tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29927797733160732422024-03-13T05:53:04.622-07:00BalaBlogUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger68125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-89698611495534770672023-12-10T07:48:00.000-08:002023-12-16T03:39:00.367-08:00The Importance of Unity<p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: small;">by <b>David Balashinsky </b></span><br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">One of the basic questions that every progressive organization has to consider is whether to form strategic alliances with other organizations dedicated to the pursuit of goals that may seem to be entirely different from its own but whose objectives still fall under the rubric of human rights or simply that of making the world better, fairer, healthier, safer and more habitable for everyone. On a grand scale, this question applies to reform movements themselves. Should climate activists and environmentalists make common cause with Black Lives Matter? Should women's rights activists make common cause with those seeking to end poverty and income inequality? The reality is that strategic alliances such as these are not contrivances or arranged marriages but the opposite. For example, now that the concept of <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/stories/what-environmental-racism" target="_blank">environmental racism</a> is widely recognized, it's evident that one cannot effectively fight the totality of systemic or structural racism without addressing the problem of industrial pollution. By the same token, one cannot combat climate change or pollution without recognizing the disparate effect these have on marginalized communities. Similarly, the fact that <a href="https://www.americanprogress.org/article/basic-facts-women-poverty/" target="_blank">more women than men live in poverty</a> means that women's rights and economic justice are not fundamentally different objectives but, rather, fundamentally the same. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Notwithstanding these root points of intersection, there are those who oppose making common cause with other movements or organizations. Whether this opposition arises from mistaken notions of ideological purity or whether from overzealous single-mindedness, the result is inevitably a net loss on both sides, if for no other reason than that there is strength in numbers.<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">This is no less true of the genital autonomy (GA) movement, a worldwide movement that seeks to end all medically unnecessary genital cutting of unconsenting minors. The GA movement consists of three main branches, each of which is organized around opposition, respectively, to female genital cutting (FGC, known also as female genital mutilation - FGM), male genital cutting (MGC, or nontherapeutic penile circumcision) and intersex genital cutting (IGC, which also includes a variety of surgeries that go beyond "normalizing" genital surgeries). Like every human rights movement, the GA movement has its share of "purists" who frown on making common cause with other human rights movements and organizations. Some want nothing to do with organizations not involved in combating genital cutting specifically while some <a href="https://dbalablog.blogspot.com/2023/08/the-bodies-that-every-body-forgets-and.html" target="_blank">within one or the other</a> of the three branches of the GA movement even regard the <i>other</i> two branches as being beyond the scope of their concern.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">At the <a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">Genital Autonomy Legal Defense and Education Fund (GALDEF)</a>, where I serve as a board member, I am happy to say that we <a href="https://www.galdef.org/2023/11/28/of-critics-and-critical-thinkers/" target="_blank">do not share this view</a>. Although its purpose is to facilitate impact litigation in order to obtain a measure of justice for individual victims of penile circumcision while creating a powerful financial disincentive for the continued imposition of this harmful genital surgery on unconsenting children, GALDEF recognizes that all genital autonomy movements stand on the same philosophical foundation. <span><span>Indeed, if one
accepts the premise that a medically
unnecessary, nonconsensual body modification is a harm <i>in and of itself</i> because it violates a person's rights to bodily integrity and self
determination, it is difficult to see how can one look at FGC, MGC and
IGC - practices that are identical in this fundamental respect - and not come to the same
moral conclusion about them. Ultimately, it doesn't matter what the surgery is and
it doesn't matter what the sex or the gender of the victim is. </span></span><span><span><span> Either there is a fundamental right to bodily self-ownership
that applies to everybody, regardless of sex, or there isn't.</span></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">It should be a foregone conclusion that, on the most basic level, any one form of genital cutting is morally indistinguishable from another, but the GA movement also shares important characteristics with other reform movements. For example, there are striking <a href="https://dbalablog.blogspot.com/2023/08/cured-what-gay-rights-movement-can.html" target="_blank">similarities between the way homosexuality and the penile prepuce have been "pathologized"</a> by the medical establishment. A fact not generally appreciated now is that it was not until 1973 that </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.ajp-rj.2022.180103" target="_blank">the American Psychiatric Association (APA) formally dropped its
classification of homosexuality as a psychiatric disorder</a>.
Although it's hard to believe that gay women and men were once
subjected to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT, or "shock therapy") and
other "treatments," for decades the APA viewed homosexuality as a
condition that needed to be "cured." Women and men were not merely
stigmatized for being gay; their homosexuality<i> </i>was actually defined as a pathological condition by the
medical establishment. As a result, gay people were subjected to interventions that would now be condemned as medical
malpractice.</span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"> It took years of advocacy before the APA was finally persuaded to revise its official stance on
homosexuality. (The story of how gay rights activists overcame decades of
entrenched thinking within the APA is movingly told in the powerful,
heartbreaking yet inspiring documentary, <a href="https://www.cureddocumentary.com/" target="_blank">"Cured."</a>)</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">In parallel to this, during the 19th and 20th centuries, the medical establishment pathologized the penile prepuce, attributing to it a host of ailments and diseases, including that scourge of Victorian-era health and social order, "masturbatory insanity." </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The "cure" for being born with a normal penis, of course, is circumcision. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">In both cases, what is in fact normal, natural, healthy, good and beautiful was vilified and pathologized. The result was that, in the case of homosexuality, untold thousands of perfectly healthy people were subjected to "treatments" they neither needed nor (in most cases) desired while, in the case of MGC, untold millions of perfectly healthy people were (and, to this day, continue to be) subjected to a surgery that they neither needed nor desired. <br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Thirty years ago, GALDEF president and
founder, <a href="http://www.circumcisionharm.org/hammond%20cv.htm" target="_blank">Tim Hammond</a>, recognized that <i>intactivism</i> (as the movement to end MGC has come to be known) had much in common with
the struggle for gay rights. As
someone with extensive experience in both movements, Hammond believed that
the LGBT community would be receptive to the idea that, as he put it, "everyone has a right to do with their own genitals what they wish." For this
reason, he argued in favor of building alliances with the gay community
by participating in Pride events. At the time, some intactivists
countered that the two movements had nothing in common and, as Hammond recalls, "even warned
that it would be political suicide" for the GA movement to align itself with the gay rights movement. And yet Hammond's prescience has been vindicated. Intactivists are now fixtures at Pride festivities across the United States. Last July, for example, GALDEF was honored to hold its <a href="https://www.galdef.org/2023/07/10/galdef-celebrates-l-a-pride/" target="_blank">first public education and outreach event at Los Angeles Pride</a>. In September, the producers of "Cured" graciously made their film available to GALDEF for a <a href="https://www.galdef.org/2023/10/05/cured-educates-inspires-and-motivates/" target="_blank">special screening and fundraising event</a>. GALDEF was again represented - and represented the GA movement - last September at the <a href="https://www.galdef.org/2023/10/05/riverside-pride-a-resounding-success/" target="_blank">Second Annual Riverside Pride Festival</a>.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">These collaborations amply demonstrate the utility of rights organizations forming strategic partnerships. They also demonstrate the principle that the objectives of socially conscious movements are not trivialized nor their impact diminished when they unite and make common cause with one another. Perhaps most importantly, they illustrate the principle that, when distilled down to their essence, most human rights movements embody the same fundamental values. Thus, it is not their joining forces that is in any way forced or unnatural but their insisting on exclusivity from one another that is. That is not to suggest that every organization or movement should abandon its individual focus or its specific mission. I am simply arguing that individual organizations throughout the broad spectrum of progressive organizations should be open to forming strategic alliances in the interests of furthering the aims of all. Ultimately, by joining forces, the efforts of all socially conscious organizations, whatever their individual goals, can only be enhanced and their collective impact magnified for the benefit of all of humanity.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;">* * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * *
* *<br /></span></p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><i><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/s365/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="299" data-original-width="365" height="163" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/w200-h163/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" width="200" /></a></div></i></span><i>David
Balashinsky is originally from New York City and now lives near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. He is a licensed physical therapist and writes about bodily autonomy and
human rights, gender, culture, and politics. </i></span><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i>He currently serves on the board of directors for the <a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">Genital Autonomy Legal Defense & Education Fund</a>, (GALDEF),</i></span> the board of
directors and advisors for <a href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" target="_blank">Doctors Opposing Circumcision</a> and the leadership team for <a href="https://www.bruchim.online/" target="_blank">Bruchim</a>.</i></span></i></span><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"> </span></span></span></span></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-69085282609901283942023-09-14T03:17:00.003-07:002023-09-17T04:38:15.249-07:00No, Farida D., the reason men fear being seen as feminine is not because they fear being treated the way they treat women<p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: small;"><span>by <b>David Balashinsky </b><br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Many years ago, when I was in my late 20s or early 30s, I got into a phone conversation with a young woman who had dialed my number by mistake. She hadn't misdialed: it was a recycled number that formerly belonged to someone she knew. The phone call began, naturally, with my explaining that the person she was trying to reach did not live at that number. However, a conversation ensued that seemed for all the world as though there were some flirtatious testing-of-the-waters going on at both ends. That is the vein in which the call proceeded for several minutes until the young woman abruptly said "You sound like a fag," and hung up.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">The recollection of this incident - one of about a half dozen in my life in which my sexual orientation has been mislabeled - either by mistake or intentionally but <i>always</i> as a way of policing my gender - was prompted by a meme that has been making the rounds on social media for several years and that appeared in my Facebook feed yet again last week. The meme presents a quote from Farida D. and it is item number 214 in <a href="https://www.amazon.com/LIST-SHIT-THAT-MADE-FEMINIST-ebook/dp/B0826VNSR8?ref_=ast_author_dp" target="_blank">"The 2nd List of Shit That Made Me a Feminist."</a> Here is the quote as it appears on Farida D.'s Instagram wall: <br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi8KehW3tmVJv7H4OieWYGmzcenq3N9FleEvx12jsBqVxnDD44SFZvw7m5cXYyIbgXKes3B9K9HzI1pC6ODxGeoClF_8wziceodUGeiWe7iTVkd-Lf2WJXQmj_0Ipg-Y8_jblsA2IriVtdZtGkmrIspIBQ19ucSpNl7dJ-shi6dbW-1JrBgS8qXgxhs2FA/s317/Screen%20Shot%202023-09-14%20at%205.28.12%20AM.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="317" data-original-width="314" height="283" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi8KehW3tmVJv7H4OieWYGmzcenq3N9FleEvx12jsBqVxnDD44SFZvw7m5cXYyIbgXKes3B9K9HzI1pC6ODxGeoClF_8wziceodUGeiWe7iTVkd-Lf2WJXQmj_0Ipg-Y8_jblsA2IriVtdZtGkmrIspIBQ19ucSpNl7dJ-shi6dbW-1JrBgS8qXgxhs2FA/w287-h283/Screen%20Shot%202023-09-14%20at%205.28.12%20AM.png" width="287" /></a></span></span></div><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><br /></span></span><p></p><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">I do not know how Farida D. comes by her special insight into the psychological lives and inmost fears of men - she <a href="https://www.faridad.com/about-contact/" target="_blank">describes herself </a> simply as "an Arab gender researcher and poet." But what I <i>do</i> know, as a cisgender, hetero male - what Farida D. refers to as a "cishet" - is that <i>most</i> men in our culture fear being seen as feminine, not just those of us who identify as cisgender or as hetero and certainly not only those men who mistreat women. This fear is instilled in us beginning in our earliest childhoods, it is reinforced throughout our lives and it is ever-present. It influences and even controls the choices we make about the clothes we wear, the color of the cars we buy, it determines how we walk, how we talk, how we hold our bodies, how we interact with others and which hobbies and interests - <a href="https://www.kuow.org/stories/man-up-how-a-fear-of-appearing-feminine-restricts-men-and-affects-us-all" target="_blank">even which careers</a> - we pursue. For many of us who are gay or trans, it has kept us closeted. For those of us who are not it has, nonetheless, inhibited us in our relationships with other men. The fear of being seen as feminine is one of the defining characteristics of masculinity because, as we are taught to be masculine, so we are taught not to be feminine. In childhood or adolescence, most of us internalize this strict gender code and, having internalized it, actively aspire to be seen as masculine just as we actively fear (dread, really) being seen as feminine.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">None of this is news. On the contrary, it's Feminism 101. Nor does the concept of gender, obviously, apply only to men. Women, too, have their own form of gender instilled in them. They are expected to be feminine in both appearance and behavior; they are expected to be accommodating, indulgent and supportive of men, ingratiating (<i>"Smile, Honey!"</i>), conciliatory, domestic and, above all, they are expected to be <a href="https://dbalablog.blogspot.com/2022/06/abortion-and-dred-scott.html" target="_blank">fecund</a>.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Just as masculinity is positively reinforced in men because it is rewarded, femininity in women is positively reinforced because it is rewarded - but only up to a point: the rewards that women "earn" for being feminine are not nearly so great as the rewards that men "earn" for being masculine.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">And just as masculinity is both negatively and positively punished in women, femininity is both negatively and positively punished in men. A refresher from Psych. 101: a negative punishment is <a href="https://helpfulprofessor.com/negative-punishment/" target="_blank">"a form of operant conditioning that aims to suppress or discourage certain behaviors by taking away something valued or desired by the individual" while a positive punishment entails the delivery of an aversive stimulus in order to discourage certain behaviors</a>. In my phone call with the young woman, I was on the receiving end of both negative and positive punishments for sounding insufficiently masculine. The positive punishment was being called "fag" and the negative punishment was the young woman's hanging up on me and withdrawing even the potential of our forming a relationship. The result was one of those periodic reinforcements of my fear of being seen as feminine.