Circumcision: An Argumentative Analysis
A very much heated and touchy talked about debate is whether or not to circumcise our nations young baby boys and the opinions are vast. Circumcision involves the surgical removal of the foreskin of a male (Our Sexuality, Pg 112). Some parents choose to remove the foreskin due to obligatory cultural and religious beliefs. Others argue that it is more hygienic, aesthetic, and will prevent STD’s later in the young boys life. However, this is a very neglectful argument and does not take in an infinite amount of counter arguments. If I were to have a son, I would not choose to have him circumcised due to the pain infants and young boys go through, its comparison to female circumcision, the loss of sensitivity, it being ultimately the boy’s choice,
…show more content…
Circumcision Controversy Flares by MSNBC author Victoria Clayton. Leto’s midwife’s bumper sticker reads, “100 percent of babies oppose circumcision” (Class Reader, Pg 117), and this is absolutely true. Less than half of infant boys that undergo this procedure receive analgesia (Our Sexuality Pg. 126). The other infant boys either are too small to receive any analgesia or their parents opt not to allow it. Complications from the surgery include bleeding, infection, cutting the foreskin too short or too long, and improper healing. The pain associated with circumcision could have long-lasting negative effects on future infant behavior as well as health risks such as hemorrhage, infections, mutilation, shock, and psychological trauma. The American Academy of Pediatrics changed their stance on the debate from a neutral one to a moderate opposition. If the AAP has an opposition to a procedure that many young boys have to endure, why are we still doing this to the nations baby …show more content…
Female circumcision is done in Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and was even practiced up until the early 1900’s in the United States. In some drastic cases, the whole exterior portion genitalia is removed and the vaginal walls are scraped raw (Our Sexuality, Chapter 4, Pg 83). However, most female circumcisions involve the removal of the clitoral hood and a majority of the women find this aesthetically more pleasing. An argument brought up for circumcision is that it is aesthetically pleasing. However, the foreskin of the penis is homologous to the clitoral hood (Lecture 10/23). If removing the clitoral hood of a female is viewed as mutilation and unacceptable, then why is the removal of the foreskin of a male is socially accepted and expected in our country? When determining whether or not to circumcise, a parent must contrast the two and due to male circumcision not being that different from female, I would opt not to have my son
Circumcision Controversy Flares by MSNBC author Victoria Clayton. Leto’s midwife’s bumper sticker reads, “100 percent of babies oppose circumcision” (Class Reader, Pg 117), and this is absolutely true. Less than half of infant boys that undergo this procedure receive analgesia (Our Sexuality Pg. 126). The other infant boys either are too small to receive any analgesia or their parents opt not to allow it. Complications from the surgery include bleeding, infection, cutting the foreskin too short or too long, and improper healing. The pain associated with circumcision could have long-lasting negative effects on future infant behavior as well as health risks such as hemorrhage, infections, mutilation, shock, and psychological trauma. The American Academy of Pediatrics changed their stance on the debate from a neutral one to a moderate opposition. If the AAP has an opposition to a procedure that many young boys have to endure, why are we still doing this to the nations baby …show more content…
Female circumcision is done in Africa, the Middle East, Asia, and was even practiced up until the early 1900’s in the United States. In some drastic cases, the whole exterior portion genitalia is removed and the vaginal walls are scraped raw (Our Sexuality, Chapter 4, Pg 83). However, most female circumcisions involve the removal of the clitoral hood and a majority of the women find this aesthetically more pleasing. An argument brought up for circumcision is that it is aesthetically pleasing. However, the foreskin of the penis is homologous to the clitoral hood (Lecture 10/23). If removing the clitoral hood of a female is viewed as mutilation and unacceptable, then why is the removal of the foreskin of a male is socially accepted and expected in our country? When determining whether or not to circumcise, a parent must contrast the two and due to male circumcision not being that different from female, I would opt not to have my son