female anatomy functions in relation to that of the male, then could the forced, violent modification of one anatomy cause problems during coitus?
And further, if it is true that man is made in the image of Yahweh, then what truly are we doing in that alteration?
The easy answer is, “Because it is written in the Bible.”
Jews have already foregone other practices, such as the stoning of children for speaking back to their parents. If we have abandoned others, why not mutilation too?
Circumcision goes against the edicts of the United Nations, and therefore violates human rights. If Jews are to exist in a contemporary world, and escape the barbaric past in which we have so suffered, we as a people must be willing to make sacrifices of our own to coexist. For we have no right to exist within an international community if we do not adhere to its norms.
The United Nations represents all peoples, placing the greater good over any specific being or group, and that is especially so for Jews. It is no exaggeration to say that had the United Nations existed prior to World War Two, the Holocaust would not have occurred. If the leaders of all of humanity have ruled that circumcision is against what is deemed humane, then so must the Jews learn, and change.
Circumcision may be a deeply felt, cultural, and religious rite; it is a covenant with God, and as so, is divine. But if we are to live in a human world, without tension or behavior that can be viewed barbaric, then sometimes we must even be willing to give up some of that which we find divine. For whether one is in a covenant, belief in God is something of the heart and soul, for every individual. And no being, not even God, could take that belief away.
It is perhaps for this reason circumcision is no longer necessary: We Jews no longer need the physical reminder of our pact. We have realized it spiritually, and so the need to maim ourselves is obsolete in that so many still honor the faith, no matter the hardships our people have endured.
(An excellent, in-depth documentary concerning the subject by critically acclaimed filmmaker Eli Ungar-Sargon can be viewed here.)
The writer is a student at George Mason University in Washington, DC.
No related posts.
Mark
September 4, 2011
I am not jewish, however I am against genital cutting/ circumcision of healthy children, which of course includes infant boys and minors.
My intentions are only to be an activist against human rights and genital integrity that ALL individuals rightfully deserve.
I wish more Jewish (and muslim) people would understand this instead of labelling people like myself as anti-semetic!
I do respect all forms of religion however I think protecting a child from physical religious modifications like genital cutting must be recognized by governments as a crime (much like females are protected internationally officially since 1996).
It’s great to see this author express that circumcision violates international law enacted by the United Nations, hopefully more will recognize it too.
Tate
October 4, 2011
Thank you for standing up for children. Doctors aren’t going to do anything to dissuade parents from having their children circumcised so it is very important that Jews and Muslims take the lead in ending this practice.
Rachel
October 4, 2011
Thank you for being educated, informed and religious. Your opinion matters! Keep speaking up for those too young to speak up for themselves.
rabbiyonah
October 5, 2011
First of all your pictures are NOT of Jewish instruments of circumcision. Which gets me to think that you are not telling the whole story.
So your point is that in order to enjoy sex more you need your foreskin? Yet study after study say that women whose husbands have a circumcision have vastly lower rates of cervical cancer.
In other words you care more about your pleasure than about your wife’s health.
Secondly, it simply is not true sex is less pleasurable. I have spoken with many men who had sex before and then as adults choose to have a circumcision . NONE replied that sex was less – in fact most thought that it was improved.
You are simply ignorant of the facts, and taken in by anti-circumcision propaganda.
Few are told how a circumcision vastly reduces the number of nerve endings in the penis, and thus the ability to enjoy intercourse.
ArchAngel
October 5, 2011
You are obviously one of those people deceivers that are responsible that this crime is still being committed on children. Your lies and arguments don’t hold any water. You are breaking the most Basic Laws of every Democracy, the laws of the US Constitution and the International Laws of the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Rights of the Child. Circumcisers purposely inflict preventable injuries on others, when done to a child it is obvious Child Abuse, Child Torture and Mutilation. You are not exempt from punishment for breaking these superior laws.
AnneS
October 14, 2011
Your claim that sex is not less pleasurable after the man is circumcised very interestingly focuses on the male partner. And I believe that is in error; of course men will convince themselves that it is the same, but you cannot remove so many nerve endings and still have the same level of pleasurable sensation. That is simple biology.
And your statement COMPLETELY IGNORES the (assumed) female partner’s pleasure. As a woman who has experienced both intact and cut partners, I can assure you that sex is much better with an intact partner. Cut men have to thrust very hard to get the same level of stimulation and have to have a longer in and out thrust as well. This leads to “banging” — a crude phrase that was not invented by an intact man, I’m sure.
cosmopolite
October 11, 2011
Rabbi Yonah, show me the epidemic of cervical cancer in Europe and Japan, parts of the world where only Moslems are circumcised.
Show me the high levels of cervical cancer among wives who are faithful and whose husbands are faithful. The strongest predictor of cervical cancer is a woman with a trashy sex life.
There are men circumcised as adults who complain of lost pleasure. And the loss of pleasure is by no means immediate. The sexual harm of infant circumcision often does not set in until middle age.
Finally, the real experts on the sexual merits of the intact penis are women who have had multiple partners of both kinds, with and without condoms. Quite a few of these women say they prefer natural to circumcised. It is high time that Mother Nature enjoy the benefit of the doubt.