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">As I suggested, this is basic stuff. That is why I was surprised to see Farida D.'s quote mindlessly shared by feminist- and pro-feminist pages and individual Facebook users. In contrast to mainstream, even orthodox feminist analyses of gender, Farida D. presents a radically different view here. In <i>this</i> view, the fear of being seen as feminine is not a behavior that is inculcated in most males but is, instead, simply the manifestation of guilt that, by definition, most men feel - since most men fear being seen as feminine - because they mistreat women.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">This <i>was</i> news to me. After all, despite <i>still</i> being prey to the fear of being seen as feminine, I don't fear being treated the way I treat women. More than this, though, it was because I have experienced the sting of gender policing many times in my life (and not only by being called "fag") and it has always taken the form of an external force or influence (a catcall by a stranger on the street, a sneer, a reproach by a friend) which I have dutifully internalized and which has always tended to reinforce my fear of being seen as feminine.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Another example from my own experience comes to mind. When I was about 10, some friends and I were "goofing around" (that's what we called it in those days) in the process of which we discovered a freight elevator (this was backstage at the New York State Theater). The elevator car was huge - we had never seen anything like it - and three of its walls were covered by thick, quilted moving blankets. Obviously, we had to ride it although we knew we were not supposed to (I think there was a sign that said "Authorized Personnel Only"). The combination of amazement, the sense of our own mischievousness, the fear of getting caught and the sheer fun we were having led to a kind of giddiness. I think we all felt that. "We all," I should explain, were three or four girls and me, the sole boy. In the midst of our cackles, one of the older girls - she must have been about 12 or 13 - suddenly turned to me with a look of concern on her face and said, "David! Stop it - you're acting like a girl."</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">I will never forget the impact of that. It's not that, at that age, I had any conscious sense of being either masculine or feminine. I was just having fun and my emotions were simply bubbling out of me in the most natural way possible. In other words - and this is key - my emotions were being expressed in an <i>uninhibited</i> way. This girl's reproach was the first time I was brought face to face with the societal expectation that an uninhibited display of joyful emotion was inappropriate in a boy and that, unless I wasn't afraid to be seen as feminine, I was not permitted to engage in it.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">By no means am I the only man to have experienced gender policing like this nor am I the first person to write about it. In a 2017 column for the New York Times, (<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/15/well/family/talking-to-boys-the-way-we-talk-to-girls.html" target="_blank">"Talking to Boys the Way We Talk to Girls"</a>) Andrew Reiner explores the ways in which <i>how</i> we communicate with boys helps to shape their gender into the masculine ideal. "Just as women's studies classes have long examined the ways that gendered language undermines women and girls," Reiner writes, "a growing body of research shows that stereotypical messages are similarly damaging to boys."</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">We tell ourselves we are preparing our sons to fight (literally and figuratively), to compete in a world that's brutish and callous. The sooner we can groom them for this dystopian future, the better off they'll be.</span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Among the findings of the studies that Reiner cites are that "mothers interacted vocally more often with their infant daughters than they did their infant sons," that "Spanish mothers were more likely to use emotional words and emotional topics when speaking with their 4-year-old daughters than with their 4-year-old sons," that "fathers . . . sing and smile more to their daughters," and that, "[a]fter visits to the emergency room for accidental injuries . . . parents of both genders talk differently to sons than they do to daughters."</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Reiner also highlights the work of the masculine-studies researcher, Michael Kimmel, who "maintains that 'the traditional liberal arts curriculum is seen as feminizing by boys.'" Reiner's observations during his own 20-plus years of teaching back this up:</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Nowhere is this truer than in English classes where . . . boys and young men police each other when other guys display overt interest in literature or creative writing assignments. Typically, nonfiction reading and writing passes muster because it poses little threat for boys. But literary fiction, and especially poetry, are mediums to fear. Why? They're the language of emotional exposure, purported feminine "weakness" - the very thing our scripting has taught them to avoid at best, suppress, at worst.</span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Gender policing that reinforces masculinity (and that teaches boys and men to fear being seen as feminine) comes from all sides, not just family or schoolmates. This continues into adulthood. Reiner takes up this thread:</span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Women often</span> </span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">say they want men to be emotionally transparent with them. But as the vulnerability and shame expert </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">B</span></span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">rené Brown reveals in her book, "Daring Greatly," many grow uneasy or even recoil if men take them up on their offer.</span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">I can attest even to <i>this</i> from my personal experience. When I was in my mid-20s, I was speaking with my then girlfriend about some very serious problems I was having in my life. I had become somewhat stuck in a kind of feedback loop of failure, fear, despair and paralysis. I was so upset, in fact, during this one conversation, that my emotions got the better of me and I began to cry. This was too much for my girlfriend. She grew impatient and intolerant and told me to "stop being so mushy." In other words, "Man up!" </span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Circling back to how men are expected to communicate verbally as opposed, specifically, to how they are expected to keep their emotions in check (although, of course, the two are closely related), Reiner cites yet another study that</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">found that college-aged female respondents considered men more attractive if they used shorter words and sentences and spoke less. This finding seems to jibe with Dr. Brown's research, suggesting that the less men risk emoting verbally, the more appealing they appear. </span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">- And the less feminine they appear.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">A 2018 Harvard Business Review article (<a href="https://hbr.org/2018/10/how-men-get-penalized-for-straying-from-masculine-norms" target="_blank">"How Men Get Penalized for Straying from Masculine Norms"</a>) concluded that "[r]esearch demonstrates that much the same way women face unfair backlash effects for being more masculine or not feminine enough, men similarly face backlash for not adhering to masculine gender stereotypes." This article cites numerous studies that delved into a half dozen specific categories of behavior including "Showing vulnerability, "Being nicer," "Displaying empathy," "Expressing sadness," Exhibiting modesty" and, of all things, "Being a feminist or feminine." In every one of these categories it was found that men were penalized in some way (or, in one of the categories, simply not given credit that <i>was </i>given to women) when they exhibited these behaviors.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">The upshot of all this is that the reason boys and men fear being seen as feminine is because they are socialized from birth to conform to masculine gender and heteronormativity. The process of instilling masculinity in boys <a href="https://dbalablog.blogspot.com/2017/10/male-genital-mutilation-and.html" target="_blank">begins when they are neonates</a> and it continues throughout childhood, adolescence and well into adulthood. In adolescence and adulthood, the penalties imposed on boys and men, respectively, for being seen as feminine can be severe, ranging from bullying to ostracism to rejection and ridicule to violence and death. Boys learn at a very early age, therefore, that few things are worse than being seen as feminine. The fear of being seen as feminine - the heavy psychological baggage that boys and men carry with them throughout much of their lives - is the result of this conditioning and comes from <i>external</i> influences that include both negative and positive punishments. It does not, as Farida D. suggests, come from their guilty consciences. The fear of being seen as feminine exists because all men - straight and gay (and transwomen, too, since, in the eyes of their persecutors, transwomen are effeminate men) know how they will be treated by <i>society</i> if they are seen as feminine and <i>not</i> because they fear being treated the way they treat women.</span></span></p><p><br /></p><p><span style="font-family: times;">* * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * *
* *<br /></span></p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><i></i></span><i>David
Balashinsky is originally from New York City and now lives near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. He is a licensed physical therapist
and writes about bodily autonomy and
human rights, gender, culture, and politics. </i></span><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i>He currently serves on the board of directors for the <a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">Genital Autonomy Legal Defense & Education Fund</a>, (GALDEF),</i></span> the board of
directors and advisors for <a href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" target="_blank">Doctors Opposing Circumcision</a> and the leadership team for <a href="https://www.bruchim.online/" target="_blank">Bruchim</a>.</i></span></i><br /> </span><br /><br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-55459258069026269942023-08-05T15:28:00.012-07:002023-09-17T03:59:59.404-07:00The Bodies That "Every Body" Forgets and the Case for Unanimity Within the Genital Autonomy Movement<p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: small;">by <b>David Balashinsky</b></span></span><br /></p><p><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">In "<a href="https://www.focusfeatures.com/every-body/watch/" target="_blank">Every Body</a>," directed by Julie Cohen, the plight of intersex people and the growing success of the intersex rights movement are at last receiving the attention they deserve. It might not be an exaggeration to say that the intersex rights movement has <i>arrived</i>. In the last several years, <a href="https://interactadvocates.org/boston-childrens-hospital-intersex-surgery/" target="_blank">two large hospitals have announced that they will no longer perform certain types of medically unnecessary intersex surgeries</a>. One of them has even taken the unusual step of <a href="https://www.luriechildrens.org/en/blog/intersex-care-at-lurie-childrens-and-our-sex-development-clinic/" target="_blank">apologizing for having performed these surgeries in the past</a>. The intersex rights movement also recently has begun to achieve success legislatively. For example, in 2021, Austin's city council passed a resolution condemning <a href="https://www.kvue.com/article/news/local/austin-city-council-protect-intersex-human-rights-healthcare/269-34c5d7b2-24b1-40d2-ae5f-4310857ae3c1" target="_blank">"nonconsensual and medically unnecessary surgeries on intersex children."</a> A <a href="https://www.openlynews.com/i/?id=d24d7290-e353-4c47-b412-03ccad0ee34c#:~:text=Malta%20was%20the%20first%20country,bans%2C%20according%20to%20ILGA%20World." target="_blank">half dozen mostly European nations have gone further, banning (most of) these surgeries, outright</a>. Now, with "Every Body" playing in theaters across the nation, Cohen is helping to raise the public's awareness of this issue. These developments - in <a href="https://dbalablog.blogspot.com/2023/08/cured-what-gay-rights-movement-can.html" target="_blank">medical practice, legislatively and socially - are all hallmarks of an idea whose time has come</a>. For all these reasons and more, "Every Body" is a hugely important film and I urge everyone - <i>every body</i> - to go see (or stream) it.</span></span></p><p><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">I
have only one criticism of "Every Body" and, while it is only one, this
criticism ties in to what I believe to be a serious and ongoing problem
within both human rights discourse and the genital autonomy movement broadly. Because this one flaw in
Cohen's film epitomizes this problem, and without intending to detract in
any way from this beautifully-made and inspiring documentary itself, I believe
that the time is right - and that it's not unreasonable - to call attention to it. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span><span style="font-family: times;">The case that prompted Cohen to make her film in the first place is the tragic story of David Reimer. Reimer was one of a set of identical twin boys <a href="https://www.betterworldbooks.com/product/detail/as-nature-made-him-the-boy-who-was-raised-as-a-girl-9780061120565" target="_blank">who were both, at the age of seven months, diagnosed with phimosis</a>. </span></span></span><span style="font-family: times;">It's important to understand here that, generally throughout childhood, the penile prepuce (the foreskin) remains fused to the glans, a normal condition that is known as <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1949079/" target="_blank">physiological phimosis</a>. In infancy, true, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2499015/" target="_blank"><i>pathological</i> phimosis is extremely rare</a>. However, partly because of their unfamiliarity with intact penises, physicians frequently mistake physiological phimosis for pathological phimosis. Consequently</span><span><span style="font-family: times;">, in infancy, <a href="http://www.drmomma.org/2010/01/phony-phimosis-diagnosis.html" target="_blank">"phimosis" is almost always a misdiagnosis of what is, in fact, the natural state of the child's penis</a>. There is every reason to think then, that the diagnosis of phimosis that both boys received was a case of a physician <i>pathologizing</i> a normal physiological condition. Not surprisingly, the boys' pediatrician recommended the treatment of choice which, at the time, was circumcision. </span></span><span><span style="font-family: times;">This was subsequently carried out by Jean-Marie Huot, a general practitioner, who opted to use, instead of a scalpel, an <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/nursing-and-health-professions/electrosurgical-device" target="_blank">electrosurgical device</a> (<a href="https://www.betterworldbooks.com/product/detail/as-nature-made-him-the-boy-who-was-raised-as-a-girl-9780061120565" target="_blank">a Bovie cautery machine, to be precise</a>). </span></span><span><span style="font-family: times;">In the process, David's entire penis was obliterated - literally burnt to a crisp. Distraught, his parents turned to one of the world's most prominent sex- and gender researchers, John Money, who had been promoting his theory that gender is <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2023/07/05/1185988683/intersex-documentary-every-body-julie-cohen-alicia-roth-weigel" target="_blank">"malleable"</a> for the first couple years of a child's life. Money recommended that David be raised as a girl and that his parents do everything in their power to reinforce their son's gender as female. The </span></span><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="https://slate.com/technology/2004/06/why-did-david-reimer-commit-suicide.html" target="_blank">unique circumstances of David's having been born male but raised female while his identical twin brother was raised male made the twins ideal as living experiment-and-control subjects</a>. </span></span>Thus, above and beyond providing a solution to the predicament the family (especially David) was faced with, </span></span><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times;">the experiment would also serve to confirm Money's theory </span></span> - if it worked. It didn't. Thanks to the courageous and diligent efforts of <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1997/03/14/us/sexual-identity-not-pliable-after-all-report-says.html" target="_blank">Doctors Milton Diamond and H. Keith Sigmundson</a>, Money's claims, <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2023/07/05/1185988683/intersex-documentary-every-body-julie-cohen-alicia-roth-weigel" target="_blank">far from being confirmed, were debunked</a>. As for David, he never felt right living as a girl, he ultimately rejected the gender that had been imposed on him and he lived a short, troubled life that he ended himself with <a href="https://slate.com/technology/2004/06/why-did-david-reimer-commit-suicide.html" target="_blank">a shotgun blast at the age of 38</a>.