I've had a problem with the "Living" section over at the Huffington Post for a while now, ever since I started noticing how the site would conflate news and legitimate analysis from my side of the political spectrum to fucking batshit insane articles supporting autism vaccine conspiracy theories, pseudo-Kabbalah bullshit, and articles about "ending death." Her "Move Your Money" campaign was partly a big scam for
generating page views. But when I saw this article called, "
We Need to Stop Circumcision," I figured it was time to vent about this shit in writing.
The whole article is written from the perspective that male circumcision is a human rights abuse. Maybe I'm just biased, seeing as I don't have my foreskin anymore, but I'm sick of this argument - usually from uncut guys - that sex is somehow not enjoyable if you don't have foreskin. In this case, "Visionary Pioneer" Dr. Christiane Northrup, has never even had any - well, as far as I know.
Circumcision is an unnecessary procedure that is painful and can lead to complications, including death. No organization in the world currently recommends this... Believe it or not, circumcision was introduced in English-speaking countries in the late 1800s to control or prevent masturbation, similar to the way that female circumcision--the removal of the clitoris and labia--was promoted and continues to be advocated in some Muslim and African countries to control women's sexuality.
Wait, I could have DIED from being circumcised? First of all, she's got her late-19th century medical history a bit off. In some of the research I did on Male Sexuality in Europe during that time when I was back in school, the reason I generally came across for most circumcisions back then was that it was thought to prevent syphilis. Earlier on in the 19th century, the Victorians were obsessed with keeping boys from masturbating at boarding schools, but I don't think there's any consensus on that being the reason for male circumcision becoming common medical practice in 20th Century America.
And saying that male circumcision is a form of sexual abuse on par with female circumcision is fucking irresponsible. It trivializes real sexual abuse and the real human rights crisis over female circumcision - which
is done with the intent to destroy a woman's sexuality, make her subservient to men, and quite often does lead to serious medical emergencies. I can't remember being traumatized by circumcision, or would she have me think I've just repressed the memory because it was too painful..? And is she trying to say I don't really own my sexuality, because some doctors ruined it for me?
Anyway, it's anti-feminist and delegitimizes a real human rights crisis. I don't like this kind of pointless cause and others like the vaccine people (who are the birthers of the left, as far as I'm concerned) getting the same webspace and press as important political causes I care about. Not to mention that Arianna Huffington's site is garbage for other reasons. Scott over at
Bill in Exile did a great post the other day on why he de-linked her from his site,
which you can read here. I never had her linked, so I can't de-link her myself, but to any readers who have her linked and care about things like social justice, PAYING YOUR WRITERS, feminism (in the first
and the third worlds), and journalistic and academic oversight, I'd recommend doing the same.
[Screen Grab from this bold fresh piece of medical literature]