We intactivists do not oppose circumcision, only circumcision that is not an informed adult choice of the person being circumcised.
Josh
October 12, 2011
Fantastic article! So very true, There is NO need to harm children in such a manner. If it matters so much, let the adult choose to cut himself. That is a true covenant. Not one signed in the blood of children unable to even voice opposition, but one signed in the blood of a consenting adult.
James Loewen
October 12, 2011
Cutting the genitals of someone too young to understand or consent is a violation of that person’s most basic human rights.
Carving religion into a child by cutting off part of their genitals is not spiritual it is sexual abuse.
I have utmost respect for those Jews and Muslims who speak up to denounce this atrocious act os sexual violence upon infants and children.
TD
October 12, 2011
It is Rabbi Yonah who is misinformed. The American Cancer Society has stated that the older cervical cancer studies used flawed methodology and are no longer taken seriously by most doctors and researchers today. Cervical cancer has everything to do with smoking, risky sex practices and HPV, and nothing to do with the circumcision status of the male. The same is true of penile cancer. They and the AMA and AAP have also stated that circumcision status has nothing to do with optimum genital hygiene.
The good rabbi goes on to inform us that circumcision does not diminish one’s sexual pleasure, and in the next paragraph does an about-face to state that it is well-known that circumcision amputates sexual nerves and thus makes men last longer (due presumably to the blunted sexual sensation). So which is it?
In fact, multiple studies by Cold, Taylor, Sorrells, et al, have shown that about 20,000 fine-touch nerve receptors are amputated in circumcision, amounting to the four most sexually innervated parts of the penis (five, if the frenulum is also removed). Compare that to the 8,000 nerves in the female clitoris, and the 4,000 in the male glans (many of which are not fine-touch, but pressure and pain-sensitive). Compare the per-capita rates of ED in the USA and Europe and Japan, age of onset, and use of related pharmaceuticals, and you’ll get a pretty clear picture of the damage it does.
Rabbi Maimonides even admitted the purpose of circumcision was to impair sensation as much as possible without impacting reproduction: “The fact that circumcision weakens the faculty of sexual excitement and sometimes perhaps diminishes the pleasure is indubitable.”
If circumcision were restricted to the Jewish community, I would say let them figure it out. Unfortunately, it was adopted by the Victorians and their puritan sexual mores, and has been perpetuated as a nonreligious MEDICAL practice despite failing every standard of care, running contrary to the most basic medical ethics, and the complete absence of any scientific merit. Fewer than 5% of circumcisions occurring in the USA now are religious.
While the rest of us fight to end an unnecessary and abusive medical procedure on non-consenting minors, perhaps the Jewish community should ask themselves if this is what they want their culture to be known for. Clearly many Jews do not. http://www.jewsagainstcircumcision.org.
The Holy Atheist
October 13, 2011
An excellent and well-written article by Friedrich Alexander. I appreciate the honesty of this article. As for the arguments made in favor of Male genital mutilation made by Rabbi Yonah, the same arguments could be made in favor of Female Genital Mutilation, and you can see them in the link below.
Don’t waste your time arguing with Rabbi Yonah. Too much cognitive dissonance to deal with.
http://islamqa.com/en/ref/45528
Hugh7
November 5, 2011
“So your point is that in order to enjoy sex more you need your foreskin?”
No, not “more” but “the normal amount”. Circumcision means you (and your partner) enjoy sex LESS.
If Rabbi Yonah doesn’t think the instruments shown are representative, I invite him to http://www.circumstitions.com/methods.html where he can see a comprehensive array of instruments, including a flint knife and the traditional izmel and barzel.
It shows a Mogen clamp, which was used for many Bristot Milah until recently, when the Mogen company lost several law suits worth millions of dollars (on behalf of babies who’d had the heads of their penises cut off) and went out of business. (WHO still recommends the Mogen).
It also includes one instrument used in the USA in the 1960s for female “circumcision”, with a shield to ensure that only the clitoral prepuce was removed and spare the clitoris itself.
cosmopolite
January 24, 2012
Mr Alexander, your essay is an excellent one, a thoughtful cry from the heart. But remember that we intactivists do not seek to require that Jewish men live their adult lives with foreskins, and that Jewish women marry men with foreskins. We intactivists only seek that circumcision not be performed at 8 days simply because a boy’s parents desire it (often because not inviting relatives and friends to a bris when a boy is born is seen as very embarrassing). Rather, it should be an informed adult choice by the man connected to the foreskin. Therefore, the time to circumcise is between the 21st birthday and one’s wedding day. To circumcise another human being by force cannot have religious or existential meaning. To have it done of one’s own volition is most definitely a major act of faith and loyalty, rich in existential significance.
And let me repeat that the authorities on the sexual consequences of circumcision are women who have had long term sexual relationships, including vaginal intercourse without condoms, with both kinds of men. I am married to such a woman. My wife discovered in college sexual facts about the intact penis that I, an intact man, did not learn before my 40s.