</span></span></span></p><p><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">It's also important to keep in mind here that, like physiological phimosis, ambiguous or indeterminate genitals - "intersex" - occur naturally and, <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/you-can-t-undo-surgery-more-parents-intersex-babies-are-n923271" target="_blank">in most cases, do not pose a problem for the individual who is born intersex</a>. Consequently, <a href="https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/32308" target="_blank">the surgical modification of the genitals of intersex children that became standard protocol during the 1970s</a> is, like the treatment of physiological phimosis, simply a case of physicians having pathologized and then "treating" what is in fact a natural and benign condition.</span></span></p><p><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">The David Reimer case is not merely relevant to the practice of intersex surgery but foundational to it. Before being discredited and even since, Reimer's putative "successful" transition from male to female through surgery, hormonal treatments and social conditioning was cited as proof of the efficacy of surgical sex- and gender-assignment and used, therefore, to justify the subsequent genital- and body-modifications to which <a href="https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/07/25/i-want-be-nature-made-me/medically-unnecessary-surgeries-intersex-children-us" target="_blank">who-knows-how-many intersex children were subjected</a>. A considerable portion of "Every Body," therefore, is appropriately devoted to the David Reimer case. </span></span></p><p><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">But <a href="https://isna.org/faq/history/" target="_blank">before there was intersex surgery</a> <a href="https://mosaicscience.libsyn.com/the-troubled-history-of-the-foreskin" target="_blank">there was penile circumcision</a>. And before David Reimer's sex, gender and identity were tampered with, his penis was. It bears repeating here that the botched circumcision in this case was prompted, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2499015/?page=1" target="_blank">in all likelihood, not by a pathological condition but by a physician's having pathologized a normal one</a>. The problem, then, was not that Reimer's attempted circumcision was botched but that it was attempted in the first place. The circumcision <i>itself</i> that was imposed on David Reimer, therefore, was the prime mover: the first in a concatenation of events that led, through diverging paths, to the disastrous outcomes in David's own life, to numerous unwanted and unnecessary intersex surgeries on other children, to the rise of the intersex rights movement, even to the making of Cohen's film. I take it as axiomatic that, when connecting dots, the first dot is the most important and yet it is <i>this</i> dot that Cohen fails to connect to all the others. It's not that Cohen fails to mention Reimer's circumcision - it would be impossible not to. But Cohen seems to regard the original attempted surgical modification of David's penis as incidental: relevant to her subject only because its untoward and catastrophic <i>results</i> led to his being raised as a girl and because his allegedly successful sexual reassignment was then used to justify subsequent intersex surgeries on other children. Thus, Cohen treats David's circumcision as something that stands apart, conceptually, from the equally unnecessary intersex surgeries that her film documents (and implicitly condemns). As a result, this can leave the viewer with the impression that the problems that David faced in his life and that so many other intersex people would face in theirs did not begin at the moment the decision was made to subject David to circumcision but only <i>after</i> the decision had been made to subject him to sex- and gender-reassignment. That is the one conceptual flaw in Cohen's film.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="font-family: times;">I want to be clear that I fully respect the right of a filmmaker to </span></span><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times;">focus
on whatever topic she chooses and, in presenting that topic to her
viewers, to circumscribe her camera's field of view as narrowly as she
deems appropriate. Viewed strictly</span></span></span></span></span></span><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"> as a documentary about intersex people,
intersex surgery and the intersex rights movement, it might seem unfair</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"> to criticize "Every Body" for not going far enough and to criticize Cohen for not connecting <i>all</i> the dots. </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times;">But "Every Body" is about much more than chromosomes and gonads. To view it superficially, as though that were all there is to it, would be to miss its larger point. The deeper message of "Every Body" - its <i>fundamental truth</i> - is that <i>every body</i> has an inherent right to exist as nature made them. This is the guiding principle against which every norm, every injustice and every harm documented in the film stands in opposition, from what was done to David Reimer, to the imposition on intersex children of a socially-constructed and strict binary view of human sexuality (two absolute and mutually exclusive sexes, with nothing in between), to the imposition on transgender individuals of a parallel and equally rigid view of gender, to "bathroom bills" - and, especially - to physicians surgically "fixing" bodies that they themselves have needlessly pathologized. More than anything, then, "Every Body" </span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">is an unequivocal condemnation of the practice of <i>pathologizing naturally-occurring but harmless anatomical features - especially genitals - of human bodies and surgically altering them without consent in order to make them conform to socially-constructed standards of appropriateness or normalcy</i>. Nota bene: that is not just a description of intersex surgery - it is the <i>very essence</i> of routine penile circumcision. That is why Cohen's failure at least to acknowledge as much in her film is disappointing</span>. <br /><br /><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">A</span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">gain, I'm not faulting Cohen for failing to make a movie about circumcision. There are already several important films - <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeJlo9RmI-8" target="_blank">"Whose Body, Whose Rights?"</a>, <a href="https://www.cutthefilm.com/">"Cut - Slicing Through the Myths of Circumcision"</a> and <a href="https://circumcisionmovie.com/">"American Circumcision"</a> - that have attempted to do for people with penises what Cohen has now attempted to do for people with intersex traits. But it's impossible to view intersex surgery accurately, both in theory and in practice, without contextualizing it within medicine's long history of pathologizing natural and harmless conditions (<a href="https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.ajp-rj.2022.180103">homosexuality</a> and the <a href="https://mosaicscience.libsyn.com/the-troubled-history-of-the-foreskin">penile prepuce</a> are prime examples) and within its long-established practice of using these contrived pathologies as a justification for administering treatments that are neither needed nor desired and, especially, as a justification for performing medically unnecessary surgeries on the genitals of unconsenting children. <a href="https://handwiki.org/wiki/Biology:History_of_intersex_surgery">By the time surgical modification of the genitals of intersex children became standard protocol</a>, medical professionals in the United States already had been performing surgical modifications to the normal genitals of infant males for decades. In fact, at that point, <i>most</i> fully and normally developed infant penises were being operated on. With a precedent like that, what chance might the anomalous genitals of the <a href="https://www.americanprogress.org/article/key-issues-facing-people-intersex-traits/#:~:text=It%20is%20estimated%20that%20up,identifiable%20sexual%20or%20reproductive%20variations.">0.5 to 1.7 percent of the population that is intersex</a> stand?</span></p><p><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Viewed this way, David Reimer's circumcision is neither extraneous nor even incidental to the story that, in "Every Body," Cohen seeks to tell. That fact that his circumcision, in all probability, and like the vast majority of the million-plus infant circumcisions that are still performed every year in the United States, occurred for no other reason than that Reimer's penis had been patholgized, and because the surgery was therefore both <a href="https://evidencebasedbirth.com/evidence-and-ethics-on-circumcision/" target="_blank">medically unnecessary</a> and imposed on Reimer without his consent makes it, in every way that matters, not just similar in its particulars but morally indistinguishable from the intersex surgeries that are the main focus of Cohen's film.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="font-family: times;">It is not only in large ways - that is, in principle - but in small ones, too, that nontherapeutic penile circumcision is identical to at least a major portion of intersex surgeries. I do not know what the statistics are - intersex surgeries run the gamut from clitoral reduction to the removal of internal testes - but these would be</span></span><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"> those surgeries that are intended to "normalize" the external genitalia of intersex children in order to make them appear more stereotypically "male" or "female." As a <a href="https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/07/25/i-want-be-nature-made-me/medically-unnecessary-surgeries-intersex-children-us" target="_blank">report by Human Rights Watch</a> explains, </span></span></span></span></span></p><p><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></span></span></p><blockquote><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">"Intersex," sometimes called "Disorders or Differences of Sex Development (DSD) in medical literature and by practitioners, encompasses around 30 different health conditions that affect chromosomes, gonads, and internal and external genitalia. In many cases, a significant factor motivating surgical intervention - <i>and often the primary rationale for it</i> [my emphasis] - is the fact that these conditions cause children's genitalia to differ from what is <i>socially expected of men's</i> [again, my emphasis] and women's bodies.</span></span></span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Similarly and in parallel, social acceptability and meeting cultural expectations about the appearance of a child's genitals are also often the primary rationales for surgically altering a child's penis from an intact one to a circumcised one ("so he won't be made fun of in the locker room," "so his future sex partners won't be turned off"). By the same token, conformity with culturally-determined anatomical standards is embodied in that other stand-by justification for nontherapeutic penile circumcision: "so he will look like his father."</span></span></span></span></p><p><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">The more sinister aspect of cultural expectations, of course, is the body shaming by which they are enforced. Alicia Roth Weigel, one of the intersex activists profiled in "Every Body," <a href="https://cbsaustin.com/news/local/austinite-and-intersex-activist-alicia-roth-weigel-featured-in-new-documentary-every-body?fbclid=IwAR31JLnqCBdyZtx-TZjw-VURtzwNnJmRvJxa94g7T9HePV8SSvul6ARA5VY" target="_blank">makes this point</a>: </span></span></p><blockquote><p><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">We are told by doctors from the moment that we are born that our bodies are shameful and that they are a problem and need to be fixed and oftentimes we undergo nonconsensual surgeries. . . . We all have different physical traits or . . . sex traits that maybe some people aren't accustomed to but we are fighting for the message that diversity is a beautiful thing. . . .</span></span></p></blockquote><div class="xu06os2 x1ok221b"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">What I would tell Weigel, if I had the opportunity, is that there are millions of people with penises in this country who can relate, to one degree or another, with this statement. The harsh truth is that it is not only intersex people - those with visibly atypical genitalia - whose genitals have been pathologized by the medical establishment. The medicalization and normalization of penile circumcision have created a culture in which the penile prepuce has been utterly stigmatized. </span></span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><a href="https://www.circumstitions.com/tv-thatthing.html" style="font-family: times;" target="_blank">Body-shaming of people with intact penises</a><span style="font-family: times;"> continues to be rampant and </span><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UutsHIuDHTY" style="font-family: times;" target="_blank">socially acceptable</a><span style="font-family: times;">. As a result, every person with a penis - whether circumcised or intact - grows up with the perception that they were born with a congenital "deformity" of their penis that either was "corrected" through circumcision or, if it wasn't, ought to have been. And every time a physician performs a medically unnecessary circumcision, that physician contributes to this body-shaming culture.</span></span></div><p><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Yet another similarity between <a href="https://www.hrw.org/report/2017/07/25/i-want-be-nature-made-me/medically-unnecessary-surgeries-intersex-children-us" target="_blank">intersex surgeries</a> and penile circumcision is that both have been and continue to be rationalized on the basis of their putative benefits and prophylactic value. But, in both cases, the evidence to support these claims is scant and, even when present, the anticipated health benefits - which may not be realized for years or even decades to come, if ever - do not justify depriving people of their right to make such personal medical decisions for themselves. This is a point that is argued forcefully by Weigel. In an <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2023/07/05/1185988683/intersex-documentary-every-body-julie-cohen-alicia-roth-weigel" target="_blank">interview with Terry Gross on Fresh Air (NPR)</a>, Weigel explains how the internal testes with which she was born came to be surgically removed when she was less than one year old:</span></span></span></span></p><p><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></span></span></p><blockquote><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Doctors . . . told my parents that I had internal testes . . . and that my internal testes could become cancerous one day and so they recommended removing them as soon as possible. And here's the kicker: anyone who is born with testes could get cancer one day; that is true. What we now know . . . is my risk of getting cancer is only somewhere between one and five percent and much later in life; that cancer never happens in childhood for people born like me, or very rarely if it ever does. And so because of a somewhere between one and five percent risk of cancer they decided to remove my hormone-producing organs without asking me. . . . Essentially, by trying to fix something that wasn't even broken, they created problems. . . . By trying to fix me, they broke me.</span></span></span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">This is how many circumcision survivors feel. (I'm sure it's how David Reimer felt, too.) And, by way of comparison, the risks of developing any of the diseases its boosters claim that neonatal circumcision can help prevent are also comparably low. As <a href="https://core.ac.uk/reader/38281692?utm_source=linkout" target="_blank">Frisch et al. point out</a>, </span></span></span></span></p><p><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></span></span></p><blockquote><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">. . . [about] 1% of boys will develop a UTI [urinary tract infection] within the first years of life. There are no randomized controlled trials (RCTs) linking UTIs to circumcision status. The evidence for clinically significant protection is weak, and with easy access to health care, deaths or long-term negative medical consequences of UTIs are rare. [Morever,] UTI incidence does not seem to be lower in the United States, with high circumcision rates compared with Europe with low circumcision rates. . . . Using reasonable estimates . . . for every 100 circumcisions, one case of UTI may be prevented [but] at the cost of two cases of hemorrhage, infection or, in rare instances, more severe outcomes or even death.</span></span></span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">So with penile cancer ("one of the rarest forms of cancer in the Western world"), STIs, HIV & AIDS:</span></span></span></span></p><p><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></span></span></p><blockquote><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">. . . only one of the . . . arguments has some theoretical relevance in relation to infant male circumcision; namely, the questionable argument of UTI prevention in infant boys. The other claimed health benefits are also questionable, weak, and likely to have little public health relevance in a Western context, and they do not represent compelling reasons for surgery before boys are old enough to decide for themselves. . . .</span></span></span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">The importance of allowing individuals to exercise informed consent - to decide for themselves which parts of their bodies they are permitted to keep - that Frisch et al. are asserting here with respect to penile circumcision is mirrored exactly in the sentiments expressed by intersex rights activists. Here's Weigel, again: <br /></span></span></span></span></p><p><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></span></span></p><blockquote><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">[A]n analogous example I like to give . . . [is] the BRCA gene. . . . The BRCA gene is a genetic variant that confers with it a high risk of breast cancer and ovarian cancer and the risk of cancer if someone is born with the BRCA gene is much, much, much, much, much higher than my one-to-five-percent risk of testicular cancer ever would have been. But you don't see them force-removing little girls' ovaries who are born with the BRCA gene because they could get cancer one day. They wait until the girl is a certain age where she is able to make an informed decision with her consent. . . . </span></span></span></span></blockquote><div class="xu06os2 x1ok221b"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span class="x193iq5w xeuugli x13faqbe x1vvkbs xlh3980 xvmahel x1n0sxbx x1lliihq x1s928wv xhkezso x1gmr53x x1cpjm7i x1fgarty x1943h6x xudqn12 x3x7a5m x6prxxf xvq8zen xo1l8bm xzsf02u x1yc453h" dir="auto" style="font-size: medium;"><div class="x11i5rnm xat24cr x1mh8g0r x1vvkbs xtlvy1s x126k92a"><blockquote><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">We
