Circumcision’s psychological damage to children

Circumcision prevalence with intaction.org : 1920: Shocked by the influx of immigrants from Southern & Eastern Europe, white upper class Americans have a crisis of cultural identity. They seek circumcision as a means of distinguishing themselves from poor immigrants that they perceived to be racially inferior, dirty, vulgar, & with disease carrying uncut penises. Circumcision elevated to a status symbol. D.L. Gollaher, (Phd, Harvard University), JOURNAL OF SOCIAL HISTORY, Volume 28, Number 1: Pages 5 – 36

Living in America in the beginning of the 21st century, it’s easy to see how this notion got ingrained in the cultural consciousness: it’s common , and it’s common, so it must be common everywhere, always. Right? Wrong! Most of the world doesn’t practice circumcision. In fact, most of the world has never practiced circumcision. The truth is that the United States is the only country that circumcises the majority of babies, and we’ve only done it for a few generations. And on top of that, we’re doing it less and less: fewer than 60% of male babies in the US are circumcised these days.

Circumcision Prevalence: The practice varies geographically around the world. It is more common in the Middle East, the Muslim world, and Israel. Other areas where the practice is popular is in South Korea, parts of Southeast Asia, and some tribal areas in Africa. It was commonly practiced in the United States from 1940’s onwards, however here the practice started declining after 1980. By 2020, American rates for the surgery are retreating to 50%. Infant male circumcision is rare in Europe, Latin America, parts of Southern Africa and most of non-Muslim Asia. The rates are also low in Australia, New Zealand, and Canada, especially since their respective medical associations rebuked the practice decades ago. Discover even more info about circumcision.

The sense of inadequacy, feelings of victimization, and violent sexual fantasies experienced during this boy’s adolescence were found to be both consciously and unconsciously linked to his experience with losing part of his penis (Kennedy, 1986). In a study examining the psychological effects of circumcision on boys between four and seven years of age, Cansever (1965) used psychological testing to measure boys’ level of distress. The results of the study indicated that circumcision was perceived as an aggressive attack on the body that left children feeling damaged and mutilated (Cansever, 1968). Cansever (1968) also noted that these boys experienced changes in body image (with many feeling smaller and incomplete), feelings of inadequacy and helplessness, as well as a tendency to withdraw psychologically.

Intaction is funded via private donations and volunteer assistance primarily by men and women that have been adversely affected by genital cutting. We promote the benefits of an intact body and the harm of genital cutting. We seek to achieve our goals through education, advocacy, and activism. We empower our members by providing them a constructive way to address the physical and emotional harm that was inflicted on them. Action is in our name. Foreskin is in our DNA. We accept the challenges of creating change, we meet our goals, and then chart new ones. We have no highly paid directors or staff like some big name popular causes. In fact, we are not paid at all. Our compensation is the satisfaction we receive from the many people whose lives we have touched. We help assure parents that keeping their son intact was the enlightened decision. We’ve helped many babies to stay intact. We help build body positive confidence in intact men so they can appreciate their own natural body. We’ve helped many cut men, essentially victims of genital cutting, to feel like they now have a voice, when as infants they didn’t have a choice. Find more info at this website.