too bad the only ones who lose are the kids
It looks so gentlemanly and friendly in the picture. It's the kid who later, behind closed doors, bleeds, and permanently loses a healthy body part.
The circumcision tourism stuff, gee, I didn't see that prevent the US from passing a ban on female circumcision.
The difference between male and female circumcision, socially, is sexism.
Name another body part that you can remove half the skin from, that doesn't lose sensation. Do you trust the AAP, or your capacity for simple logic? Is the AAP making money off of circumcision? You bet. An estimated 1 billion a year is paid for circumcision in the US.
If you don't want to believe me, I have no problem with that. Look up the description of circumcision by Maimonides, one of the most famous physicians of all time, and a mohel (Jewish circumciser). He stated that "Similarly with regard to circumcision, one of the reasons for it is, in my opinion, the wish to bring about a decrease in sexual intercourse and a weakening of the organ in question, so that this activity be diminished and the organ be in as quiet a state as possible." and "The fact that circumcision weakens the faculty of sexual excitement and sometimes perhaps diminishes the pleasure is indubitable. For if at birth this member has been made to bleed and has had its covering taken away from it, it must indubitably be weakened."
It's too bad that the Germans don't have the guts to protect their kids from unnecessary and unhelpful surgery. They are so afraid of being labeled anti-Semitic, that they will sacrifice parts of their kids to avoid it. It's sad that the Americans protect only their girls, but advocate for it for their boys. Europeans who don't circumcise have lower rates of all the diseases American doctors say circumcision prevents. Our dogs and cats have more protection. Sick stuff. Generally, healthy kids are not born needing surgery.