have suffered these nonconsensual and medically-unnecessary surgeries
that everyone from the United Nations to the World Health Organization
condemn as torture - they call it genital mutilation - and entire
countries have banned these practices. . . . Unfortunately, they happen
every day in accredited hospitals in the United States.<span><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"> <br /></span></span></span></span></div></blockquote></div></span></span></span></span></div><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">I do not know how often an intersex child is subjected to a medically unnecessary surgery in the United States but even once per day is once per day too often. At the same time, it's worth remembering that medically unnecessary penile circumcisions occur more than three thousand times every day in accredited hospitals in the United States.</span></p><p><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">If one accepts the premise of "Every Body" that intersex surgery is a medically unnecessary, nonconsensual body modification that is unethical <i>in and of itself</i> because it violates a person's rights to bodily integrity and self determination, it is difficult to see how can one look at the practice of nontherapeutic penile circumcision (let alone at what happened to David Reimer) and not come to the same conclusion about it, not form the same moral judgement about it, and not be as outraged by it. </span></span></p><p><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">My own view is that, as an abstract principle, any medically unnecessary surgery (that is, a surgery not urgently necessary to save life or limb) that is imposed on someone without that person's consent is unethical.</span></span></p><p><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Keeping that principle in mind, it doesn't matter what the surgery is and it doesn't matter what the sex or the gender of the victim is.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="font-family: times;">Keeping <i>all</i> of this in mind, <i>all</i> of the particulars of David Reimer's case - not just some of them - matter and are therefore inseparable from the premise of "Every Body." A more appropriate way to have presented David Reimer, then, would be not merely as an unfortunate victim of happenstance or of medical incompetence who <i>subsequently</i> became a victim of medical malpractice but, rather, as the man whose very life (<a href="https://slate.com/technology/2004/06/why-did-david-reimer-commit-suicide.html" target="_blank">and, likely, death</a>) represents the nexus </span></span><span style="font-family: times;">between medically unnecessary penile circumcision and medically unnecessary intersex surgery. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">For this very reason, the most appropriate way to honor David Reimer's memory is to take from his case the lesson that the campaigns to end all medically unnecessary, nonconsensual genital (and other, non-genital) surgeries are, fundamentally, one and the same. It is high time that the movements to end nontherapeutic penile circumcision, medically unnecessary intersex surgeries and female genital cutting (FGC) made common cause with one another and formed the strategic alliances that moral consistency and common sense demand. </span></span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">The failure of these three pillars of the genital autonomy movement to unite on the basis of their shared logical, philosophical and ethical foundations is the ongoing problem within the genital autonomy movement, and within human rights discourse, more broadly, of which "Every Body" is, I began by observing, a good, if unwitting, illustration. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">I am not suggesting that it is somehow wrong for intersex rights activists to focus primarily on banning medically unnecessary intersex surgeries, for anti-FGC activists to focus primarily on banning FGC, or for anti-MGC (male genital cutting) activists to focus primarily on banning MGC, just as I am not suggesting that it was wrong for Cohen to make the intersex rights movement the primary focus of her film. But I do think that it would be beneficial to all of these groups to present a united front to the world and to support one another by at least acknowledging their shared values and objectives and by treating one another as respected and valued allies. Similarly, organizations concerned with promoting human rights more generally and with promoting the common good should be morally consistent and adopt a position of inclusion when condemning harmful practices that violate the rights of children. Too often, however, the opposite has been the case.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">S</span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">ometimes this is a failure of omission but sometimes, one of commission. <a href="https://www.equalitynow.org/" target="_blank">Equality Now</a>, for example, used to have a "fact sheet" (and I use the quotation marks advisedly) on female genital mutilation (FGM) in which the author or authors went out of their way to differentiate FGM from nontherapeutic penile circumcision, representing the former as abhorrent and never justifiable and the latter as benign. This fact sheet included the eye-popping statement that "circumcision is the removal of foreskin and does not affect the male sex organ itself." (The male foreskin, or <i>prepuce</i>, is, of course, <a href="https://www.cirp.org/library/anatomy/cold-taylor/" target="_blank">an integral part of the penis </a>- <a href="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5637fb85e4b0995ae16a8c5a/t/5b34f7c6575d1fa05d2afc6e/1530197959686/38-+The+Case+Against+Circumcision.pdf" target="_blank">as integral to the penis</a>, in fact, as any part of the external genitalia, including the female foreskin, is to the vulva.) In contrast, the statement continued, "FGM damages the sex organs, inhibiting pleasure and causing severe pain and complications for women's sexual and reproductive health." It's a small but encouraging sign that Equality Now has since scrubbed from its site language denying the critical erogenous function of the penile foreskin and dismissing the human rights violation that necessarily occurs when it is surgically removed without consent.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">But Equality Now is not the only organization that has gone out of its way to distinguish female genital cutting from male genital cutting. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS have gone even further, <a href="https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/43749/9789241596169_eng.pdf;jsessionid=F0730A0C18A422DBC5E9D85ACEFB4598?sequence=1" target="_blank">explicitly promoting male genital cutting while, at the same time, condemning female genital cutting</a>. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">The reluctance by these organizations and others within the anti-FGC movement to recognize the similarities between FGC and MGC is hard to fathom. Likewise, their apparent aversion to accepting the banning of nontherapeutic penile circumcision as a valid human rights concern. Both campaigns to end genital cutting (that is, of penises and vulvas), like the intersex rights movement, rest on the same ethical and philosophical foundation: the right of every individual to bodily self-ownership - the right to control one's own body. Yet, paradoxically, <a href="https://aeon.co/essays/are-male-and-female-circumcision-morally-equivalent" target="_blank">there appears to be a notion among some within the anti-FGC movement that the movement risks becoming trivialized or diluted by making common cause with the anti-MGC movement</a>. The thinking seems to be that, because FGC is so much worse, MGC can't be all that bad. Or perhaps there is an apprehension by some that the true horrors of FGC can only adequately be characterized by distinguishing it from MGC. But, even allowing that, <a href="https://aeon.co/essays/are-male-and-female-circumcision-morally-equivalent" target="_blank">in certain cases (but by no means all) FGC is more harmful than MGC</a>, that is like reasoning that it's okay to cut off a boy's hand simply because cutting off a girl's arm is so much worse. Both are wrong and it is morally inconsistent and <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2d-VP9E6Kxk" target="_blank">ultimately counterproductive</a> for opponents of FGC to view opponents of MGC as competitors in a zero-sum game</span>.<br /><br /><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">A</span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">n example of the failure of some to acknowledge others within the genital autonomy movement through an act of omission (although someone who is pessimistic about human nature might also view this as an act of commission) would be the post by <a href="https://www.oiieurope.org/" target="_blank">Organisation Intersex International Europe</a> last year in which it made a point of linking FGM and IGM (intersex genital mutilation) conceptually and strategically while conspicuously omitting male genital mutilation (MGM). The meme, which was posted on Twitter, depicts a flower suspended between two hands, each coming from opposite ends of the image. Next to one hand is the caption "#EndFGM" and, next to the other, the caption "#StopIGM."</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Other notable examples can be found outside the genital autonomy movement. The WHO, the United Nations and several other important human-rights- and physicians' organizations, including <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-health-and-wellness/intersex-people-challenging-gender-normalizing-surgery-doctors-are-sta-rcna3815" target="_blank">Physicians for Human Rights, the American Academy of Family Physicians, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, "have condemned medically unnecessary surgeries on intersex youth"</a> while remaining silent on equally unnecessary genital surgeries on children with penises.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Still another example of this failure has been the subject of much of this essay: Julie Cohen's film, "Every Body," in which the <i>original</i> pathologizing and medical mismanagement of David Reimer's genitals are passed over and implicitly treated as being fundamentally distinct from the pathologizing and medical mismanagement of the genitals of intersex people.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">In contrast to these exclusionary approaches to genital autonomy is the work of bioethicist Brian D. Earp <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15265161.2019.1643945?scroll=top&needAccess=true&role=tab" target="_blank">and others</a> who argue for a unified, ethical approach to solving the problem of genital cutting in all its various forms. On the question,</span><span style="font-family: times;"> </span><a href="https://philpapers.org/archive/EARFGM.pdf" style="font-family: times;" target="_blank">"Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) and male circumcision: Should there be a separate ethical discourse?,"</a><span style="font-family: times;"> Earp concludes,</span></span></p><p></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">It is . . . to be welcomed that ethicists, activists and other stakeholders have been campaigning to protect the rights of girls to be free from non-therapeutic, nonconsensual cutting into their genital organs. I cannot state enough that I am in support of such efforts. . . . My argument has been that they should not be stopping there. Female, male and intersex genital cutting . . . should be done exclusively with a medical indication or with the informed consent of the individual. Children of whatever gender should not have healthy parts of their most intimate sexual organs removed before such a time as they can understand what is at stake in such a surgery and agree to it themselves.</span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">A model of promoting unity and emphasizing the shared objectives of the three branches of the genital autonomy movement is the <a href="https://genital-autonomy.de/" target="_blank">Worldwide Day of Genital Autonomy</a> (WWDOGA). Although WWDOGA commemorates a judicial ruling vindicating the rights of a victim of male, or penile, genital cutting, the creators and organizers of this annual event have taken pains to deliver a message of universality on behalf of <i>all</i> victims and potential victims of genital cutting. WWDOGA calls for "protection for all children from non-therapeutic genital interventions" and "Genital self-determination regardless of sex traits, gender, religion, tradition or where you come from." Additionally, WWDOGA endorses <a href="https://die-betroffenen.de/static/media/uploads/hel-dec-final_wm.pdf" target="_blank">The 2012 Helsinki Declaration of the Right to Genital Autonomy </a>which states, in part,</span></p><p></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Whereas it is the fundamental and inherent right of each human being to security without regard to age, sex, gender, ethnicity or religion as articulated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Convention on the Rights of the Child[,]</span></blockquote><p></p><p></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Now we declare the existence of a fundamental right of each human being a Right of Genital Autonomy, that is the right to:</span></blockquote><p></p><p></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">* personal control of their own genital and reproductive organs; and</span></blockquote><p></p><p></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">* protection from medically unnecessary genital modification and other</span> <span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">irreversible reproductive interventions. </span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"> <br /></span></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Another modest but nonetheless important example of inclusiveness and support for its sibling movements by an organization created primarily to eradicate nontherapeutic, nonconsensual penile circumcision can be found in the <a href="https://www.galdef.org/values-statement/" target="_blank">Values Statement of the Genital Autonomy Legal Defense and Education Fund (GALDEF)</a> which begins with these words: </span></p><p></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">GALDEF promotes solidarity with female and intersex victims of genital cutting and we recognize that some transgender people have also been harmed by penile circumcision. </span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">(Full disclosure: I serve on the board of directors of GALDEF.) Most recently, GALDEF has issued a <a href="https://dbalablog.blogspot.com/2023/02/galdef-statement-on-international-day.html" target="_blank">public statement in support of the International Day of Zero Tolerance for Female Genital Mutilation</a>.<br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">There are several reasons why the three pillars of the genital autonomy movement should view and honor one another as allies, and these include not just philosophical reasons but strategic and practical ones as well. Above all, it's the right thing to do.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">A good illustration - and a good example of making common cause - is, again, provided by Alicia Weigel, herself. (If I have given an unfair amount of space here to Weigel, it's because she is featured prominently in "Every Body" and is a prominent spokesperson for the intersex rights movement. Additionally, it is because her comments, not surprisingly, are so relevant to the cause of banning nontherapeutic penile circumcision. Beyond all this, she also happens to be tremendously quotable.) </span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Weigel, who also serves as a Human Rights Commissioner for the City of Austin, was asked by Terry Gross (in the Fresh Air interview, linked above) what she thought are the strengths and potential drawbacks of intersex people being included with the other communities represented respectively by the initials "LGBTQIA," with the "I," of course, standing for "intersex." As Weigel explained, <br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">We share so many common experiences. Just like people who grow up gay, grow up often feeling ashamed simply for existing, or might have undergone conversion therapy whereas intersex kids also undergo conversion therapy just using surgeons and scalpels, instead of electric shocks. We also hold a lot in common with the trans community in that we often have had surgeries that change our bodies' gender presentation. . . . So there's so much natural overlap and allyship between our experience that I think it makes total sense to include us in that community. Just like there are some gay people who are closeted and not out, there are some intersex people who I think also don't consider themselves part of the LGBTQI+ community - and maybe it's because they're straight in terms of their sexuality; or the choice of their gender was not wrong. But, for me, including us as part of that community helps all the other letters of the acronym feel compelled to stand up for us; just like the gay community was so vital in the trans folks finally getting a platform to stand up for their needs, we are now asking on all of our brothers, sisters and comrades in the broader queer and trans community to now fight for us, too. Because, just like I showed up to help kill the bathroom bill, even though it wouldn't necessarily have affected me - it already says "female" on my birth certificate and I pee in the women's room - I was there to really help my trans friends that day, we really hope our gay and queer and trans friends will stick up for us as well, understanding that <i>all of our liberation is intricately bound up in one another's progress</i> [my emphasis].<br /></span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">The intersectionality expressed in this statement can, of course, be expanded even further. There are literally <a href="https://dbalablog.blogspot.com/2022/11/dear-rachel-e-gross-welcome-to-our-world.html" target="_blank">millions of people with penises</a> who have the exact same anger and resentment about what was done to their bodies that intersex people have about what was done to theirs. I
hope, for this reason, that Weigel may come to look upon <i>these</i> people with <i>these</i>
bodies too as her natural allies and that they, in turn, will view and support Cohen's film and embrace
Weigel, the other courageous stars of "Every Body," Sean Saifa Wall and
River Gallo, and the entire intersex rights movement as allies. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Another prominent intersex rights advocate, and one who <a href="https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=737096731555764&set=pcb.737097604889010" target="_blank"><i>has</i> publicly made the connection between the movements to ban all forms of genital cutting (and other forms of medically unnecessary intersex surgeries)</a>, is <a href="https://anunnakiray.com/my-accomplishments/" target="_blank">Mx. Anunnaki Ray Marquez</a>. Marquez (who is <i>also</i> tremendously quotable: my favorite is <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpPTf-00ab0" target="_blank">"When you've met one intersex person, you've met one intersex person."</a>) is the <a href="https://anunnakiray.com/2018/09/20/i-am-proudly-the-first-in-colorado-to-get-an-intersex-birth-certificate/?fbclid=IwAR0eGnEWVxxuIQdU0eSNThGo9AsfmLOFxSfT1fx8sST8u9gMHO96dutd2uc" target="_blank">first person in the state of Colorado to receive (retroactively, and after fifteen months of fighting for it) an intersex birth certificate</a>. Marquez truly em<i>bodies</i> the spirit of intersectionality and of making common cause with <i>all</i> movements to ban genital cutting.<br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Ultimately, the right to bodily integrity and the right to genital autonomy rest on the foundation of bodily self-ownership, no matter whose body we're talking about. Either there is a fundamental right to bodily self-ownership that applies to <i>every body</i>, regardless of sex, or there isn't. And, if there is, that means that that right is not just fundamental but universal.<br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">This ties in to the underlying concept of Cohen's film just as it does to Weigel's comments about inclusion. Importantly, the demands for justice and equality by any one group within the abbreviation "LGBTQIA" are not trivialized or diminished by the inclusion of any other group within that assemblage. The cause of advancing gay rights, for example, is not undermined by linking it conceptually and strategically to the cause of advancing intersex rights. By the same token, t</span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">he
right of intersex people and people with vulvas to autonomous control over their bodies (especially their genitals and reproductive organs) is not diminished, trivialized or threatened by acknowledging that that same right belongs no less to people who happen to have been born with
penises. On the contrary: that right can only be strengthened by recognizing its universality. </span></span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"> It's self-evident that a morally consistent
principle is more powerful than one with a carve-out that omits 50% of
the population. Hence, the
campaigns to end female genital cutting and medically-unnecessary intersex surgeries can
only be strengthened by joining forces with the campaign to end male genital cutting. Establishing the right to be free
from nonconsensual genital surgery on a <i>universal</i> right of bodily self-ownership rather than on a right narrowly tailored to protect <i>only</i> people with vulvas or <i>only</i> people with intersex traits will help secure and guarantee this right for Every Body.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"></span></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"></span></div><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg-u-Klg7HlS-gwE3LDXcHopwpvxyCM0aD-Bd745cCpLVI7ObJHDYuOeF4q_BE--FlTjXQnJMJRm2JHifB6I4pK-HyqHzrzgrZJtJezTTOG6LnpnPmUXibgx4Z4xIhg857HG-rfdJKV3wefx8_E24PL55BRd-Gi-sbNGsykftiJzFUDOMW1CO8BTsGsbRA/s765/Screen%20Shot%202023-07-10%20at%207.05.10%20AM.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="765" data-original-width="661" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg-u-Klg7HlS-gwE3LDXcHopwpvxyCM0aD-Bd745cCpLVI7ObJHDYuOeF4q_BE--FlTjXQnJMJRm2JHifB6I4pK-HyqHzrzgrZJtJezTTOG6LnpnPmUXibgx4Z4xIhg857HG-rfdJKV3wefx8_E24PL55BRd-Gi-sbNGsykftiJzFUDOMW1CO8BTsGsbRA/s320/Screen%20Shot%202023-07-10%20at%207.05.10%20AM.png" width="276" /></a></span></span></div><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"></span></p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"> </span></span><p></p><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times;">* * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * *
* *<br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><i></i></span><i>David
Balashinsky is originally from New York City and now lives near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. He is a licensed physical therapist and writes about bodily autonomy and
human rights, gender, culture, and politics. </i></span><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i>He currently serves on the board of directors for the <a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">Genital Autonomy Legal Defense & Education Fund</a>, (GALDEF),</i></span> the board of
directors and advisors for <a href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" target="_blank">Doctors Opposing Circumcision</a> and the leadership team for <a href="https://www.bruchim.online/" target="_blank">Bruchim</a>.</i></span></i></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i></i></span></i></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbuG7QsAK_-xmpOscQAV4c_TQZ7lYBOWb9VaxQUEIZEaMZfkBfsmNJ1PLDAJfvYRtcmYFMY59F5UopB9jABsO-ZikUEIDdb8MwV_VwVHtJLV3X22wq5RMNQSS50ot4EoEI6gPyWHhyYimQXdq94R4-eWpOanPa6Am2sqNfh1lbmZNMidtIjXO6OYvTdBY/s1403/361635362_6571249672935090_6828371828525976342_n.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1403" data-original-width="841" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbuG7QsAK_-xmpOscQAV4c_TQZ7lYBOWb9VaxQUEIZEaMZfkBfsmNJ1PLDAJfvYRtcmYFMY59F5UopB9jABsO-ZikUEIDdb8MwV_VwVHtJLV3X22wq5RMNQSS50ot4EoEI6gPyWHhyYimQXdq94R4-eWpOanPa6Am2sqNfh1lbmZNMidtIjXO6OYvTdBY/s320/361635362_6571249672935090_6828371828525976342_n.jpg" width="192" /></a></i></span></i></span></div><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i><br /> </i></span></i><br /> </span><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"> </span></p><br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-44424012975202194082023-08-01T04:48:00.004-07:002023-09-19T02:15:39.795-07:00"Cured": What the Gay Rights Movement Can Teach Us About Grassroots Campaigns to Change Medical Practice<p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span><span style="font-size: small;">by <b>David Balashinsky</b></span><br /></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">In the history of the gay rights movement, certain events stand out as milestones. First and foremost is the <a href="https://guides.loc.gov/lgbtq-studies/stonewall-era" target="_blank">Stonewall uprising in 1969</a>.
Another is the <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/senate-bill/4023" target="_blank">termination by Congress of the Defense Department's "Don't Ask - Don't Tell" policy in 2010</a> allowing lesbian, gay and bisexual people to serve openly in the armed forces. Still another is the Supreme
Court's 2015 decision in <a href="https://www.hrw.org/news/2015/06/26/us-supreme-court-upholds-same-sex-marriage" target="_blank"><i>Obergefell v. Hodges</i> recognizing the right to same-sex marriage</a>. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Less
well known by the general public is
the <a href="https://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.ajp-rj.2022.180103" target="_blank">decision in 1973 by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to drop its classification of homosexuality as a psychiatric disorder</a>.
Although it's hard to believe now that gay women and men were once
subjected to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT, or "shock therapy") and
other "treatments," for decades the APA viewed homosexuality as a
condition that needed to be "cured." Women and men were not merely
stigmatized for being gay; their homosexuality<i> </i>was actually defined as a pathological condition by the
medical establishment. As a result, among other interventions that would now be condemned as medical
malpractice, gay people were institutionalized, subjected to"aversive
therapy" (a technique that involved, in the case of gay men, exposing
them to pictures of nude or semi-nude men while administering electric shocks) and even
subjected to lobotomies - all in an effort to "cure" them of their gayness.<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">It took years of advocacy and even direct confrontation before the APA was finally persuaded by
gay rights activists (from within but mostly outside the organization) to revise its official stance on
homosexuality. The story of how these activists overcame decades of
entrenched thinking within the APA is movingly told in the powerful,
heartbreaking yet inspiring documentary, "Cured."</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Anyone who cares about human rights should watch this film. Anyone who cars about the rights of LGBTQIA+ persons should watch this film. And anyone who cares about ending all forms of forced genital cutting should watch this film. Why? Partly because the gay rights movement has been phenomenally successful and there is always something to learn from a successful human rights movement. But, more particularly, because the battles for gay rights that have been fought over the past 60 years and more have been waged within the social sphere, within the legal domain and within the realm of medical practice. It is precisely in this respect that the gay rights- and genital autonomy movements have so much in common. <br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">It goes without saying that both movements represent quests for fundamental human rights. What right is more fundamental, after all, than the right not to have healthy, erogenous tissue surgically removed from one's body without consent? At the same time, there are other rights perhaps not as crucial as the inviolability of one's physical boundaries but that are still important enough to be regarded as fundamental. Chief among these is the right to <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/equal_protection" target="_blank">equal protection</a>. The aim of the gay rights movement is for gay people to have the same rights to housing, employment, marriage, services and public accommodations, government benefits, healthcare and the myriad other rights that (some - not all) hetero people take for granted (rights that, at least, exist on paper). These particular rights are typically <i>legal</i> rights: that is, they are either codified in statutes or they are rooted even more deeply in the texts of constitutions. Additionally, an important aim of the gay rights movement has been and continues to be for <i>social</i> acceptance: not just of homosexual relationships but of homosexuality itself, as something intrinsic to an individual's identity. Gay people want what all of us want: the right to live openly as themselves and without apology for who they are. A third domain in which gay people have had to fight for their fundamental rights is the subject of "Cured": their <i>treatment</i> (in both senses of the word) by the medical profession. All of these specific rights can be distilled down to fundamental human rights but it is significant that the struggle to achieve them has taken place within each of these three domains: the law, society, and medical practice.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">This is exactly the case with the movement to end nontherapeutic penile circumcision (male genital cutting, or MGC), which comprises one of the three major pillars of the genital autonomy movement (the other two being the FGM-eradication movement and the movement to end the <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2023/07/05/1185988683/intersex-documentary-every-body-julie-cohen-alicia-roth-weigel" target="_blank">medically unnecessary surgeries that are imposed on intersex children in a misguided attempt to "normalize" their bodies</a>). Just as the gay rights movement has done, the MGC-eradication movement is pursuing its aims within each of these three spheres. For example, the groundwork is now being laid for the pursuit of creative and effective legal strategies to redress individual cases of harm while creating<i> impact litigation</i> that will have a positive deterrent effect more broadly on the practice of subjecting unconsenting minors to medically unnecessary, irreversible and life-altering genital surgery. That is the focus and <i>raison d'<span><span data-dobid="hdw">ê</span></span>tre</i> of the <b><a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">Genital Autonomy Legal Defence and Education Fund (GALDEF)</a></b>. At the same time, campaigns within the social sphere to <a href="https://www.bruchim.online/" target="_blank">normalize intactness</a> and to <a href="https://intactamerica.org/do-you-know-about-the-tipping-point/" target="_blank">destigmatize the penile prepuce</a> are gaining momentum. Within the medical sphere, more and more <a href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" target="_blank">physicians</a>, <a href="https://www.thelocal.dk/20161205/danish-doctors-come-out-against-circumcision" target="_blank">physicians' organizations</a> and <a href="http://childrightsnurses.org/index.php/about-us/" target="_blank">other healthcare providers</a> and <a href="http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2013/07/podcast-the-ethics-of-infant-male-circumcision/" target="_blank">medical ethicists</a> are publicly stating their opposition to the practice of MGC. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Notwithstanding these encouraging developments, the penile prepuce continues to be disparaged and worse by the medical profession. It is particularly within the realm of medical practice, therefore, that the penile prepuce bears such a striking similarity to the state of being gay. Both the <a href="https://arstechnica.com/science/2015/02/the-troubled-history-of-the-foreskin/" target="_blank">penile prepuce</a> and homosexuality have an overlapping history of explicit pathologizing by the medical establishment. Both have been regarded, therefore, by medical professionals as conditions that warranted aggressive interventions for the well-being of the "patient." In both cases, the goal of these interventions was the same: the elimination of the offending pathological condition.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">It's worth bearing in mind that none of the three domains discussed here - law, society and medical practice - is entirely walled off (or "siloed") from the other two. There is an active interplay between all of them as the prevailing normative values of each influence and, in turn, are influenced by the others. That is partly why the problem of MGC has proved so intractable. The unwarranted privilege it has enjoyed within the legal realm is unquestionably due to its persistent social acceptability and the gloss of legitimacy that it continues to receive from the medical profession. By the same token, the medical profession <a href="https://renaissance.stonybrookmedicine.edu/system/files/The%20Circumcision%20Debate.%20Beyond%20Benefits%20and%20Risks%202016%20pediatrics.pdf" target="_blank">continues to cite societal acceptance of MGC (including parental preference and prerogative)</a> as <a href="https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/130/3/585/30235/Circumcision-Policy-Statement?autologincheck=redirected" target="_blank">justifications for its continued availability (and for third-party payment for it)</a>. And the fact that legal sanctions have yet to be imposed upon any physician for performing what is nevertheless universally understood to be a medically unnecessary surgery - in contrast to other cases in which physicians <i>have</i> been prosecuted for and even <a href="https://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/pr/jury-convicts-doctor-scheme-perform-unnecessary-surgeries-women" target="_blank">convicted of performing medically unnecessary surgeries</a> - surely indirectly reinforces the continued acceptance within the societal and medical realms for MGC. By failing to prosecute medical professionals and others for performing <i>any</i> medically unnecessary penile circumcision - <a href="https://ww3.lawschool.cornell.edu/research/JLPP/upload/Adler-et-al-final.pdf" target="_blank">an act that, were it to involve any other body part, would be considered not just malpractice but battery</a> - the state implicitly bestows its imprimatur on MGC and does so explicitly in those states (<a href="https://circumcision.org/medicaid-funding-for-circumcision/" target="_blank">and there are still 34 of them) in which Medicaid Funds are used to pay for it</a>.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">But if each one of these three domains supports the other two and, together, all of them undergird the practice of nontherapeutic penile circumcision, it is also true that, like a three-legged stool, without any one of them, the stool must inevitably fall down. Therein lies cause for hope. That is why it is imperative that the struggle to eradicate MGC be waged in the legal sphere (in courts and in legislatures), in the public sphere (through media and online forums, through one-on-one engagement and through <a href="https://dbalablog.blogspot.com/2019/06/bloodstained-men-guerilla-theatre.html" target="_blank">public protest</a>) and in the medical sphere (through outreach to medical school faculties and students and to medical professionals, through efforts to defund nontherapeutic circumcision by eliminating third-party payments for it, such as Medicaid, through education aimed at new parents and through vociferous advocacy with medical organizations and regulatory bodies). </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Fortunately, not only has exactly this sort of three-pronged approach been employed before but it has succeeded. To see how, we need only look to the gay rights movement. In particular, the medical prong - the campaign by gay rights activists targeting the APA's pathologizing of homosexuality - is a paradigm of effective grassroots advocacy. That is the story told by "Cured," which is why this documentary is must-see viewing for those who support the cause of genital autonomy. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEisgQ-gQYLWtwdqq_Mca3RKiCSeWNH9C3PLWIq4Aa1lBu3UzjqE0AbWrpqvS3DQaE1fTNdGf37rSoDi1PZsMQv2e6k_tQiXP4WKZDxQa9D7YjpvxIeWuBtO8vXp048Te_cukZ8qAlP42gV9naYOPvJ2vZL2W1LOl8ndkG99llk01euqpth2QBm1IeaXg7g/s1146/Screen%20Shot%202023-08-01%20at%206.40.06%20AM.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="518" data-original-width="1146" height="219" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEisgQ-gQYLWtwdqq_Mca3RKiCSeWNH9C3PLWIq4Aa1lBu3UzjqE0AbWrpqvS3DQaE1fTNdGf37rSoDi1PZsMQv2e6k_tQiXP4WKZDxQa9D7YjpvxIeWuBtO8vXp048Te_cukZ8qAlP42gV9naYOPvJ2vZL2W1LOl8ndkG99llk01euqpth2QBm1IeaXg7g/w331-h219/Screen%20Shot%202023-08-01%20at%206.40.06%20AM.png" width="331" /></a></span></span></div><p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: small;"><i>This post was originally published as a promotion for a fundraising event to benefit GALDEF that took place on 17 September 2023 which included a special screening of "Cured." It has now been revised, accordingly. You can learn about distribution efforts for "Cured" by following it on <a href="https://www.facebook.com/cureddocumentary" target="_blank">Facebook</a>, <a href="https://www.instagram.com/cureddocumentary/" target="_blank">Instagram</a> and <a href="https://twitter.com/cureddoc" target="_blank">X</a>. If you're interested in contacting the flimmakers, they can be reached at "Cured"'s <a href="https://www.cureddocumentary.com/" target="_blank">website</a>. The producers of "Cured" have also created a <a href="https://www.cureddocumentary.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/CURED_Resources.pdf" target="_blank">Resource List</a>. Finally, if you would like to learn more about <a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">GALDEF</a> or <a href="https://www.galdef.org/donate/" target="_blank">donate</a>, please visit our website.</i></span></span></span></p><p><br /></p><p><span style="font-family: times;">* * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * *
* *<br /></span></p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"></span><i>David
Balashinsky is originally from New York City and now lives near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. He is a licensed physical therapist
and writes about bodily autonomy and
human rights, gender, culture, and politics. </i></span><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i>He currently serves on the board of directors for the <a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">Genital Autonomy Legal Defense & Education Fund</a>, (GALDEF),</i></span> the board of
directors and advisors for <a href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" target="_blank">Doctors Opposing Circumcision</a> and the leadership team for <a href="https://www.bruchim.online/" target="_blank">Bruchim</a>.</i></span></i></span><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-14285401692356287852023-05-02T04:49:00.003-07:002023-05-03T03:40:26.745-07:00GALDEF Statement in Support of the 2023 WWDOGA<p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span><span style="font-size: small;">by <b>David Balashinsky</b> </span><br /></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span>May
7th, 2023 is the eleventh anniversary of the
ruling by the Regional Court of Cologne recognizing that nonconsensual,
non-therapeutic penile circumcision constitutes an illegal act of bodily
harm. That ruling has been commemorated every May 7th since as the <b>Worldwide Day of Genital Autonomy</b>.</span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span>The <a href="https://genital-autonomy.de/" target="_blank">Worldwide Day of Genital Autonomy</a>, or <b>WWDOGA</b>, calls for the State Parties to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child to honor their commitment to "take all effective and appropriate measures with a view to abolishing traditional practices prejudicial to the health of children." <b>WWDOGA</b> also calls for legislative initiatives to protect all children, regardless of sex, against non-therapeutic genital surgeries. It calls for the protection of children with atypical sex characteristics from genital surgeries when not medically indicated; it calls for an immediate end to the campaign of mass circumcision of African boys; and it calls for a program of publicly-funded research and education on the consequences of genital cutting for children in all its various social contexts. These objectives are so basic to any rational definition of fundamental human rights that <b>WWDOGA</b> has now grown into an annual observance that is supported by over 90 organizations around the world. <br /></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span><span><span>One of these is the <a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">Genital Autonomy Legal Defense and Education Fund</a> (<b>GALDEF</b>) which is proud to support of the eleventh annual <b>Worldwide Day of Genital Autonomy</b>.</span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span><b>GALDEF</b>'s <a href="https://www.galdef.org/mission-vision/" target="_blank">Mission</a> is "to promote impact litigation by providing the resources needed for our clients to win legal cases involving medically unnecessary genital cutting." Our <a href="https://www.galdef.org/mission-vision/" target="_blank">Vision</a> is "to create a world where the rights of children to bodily integrity and future autonomy over their genitals and their sexuality are respected and legally protected." </span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span>Although our strategies may differ, the ultimate goals of <b>WWDOGA</b> and <b>GALDEF</b> are the same. Both organizations are working to create a world in which the right of every individual to ownership of their own genitals is recognized and respected. Like<b> WWDOGA</b>, <b>GALDEF </b>believes that this right is absolute, fundamental and belongs to every human being </span></span><span><span><span><span>regardless of sex or any other individual- or group identification. </span></span>For us at <b>GALDEF</b>, that means helping those who have been deprived of this right seek redress through the judicial process. But our mission is much broader, much deeper and much more ambitious than fighting for this cause on an individual, case-by-case basis. We believe that strategic and targeted legal actions can result in precedent-setting and high-profile judgments that will reverberate throughout the legal landscape, across the country and beyond. This will have the effect of discouraging others from violating or assisting others in violating the right to genital autonomy of every child everywhere.</span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span>It is not a coincidence that both <b>WWDOGA</b> and <b>GALDEF</b> have the phrase "genital autonomy" in their names. The principle of genital autonomy is the moral foundation of both organizations; the universal safeguarding of this right, the cause to which both organizations are committed. </span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span>Nor is it a coincidence that a judicial remedy for forced genital cutting lies at the heart of both organizations. For as long as there have been law codes, charters and constitutions, courts have been the place of last resort where those who have been aggrieved can seek justice. Courts have been the place where statutes that violate human rights have been struck down and where previously <i>un</i>recognized rights have been recognized. Throughout the history of jurisprudence, courts have been one of the most important tools that civilized societies have to insure justice and equality for every citizen within their jurisdiction. On May 7th, 2012, it was one regional court in Cologne, Germany that issued the ruling that we now commemorate every May 7th as the <b>Worldwide Day of Genital Autonomy</b>. </span></span><br /><br />T<span><span>he essential <i>holding</i> of the Cologne ruling is that <a data-auth="NotApplicable" data-linkindex="9" href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jun/27/circumcision-ruling-germany-muslim-jewish" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" title="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jun/27/circumcision-ruling-germany-muslim-jewish">"a
[medically unnecessary] circumcision, 'even when done properly by a doctor with the permission
of the parents, should be considered [a] bodily harm if it is carried out
on a boy unable to give his own consent.'"</a> <br /></span></span></span></span></p><div style="color: black;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The essential <i>fact</i>
of the Cologne ruling is that it was symbolic: it had little or no
practical effect because the German Bundestag shortly thereafter passed
legislation explicitly permitting non-therapeutic penile circumcision - legislation that, of course, superseded the ruling. <br aria-hidden="true" /></span></span></div><div style="color: black;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><br aria-hidden="true" /></span></span></div><div style="color: black;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The essential <i>significance</i>
of the ruling, however, is that it represented the first time that a
legally-instituted body officially recognized that
people with penises actually have a right to decide for themselves what part of their penises they may keep and what part gets cut off. It was the first time that a court recognized that non-therapeutic penile circumcision is a harm in and of itself and that, when imposed on a child without his consent, his right not to be physically harmed is violated. <span><span>Thus, while this may have been one legal decision by one regional court with little or no practical effect, for the genital autonomy movement it was the legal shot heard round the world.</span></span></span></span> </div><div style="color: black;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></span></div><div style="color: black;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The deeper significance, then, of the Cologne ruling is that it transcended the personal interests of the child whose medically unnecessary penile circumcision led prosecutors to bring charges against the physician who had committed it. The Cologne ruling was a vindication of the rights not only of that child but of every child born with a
penis. And, although the Cologne ruling pertained strictly to penile
circumcision, the <b>Worldwide Day of Genital Autonomy</b>, to its credit, regards the right to genital
autonomy as <i>universal</i>, meaning that it is a right that belongs
to every human being irrespective of sex, gender, nationality, religion
and irrespective of the particular shape or structure of an
individual's genitals. <br aria-hidden="true" /></span></span></div><div style="color: black;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><br aria-hidden="true" /></span></span></div><div style="color: black;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The concept of <i>universal</i>
human rights is important not only because it means that the <i>rights</i> apply to
everyone equally but because the concept itself provides a moral
framework in which each of us can extrapolate from our own unique
situations to those of others from whom we differ. That is why <b>WWDOGA</b> seeks to bring together advocates from every genital autonomy movement: not just those of us working to end male genital cutting but those working to end female genital cutting and intersex genital cutting, too. Likewise, we at <b>GALDEF</b> believe in the universality of the cause of genital autonomy and we also recognize the strategic importance of making common cause with other genital autonomy movements. This is reflected in our <span><span><a href="https://www.galdef.org/values-statement/" target="_blank">Values Statement in which <b>GALDEF</b> expresses its "solidarity with female and interesex victims of genital cutting. . . .</a>" <br /></span></span></span></span></div><div style="color: black;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><br aria-hidden="true" /></span></span></div><div style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, serif, serif, EmojiFont; font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Sooner or later the world will recognize what the regional court in Cologne recognized eleven years ago. Either there is a fundamental right to genital autonomy that applies to everyone regardless of sex or there isn't. And, if there is, sooner or later that right must be recognized by unbiased courts in the constitutions and statutes that already exist or it must be enshrined in constitutional amendments or codified in new legislation. Whatever course this campaign takes and however long it takes, <b>GALDEF</b> will be fighting for the right of every child to grow up with their genitals uncut, unharmed and intact. </span></span><br /></div><div style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, serif, serif, EmojiFont; font-size: 12pt;"><br aria-hidden="true" /></div><div style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, serif, serif, EmojiFont; font-size: 12pt;"> <br aria-hidden="true" /></div><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"></span></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-cl-BsiWPECqd2bnGSM0AWMBhevNLavcHk9HL4-VKY0NZcKG5GGmgGy9aO_hpjGt_jDGH9EGkRe84eoT2Ch5ORLUftCbT-dbtTxUIlelcz08Y8U7GHi7FxJDC3qTU29FlCs-1GWk6WdAv_3UhLJ9bnSJU-dKLsP7BOZnwhNCDGZpsFzbLyNzBjIOz/s509/Screen%20Shot%202022-05-07%20at%205.24.58%20AM.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></a><span style="font-size: medium;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhy_G8iz1NLjyxwPm36l8yoG8aTKPDJ2Lysn4paFP3zc_EAwsIOM8PlAz894TEcm_BjVcFtQHyVuChB3NaUumpPyPIdlgpsALqKCYXk2-pnHQISetMEoGCBQTgvhJSMHkZrV9AYyKVg9BN4FZU4VVjuOuv01sCe9ymbNSYXepbZbB_aATeaqEqx5U4X/s831/Screen%20Shot%202023-02-06%20at%207.09.28%20AM.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="817" data-original-width="831" height="197" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhy_G8iz1NLjyxwPm36l8yoG8aTKPDJ2Lysn4paFP3zc_EAwsIOM8PlAz894TEcm_BjVcFtQHyVuChB3NaUumpPyPIdlgpsALqKCYXk2-pnHQISetMEoGCBQTgvhJSMHkZrV9AYyKVg9BN4FZU4VVjuOuv01sCe9ymbNSYXepbZbB_aATeaqEqx5U4X/w200-h197/Screen%20Shot%202023-02-06%20at%207.09.28%20AM.png" width="200" /></a></span><img border="0" data-original-height="509" data-original-width="477" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-cl-BsiWPECqd2bnGSM0AWMBhevNLavcHk9HL4-VKY0NZcKG5GGmgGy9aO_hpjGt_jDGH9EGkRe84eoT2Ch5ORLUftCbT-dbtTxUIlelcz08Y8U7GHi7FxJDC3qTU29FlCs-1GWk6WdAv_3UhLJ9bnSJU-dKLsP7BOZnwhNCDGZpsFzbLyNzBjIOz/w188-h200/Screen%20Shot%202022-05-07%20at%205.24.58%20AM.png" width="188" /></div><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></span></p> <p><span style="font-family: times;">* * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * *
* *<br /></span></p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><i><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/s365/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="299" data-original-width="365" height="163" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/w200-h163/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" width="200" /></a></div></i></span><i>David
Balashinsky is originally from New York City and now lives near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. He is a licensed physical therapist and writes about bodily autonomy and
human rights, gender, culture, and politics. </i></span><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i>He currently serves on the board of directors for the <a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">Genital Autonomy Legal Defense & Education Fund</a>, (GALDEF),</i></span> the board of
directors and advisors for <a href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" target="_blank">Doctors Opposing Circumcision</a> and the leadership team for <a href="https://www.bruchim.online/" target="_blank">Bruchim</a>.</i></span></i></span> <br /><p><br /><br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-41939128413738871792023-04-26T13:31:00.016-07:002023-07-01T03:55:16.919-07:00Some Thoughts on "They" as a Singular Pronoun and Other Linguistic Pet Peeves<div class="x1lliihq xjkvuk6 x1iorvi4"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span class="x193iq5w xeuugli x13faqbe x1vvkbs xlh3980 xvmahel x1n0sxbx x1lliihq x1s928wv xhkezso x1gmr53x x1cpjm7i x1fgarty x1943h6x xudqn12 x3x7a5m x6prxxf xvq8zen xo1l8bm xzsf02u" dir="auto" lang="en"><div class="xdj266r x11i5rnm xat24cr x1mh8g0r x1vvkbs"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: small;">by <b>David Balashinsky</b></span><br /></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">I had the good fortune to be off from work yesterday and so had the opportunity to listen to <i><a href="https://www.wbur.org/radio/programs/hereandnow" target="_blank">Here and Now</a></i> which, where I live, airs on WSKG radio at 12:00 noon. Yesterday's show featured an <a href="https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2023/04/25/like-literally-dude-valerie-fridland" target="_blank">interview</a> with sociolinguist and author <a href="https://www.valeriefridland.com/" target="_blank">Valerie Fridland</a> who was there to discuss her new book, <i><a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/671558/like-literally-dude-by-valerie-fridland/" target="_blank">Like, Literally, Dude: Arguing for the Good in Bad English</a></i>. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><br /></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">I
was not aware of the fact that so many people become so exercised about
their linguistic pet peeves or what they believe to be misuses of the English language as to
become impelled to write indignant emails about them to radio shows. However, this phenomenon formed the backdrop not only of yesterday's interview but also (at least to some extent) of Fridland's book which on her site is described as "A lively linguistic exploration of the speech habits we love to hate - and why our 'like's and 'literally's actually make us better communicators." </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">For my part, I do not object to "like" nearly as much as I object to "you know" but that phrase did not come up during the interview. (I do not know whether Fridland addresses "you know" in her book and, if she does, whether she is as forgiving of it as she is of "like," "literally," "um" and ""uh.") However, I found myself experiencing my own outrage at certain usages that <i>did </i>come up during the broadcast. Not coincidentally, these happen to be several of my own favorite pet peeves so, like any indignant language lover who fires off an angry email, I am sharing them now - except, of course, that I get to vent spleen here on my blog. </div><br /></div><div class="x11i5rnm xat24cr x1mh8g0r x1vvkbs xtlvy1s"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">First is the use of the singular "they." I loathe the use of "they" as a singular pronoun not
because I oppose the existence of a gender-neutral pronoun but simply
because "they" is already taken (as a plural) and its use as both a singular <i>and</i>
a plural is often confusing and grates on the ears
like fingernails on a chalkboard. There really should be a better
alternative and I hope someone can come up with one. In the interview, Fridland claims that "hundreds" of alternative, gender-neutral singular pronouns have been tried but that none has caught on in the way that "they" has. Fridland attributes this to the fact that the use of "they" as a singular pronoun is "an organic development." Not having read her book, I do not know how Fridland defines this term but i<span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span class="x193iq5w xeuugli x13faqbe x1vvkbs xlh3980 xvmahel x1n0sxbx x1lliihq x1s928wv xhkezso x1gmr53x x1cpjm7i x1fgarty x1943h6x xudqn12 x3x7a5m x6prxxf xvq8zen xo1l8bm xzsf02u" dir="auto" lang="en">t's probably safe to assume that by "organic development" she means a change in language that is unconscious and "natural."</span></span></span> I understand that English is always changing but I also know that people misuse words all the time and how we speak is inevitably influenced by what we hear and learn from others. For this reason, common misuses of words tend to spread and become even more common until at last, through the alchemy of semantic change, a frequently misused word becomes a legitimate way of expressing the idea that it was formerly improperly used to convey. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Is that a good thing or a bad thing? <span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span class="x193iq5w xeuugli x13faqbe x1vvkbs xlh3980 xvmahel x1n0sxbx x1lliihq x1s928wv xhkezso x1gmr53x x1cpjm7i x1fgarty x1943h6x xudqn12 x3x7a5m x6prxxf xvq8zen xo1l8bm xzsf02u elementToProof" dir="auto" lang="en">Well, after contacting Fridland
directly and receiving not one but two very gracious and hugely
enlightening responses, I believe it is fair to say that, at least from
Fridland's perspective, it is neither. A sociolinguist views the
evolution of language much as a biologist views evolutionary changes in a
species over time: these changes are neither "good" nor "bad" but
merely adaptive. As Fridland pointed out in her first email, the pronoun "you," exactly like "they," is used in both a singular and plural sense and this does not seem to bother anybody - at least not now. I hadn't considered this and, honestly, this got me 98 per cent of the way there. <br /></span></span></span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"></span></span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">And yet it is hard for me to let go of the idea that not every change is for the better. Isn't it possible that, while language may be characterized by "organic development," like everything else it also tends to degrade from sheer entropy? Over time, a building will begin to sag and its foundations give way until the building collapses. At room temperature, food will decay and what once might have been dinner is now slimy and putrid. That might be great for bacteria but it's not so great for the larger, more complex organism who was hoping to make a meal out of that rotting food. This illustrates the principle that, depending upon one's point of view, change can be either "organic development" or simply organic decay. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">But this is where the view of the sociolinguist can actually be liberating. As Fridland explained to me in her second email,</div><blockquote><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Over the long haul, language evolves in ways that meet the needs of
speakers, but not always in ways that meet the social desires of those
who have come to feel tied to the conventions of use at any one point in
time on the long continuum of a language's history. This is the crux
of why people are so vehement in their views about language - it is a
resource both intensely personal (communicating our own views and
experiences) and, at the same time, communal (based on a set of
conventions and usages that arise via collective agreement). When
people start messing with what we feel is established as normative use -
especially when those speakers belong to groups less valued or well
thought of socially, economically and politically (be it due to age,
gender, ethnicity or region) - it irks us that they are changing the
conventions we have helped to establish. Toss in the fact that these
norms have been taught to us every year in grammar class and so are
validated in that way that these new forms are not and you get fierce
opposition. I think what is key is to realize that many of the forms
that one or two centuries ago really angered people are now the things
we all say without the dissolution of our ability to communicate having
resulted. One great example is that we now are not only using 'you' for
both singular and plural but also using it as a subject pronoun (as in
"You went home") when 'you' historically was only used for objects, and
'ye' was used exclusively for subjects. In the 16th century, 'you' and
'ye' seem to have started to fall together, likely because in fast
speech they sound similar and because in certain sentences it was a bit
hard to tell which one should be used. For instance, "ye know that man"
becomes 'Know ye that man" where the subject 'ye' now is in a position
that 'you' typically occupies, i.e., following the verb. Thus 'you'
started to get used in that case instead, creeping into 'ye' territory
one grammatical inch at a time. The result? Now all we say is 'you'
and 'ye' is nowhere to be seen. Has language been destroyed because of
this change we didn't even know had happened? Not really. But when
someone today does something similar such as saying "him and I are going
to the party," we get upset with this grammatical infraction - one
which we actually commit every time we use 'you' as a subject. We might
socially disfavor it, but that is . . . [no] worse . . . than what we did with 'you' and 'ye.' <br /></div></blockquote><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">That got me the rest of the way there - at least, intellectually. And yet I still have a visceral antipathy for the singular "they." </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">There is another dimension to the question of whether "they" ought to be accepted as both a singular and a plural pronoun. In realms such as language, where education, skill, artistry and rules figure prominently (and aren't these precisely what give language its charm, beyond its strictly utilitarian function?), changes over time can be either conscious and inorganic or unconscious and organic. An example of a conscious, inorganic change in language - and one, for the better, in my opinion - would be the now ubiquitous title "Ms." as an alternative to "Miss or "Mrs." There was nothing at all natural or "organic" about the way "Ms." was incorporated into everyday usage. Its adoption and popularization were the result of very conscious and deliberate campaigns which arose in response to the inherent sexism of the use of either "Miss" or "Mrs." </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">A further development along these lines would be to abandon "Ms." and "Mr." altogether in favor of a gender-neutral title such as <a href="https://nonbinary.wiki/wiki/Mx#Popularity" target="_blank">"Mx.," which is now the leading choice among those expressing a preference</a>. To me, however, "Mx." seems inelegant and awkward in the same way that "Latinx" does. On the other hand,<span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span class="x193iq5w xeuugli x13faqbe x1vvkbs xlh3980 xvmahel x1n0sxbx x1lliihq x1s928wv xhkezso x1gmr53x x1cpjm7i x1fgarty x1943h6x xudqn12 x3x7a5m x6prxxf xvq8zen xo1l8bm xzsf02u" dir="auto" lang="en"> "Ms." undoubtedly seemed unnatural and awkward when it was introduced, also. </span></span></span> And while there is a certain logic and even validity to "Mx.," <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/15/learning/for-most-latinos-latinx-does-not-mark-the-spot.html" target="_blank">the same, apparently, cannot be said of "Latinx."</a> <br /></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><br /></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">"They," as a singular pronoun, falls somewhere in between the organic development that Fridland talks about and the inorganic change in language that is consciously advocated as a way to rectify inequity, as in the case of "Ms." I do not dispute that "they" has a long history of use as a singular pronoun but the organic development by which it came to be used was not a result of gender consciousness or of a rejection of heteronormativity and sexual-binary normativity. People have misused "they" when they meant to say "he" or "she" for decades. It is only recently that advocates for a more inclusive language have argued for the use of "they" specifically as a gender-neutral singular pronoun. That is certainly a much more valid reason for its use than sheer carelessness or ignorance. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">That said, and aside from my longstanding objection to the use of "they" as a singular pronoun on strictly grammatical and aesthetic grounds, my argument has been that, if we are going to use "they" as a singular pronoun, we should at least follow the rule of grammar that a pronoun and a verb must agree in
number. In other words, we should be consistent, especially if there is any hope of the singular "they" acquiring any grammatical legitimacy. Thus, for example, one ought to say "they is," not "they are." Here are several additional examples of the correct way to use "they" as a singular pronoun in a sentence: "They is the president and CEO of that organization,"
or, "They writes for <i>The Guardian</i> and is a frequent contributor to other
publications," or, "They is going to be delivering a lecture on
semiotics which you won't want to miss because they is the leading expert on this topic." Admittedly, using the correct verb forms, as in these examples, grates on one's ears, but no more so than the singular "they" does. And if we are being asked to get used to "they"
as a singular pronoun, don't we have a right to expect the champions of
the singular "they" to get used to conjugations such as "they is"?<br /></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">On the other hand, though, there is the powerfully convincing example that Fridland cites in which "you" is used as either a singular pronoun or a plural pronoun but always with a verb form as though it were a plural. We never say "you is." Yes, maintaining agreement in
number between the singular "they" and the accompanying verb would serve
the purpose of making it clear that one is speaking about
one person and not more than one and so avoid the confusion that may occur with the use of the singular "they," as in this example: "The committee members and the chair could not come to an agreement about the budget because they were afraid that the funds would not be allocated properly." In that sentence, does "they" refer to the committee members, to the chair of the committee, or to all of them? Now try this: <span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span class="x193iq5w xeuugli x13faqbe x1vvkbs xlh3980 xvmahel x1n0sxbx x1lliihq x1s928wv xhkezso x1gmr53x x1cpjm7i x1fgarty x1943h6x xudqn12 x3x7a5m x6prxxf xvq8zen xo1l8bm xzsf02u" dir="auto" lang="en">"The
committee members and the chair could not come to an agreement
about the budget because they was afraid that the funds would not be
allocated properly."</span></span></span> Awkward, yes, but at least we understand that it is the chair of the committee and not the committee members who has reservations about approving the budget. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Of course, all this awkwardness and confusion could be avoided by using a different, gender-neutral pronoun altogether. However, if we are to use the singular "they," using it in a way that preserves agreement in number between the pronoun and the verb would, over time, as our ears become accustomed to it,
have the added virtue of conferring <i>more</i> legitimacy on the use of "they" as a singular, specifically gender-neutral pronoun
because it would make it unambiguous that the speaker used "they" deliberately as an affirmation of the non-binary gender of the person
being spoken about rather than that the speaker used "they" simply out of
carelessness.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span class="x193iq5w xeuugli x13faqbe x1vvkbs xlh3980 xvmahel x1n0sxbx x1lliihq x1s928wv xhkezso x1gmr53x x1cpjm7i x1fgarty x1943h6x xudqn12 x3x7a5m x6prxxf xvq8zen xo1l8bm xzsf02u" dir="auto" lang="en">To be clear, I am not objecting here to a person's choice of pronouns
but to the inappropriate use of the verbs that accompany them. As I have written <a href="https://dbalablog.blogspot.com/2023/03/you-say-tetra-i-say-quadri-lets-call.html" target="_blank">elsewhere</a>, I respect the
right of everyone to identify herself, himself, or themself
in any way that she or he or they chooses to. Indeed, I do not
regard it as "woke" so much as common courtesy to respect the wishes of
each person to be addressed and identified as she, he or they wishes.
(And I say this not only as someone who bristles when people
presume to call me "Dave" rather than by my real name - David - but as someone who legally changed his last
name as an act of public repudiation of what I had long regarded as the ethnic self-abnegation of my forebears.) <br /></span></span></span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="x11i5rnm xat24cr x1mh8g0r x1vvkbs xtlvy1s"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">So much for "they." Secondly,
I was flabbergasted to hear Professor Fridland use the expression
"flash forward" (at 4:40 in the interview). No! No! No! It is "<i>fast </i>forward" - not "flash forward." This expression is used metaphorically -
as Fridland used it - but comes, unless I am completely mistaken about this,
from tape cassette players which included a "Play" button, a "Stop"
button, a "Rewind" button and - you guessed it - a "Fast Forward"
button. If one wanted to quickly advance the tape, one would press
"Fast Forward," hence the use of this phrase to mean rapidly advancing
and skipping over the contents of something in order to get to the desired location much later on or farther along in
the sequence. "Fast forward" is therefore now used synonymously with phrases such as "skipping ahead to the present time. . .," or "bringing us up to the present moment. . . ." "Flash forward" seems to be a corruption of "fast forward" and it also seems to be used exclusively by young people - at least, I have only ever heard young people use it. This tends to confirm what I suspect is the cause of the change from "fast forward" to "flash forward," namely, the fact that most young people
nowadays have never even seen, let alone operated, a tape cassette player. They are, however, familiar with flash drives. It is my hypothesis, therefore, that their familiarity with this more contemporary recording technology is the source of the corruption of "fast forward" into the increasingly prevalent "flash forward." I also have to
infer from her use of "flash forward" that Fridland falls into the
category of post-boomer. </div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"> </div></div><div class="x11i5rnm xat24cr x1mh8g0r x1vvkbs xtlvy1s"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">The broader point of Fridland's comments and, I assume, of her recent
book, is that, because language is always changing and because this change reflects a natural process - the <i>organic development </i>of language cited above -
one should respect neologisms and new constructions and be less dogmatic
about English. Fair enough. But this raises another point which is my
third pet peeve. Namely, if language is always
changing, including its grammatical rules, the meaning of words, etc.,
then why even bother teaching grammar in the first place? Why teach
English as a subject to native English speakers? When I was in elementary school, we all laboriously diagrammed
sentences and learned what words to use, how to use them and how not to
use them. Was that all a gigantic waste of time? It seems as though what Fridland is arguing is that every usage is valid. Anything goes. This would be consistent with what one of my English
professors back in college stated, namely, that dictionaries are
descriptive, rather than prescriptive. As it happens, though, this is emphatically <i>not</i> what Fridland is arguing. As she explained to me, </div><blockquote><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">Language is self-sustaining and a remarkable and highly rule
governed system - just not by the rules we tend to think of when we talk
about 'language rules' typically. People often mistake linguists to be
saying there are no rules, but this is far from true. Language can't
operate without cognitive and articulatory rules that are deeply tied to
how we understand and produce language. . . . Natural inherent linguistic rules . . . allow language to keep thriving and changing without losing meaning
or utility. . . . </div></blockquote><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span class="x193iq5w xeuugli x13faqbe x1vvkbs xlh3980 xvmahel x1n0sxbx x1lliihq x1s928wv xhkezso x1gmr53x x1cpjm7i x1fgarty x1943h6x xudqn12 x3x7a5m x6prxxf xvq8zen xo1l8bm xzsf02u" dir="auto" lang="en">These "inherent linguistic rules" differ, then, from "the social rules that have just become what we <i>like </i>to do [but do not reflect] what we <i>need</i> to do as language speakers."</span></span></span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span class="x193iq5w xeuugli x13faqbe x1vvkbs xlh3980 xvmahel x1n0sxbx x1lliihq x1s928wv xhkezso x1gmr53x x1cpjm7i x1fgarty x1943h6x xudqn12 x3x7a5m x6prxxf xvq8zen xo1l8bm xzsf02u" dir="auto" lang="en"> </span></span></span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span class="x193iq5w xeuugli x13faqbe x1vvkbs xlh3980 xvmahel x1n0sxbx x1lliihq x1s928wv xhkezso x1gmr53x x1cpjm7i x1fgarty x1943h6x xudqn12 x3x7a5m x6prxxf xvq8zen xo1l8bm xzsf02u" dir="auto" lang="en">So perhaps it's not unreasonable to say that, at least to some extent, the rules of grammar that we all struggle with are <i>constructs</i> (and, therefore, artificially rigid) in a way that the "cognitive and articulatory rules" to which Fridland refers are not. If I understand her correctly, what Fridland is saying is that the formal rules of grammar - <i>as taught</i> - differ from the inherent logical rules of language itself. I can accept that. But if that is true, then I still maintain that no
professor or grade-school teacher should ever again wield the red pen when grading a
student's paper and criticize or "correct" her grammar, spelling,
punctuation or (alleged) misuse of a word.</span></span></span></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span class="x193iq5w xeuugli x13faqbe x1vvkbs xlh3980 xvmahel x1n0sxbx x1lliihq x1s928wv xhkezso x1gmr53x x1cpjm7i x1fgarty x1943h6x xudqn12 x3x7a5m x6prxxf xvq8zen xo1l8bm xzsf02u" dir="auto" lang="en"> </span></span></span> <br /></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;">One last point - you'll notice that I used the pronoun "her" rather than
"their" just now to refer to an individual of unspecified sex or gender. As much as I
loathe the use of "them," "they" and "their" in the singular, I also appreciate
that the universal "he" or "him" when used to refer to an unidentified individual
reflects the patriarchal and sexist roots of our society and actually perpetuates patriarchy and sexism by reinforcing the concept that maleness is
the standard or the default in relation to which everything else is a subsidiary variation. Accordingly, for decades now I have (with rare exceptions) used "her" or
"she" instead of "him" or "he." It's true that feminine pronouns are
not inclusive and therefore "privilege" females, however, I figure that
white males have enjoyed the benefits of affirmative action in language as in most other things for at least 5,000 years so it's probably time to give someone else a chance.</div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><br /></div><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: small;"><i>Revised, and with grateful acknowledgement to Professor Valerie M. Fridland, Ph.D., on 30 April 2023</i></span><br /></div></div></span></span></span></div><p><span style="font-family: times;">* * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * *
* *<br /></span></p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><i><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/s365/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="299" data-original-width="365" height="163" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/w200-h163/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" width="200" /></a></div></i></span><i>David
Balashinsky is originally from New York City and now lives near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. He is a licensed physical therapist and writes about bodily autonomy and
human rights, gender, culture, and politics. </i></span><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i>He currently serves on the board of directors for the <a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">Genital Autonomy Legal Defense & Education Fund</a>, (GALDEF),</i></span> the board of
directors and advisors for <a href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" target="_blank">Doctors Opposing Circumcision</a> and the leadership team for <a href="https://www.bruchim.online/" target="_blank">Bruchim</a>.</i></span></i></span> <br /><p><br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-22618891671276110242023-03-06T10:50:00.012-08:002023-04-30T05:41:39.172-07:00You Say "Tetra-"; I Say "Quadri-". . . Let's Call the Whole Thing Off<p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: small;">by <b>David Balashinsky</b></span></span><br /></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">As a physical therapist, one of my responsibilities - to my patients and to the profession - is to keep learning. Whether it's to learn about new developments in the field or treatment techniques with which I might not be familiar, I am obligated to take continuing education courses. (I am also legally required</span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"> to do so, just as most licensed healthcare professionals are, </span></span>as a condition for renewal of my license every three years.) These are generally lectures online or in person that can last from as little as a couple hours to several days and that cover myriad topics related to physical therapy. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Physical therapy, incidentally, is a great field, not least because it is so rewarding for the therapist and beneficial to the patient but because it addresses so many different types of diagnoses and encompasses so many different types of treatment techniques. Physical therapists treat patients with strokes, cancer, fractures, joint replacements, pelvic-floor dysfunction, neuropathies, vestibular problems, amputations and many other conditions, as well. They treat the young and the old, female, intersex, male, gay, straight, transgender, cisgender and everything in between and beyond. The number and type of continuing "ed" courses available, therefore, is as vast and diverse as the diagnoses and patient populations it is our privilege to serve.<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">One of the most serious types of injuries that physical therapists treat are spinal cord injuries. Most people are fortunate enough not to have to cope with the day-to-day challenges of living with a spinal cord injury (SCI) or even to think about what that might be like. The <a href="https://www.nscisc.uab.edu/" target="_blank">statistics</a>, by themselves, do not adequately convey a sense of the gravity of this condition. For that, I encourage you to listen to <a href="https://facingdisability.com/" target="_blank">first-person accounts of people living with SCI</a>. But, for what it's worth, there are roughly 300,000 people with SCIs living in the United States. Interestingly, the sex identification of about 78% of all new reported cases of SCI (since 2015) is male. Motor vehicle accidents are the leading cause of SCI followed by falls, but other <a href="https://www.nscisc.uab.edu/public/Facts%20and%20Figures%202022%20-%20English%20Final.pdf" target="_blank">"common" causes</a> are acts of violence (primarily gunshot injuries) and injuries resulting from sports and recreational activities. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The type and severity of SCIs are categorized according to a system of classification established by the <i><b><a href="https://asia-spinalinjury.org/" target="_blank">American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA)</a></b></i>. This system, which is known as the <i><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8152171/" target="_blank">International Standards for Neurological Classification of Spinal Cord Injury (ISNCSCI)</a></i> is used throughout the United States and abroad and is considered <a href="https://asia-spinalinjury.org/learning/" target="_blank">"the gold standard"</a> for SCI classification. (</span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The <i>ISNCSCI</i> includes the <i><a href="https://asia-spinalinjury.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/ASIA-ISCOS-Worksheet_10.2019_PRINT-Page-1-2.pdf" target="_blank">ASIA Impairment Scale [AIS]</a></i> but, although </span></span>the <i>AIS</i> classification of SCI is derived from and, therefore, constitutes just one part - a major part but, still, only one part - of the battery of sensory and motor testing that comprise the <i>ISNCSCI</i>, in the jargon of healthcare "the ASIA" has come to be used to refer broadly to the <i>ISNCSCI</i> itself.) <br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">I was introduced to the <i>ISNCSCI</i> and the <i>AIS</i> in physical therapy school but it was only an introduction. </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">In a class on inpatient rehabilitation, we
watched a video that demonstrated how to perform the
elements of "the ASIA," one of which is to insert a gloved index
finger into an anus in order to check for sensation to deep anal pressure and voluntary
contraction of the external anal sphincter. (The thing I remember most
about this is one of my classmates asking if he could please watch that
part of the video again.)</span></span> Like much if not most of what one learns in a physical therapy program, this was just an introduction to material that one cannot possibly hope to master without additional training and, above all, experience - preferably under the guidance of more experienced therapists. Although I have worked with SCI patients over the years, the inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) where I work does not typically receive patients during the acute phase of their (newly diagnosed) spinal cord injuries. Largely for this reason, I have not had occasion to use the <i>ISNCSCI</i> and have never acquired what I felt was a sufficient grasp of how to administer it and how to interpret its results. This is why I chose, a couple weeks ago, to enroll in a series of continuing ed courses devoted to SCI and to "the ASIA."<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">It was while taking these courses that I was reminded that there has been an effort underway by the leading authorities on SCI to replace the term "quadriplegia" - which is how most of us, at least here in the United States, know it - with "tetraplegia." These words mean the exact same thing and are <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8152171/" target="_blank">defined</a> as </span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">impairment or loss of motor and/or sensory function in the cervical segments of the spinal cord due to damage of neural elements within the spinal canal. Tetraplegia results in impairment of function in the arms as well as typically in the trunk, legs, and pelvic organs. . . .</span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">For a long time, I have been dimly aware of the fact that there is an official policy of preference for "tetraplegia" over "quadriplegia." Revisiting these topics, I discovered that the <i>ISNCSCI</i> <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8152171/" target="_blank">explicitly says so</a>. What I have not known is why. Seeing "tetraplegia" used again and again in these courses rekindled my interest in understanding the <i>reason</i> for this change in nomenclature. I was finally able to find an explanation for it on the website of the online organization, <i><b><a href="http://facingdisability.com">facingdisability.com</a></b></i>:</span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">We get asked about this subject a lot, “What’s the difference between quadriplegia and tetraplegia?” </span></span></p></blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">
</span></span><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Surprisingly, there isn’t any difference in meaning. Both words apply
to paralysis of all four limbs. And both terms are used
interchangeably these days.</span></span></p></blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">
</span></span><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The difference is in the derivation of the words. The word “Quadri”
means four in Latin; the word “Plegia” means paralysis in Greek. So
the roots of the word “quadriplegia” which means paralysis in all four
limbs, come from both Latin and Greek. It combines two different
languages.</span></span></p></blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">
</span></span><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The Greek word for four is “Tetra.” Combine that with “plegia” and
you have a word with Greek roots for both halves. The British have
always used the term “Tetraplegia” for four-limb paralysis, so they are
not combining Latin and Greek words.</span></span></p></blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">
</span></span><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span id="more-1347"></span></span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">
</span></span><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Such distinctions are important to the English, but Americans don’t
seem to mind. Although there was a movement in the 1990’s to try to
adopt “tetraplegia” in America, it never really caught on outside of the
medical literature.</span></span></p></blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">
</span></span><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">That’s why most Americans still continue to refer to “quad rugby,”
for example, and why the word “quadriplegia” remains in common use.</span></span></p></blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">
</span></span><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Incidentally, since “para” is the Greek word for two, and “plegia” is
Greek for paralysis the word “paraplegia” all comes from the same
language of origin—Greek.</span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">As much as I revere (and generally comport myself with due deference to) experts and expertise, I am also, by nature, highly skeptical of (and even hostile to) neologisms. This holds as much for those that fall from the spires of ivory towers as it does for those that arise from the propagation bed of vernacular. Learning the reason, therefore (and at long last), for the use of "tetra-" versus "quadri-"elicited from me an especially large eye-roll. Could the clash of civilizations that threatened to result from the pairing of the Latin "quadri-" with the Greek "-plegia" possibly matter less? Are the Barbarians - with their battle axes and their "quadri-" - not just at the gate but inside, and in need of expulsion? (Except, of course, that the Barbarians, in this case, are not the Greeks but the Romans themselves. And, in any case, the civilizations of antiquity frequently learned and borrowed from one another.) </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">I am a language purist as much as anyone but I am also an American: after this initial reaction, my patriotism took hold of me. I take pride in the fact that every person in this country is or is the descendant of immigrants, including Native Americans who were themselves "immigrants" in the Americas (long before they were "the Americas") many thousands of years before the Vikings and the Europeans were, and that, perhaps more than any other nation on Earth, the United States is woven from the myriad cultures, ethnicities, races and nationalities that make up the ornate tapestry of the American body politic. I admit it: I am one of those who believe that diversity is a positive good. When I was young, the concept of "the melting pot" was instilled in us as part of our civics instruction in elementary school. After Alex Haley (and many others) and the recognition that what "melting pot" <i>really</i> meant was Anglo-conformity, that metaphor was replaced by one which was much more apt. This one - "a gorgeous mosaic" - <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1990/01/03/opinion/the-mosaic-thing.html" target="_blank">was popularized by David Dinkens, although apparently it was coined by Mario Cuomo, who referred to my home town, New York City, and to the United States as "a magnificent mosaic."</a> This concept - the mingling of people and cultures as coequals in which their individual identities are retained and honored yet, at the same time, are subsumed within a single whole for the greater good - I believe is epitomized by the word "quadriplegia." It is a word that marries two languages and two cultures; it is like Cleopatra and Mark Antony. Opposition to the use of "quadriplegia" on the basis of its impurity seems as contrary to my view of people and America and is almost as offensive to my values as are anti-miscegenation laws.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Then, there is the problem that well-meaning efforts to change terminology often just fall flat for other reasons. The prefix "tetra" is undeniably beautiful in and of itself. It elicits associations with such naturally elegant structures as tetrahedrons and such beautiful creatures as "tetras" (short for <i><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetra" target="_blank">tetragonopterus</a></i>). Contrast "tetraplegia," however, with another recent effort to change the medical nomenclature from "stroke" (or cerebral vascular accident - CVA) to "brain attack." Yes, that really happened. A number of years ago, there was a similar effort to begin using "brain attack" to describe a stroke on the principle that the etiology (at least in the case of an ischemic stroke, which is caused by the obstruction of blood flow through an artery) is the same as that which results in a heart attack. </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">(In contrast, a hemorrhagic stroke results from the rupture of a blood vessel so it's unclear to me whether "brain attack" advocates intended that this should refer to both ischemic and hemorrhagic strokes or merely to those that had in common with heart attacks a mechanism involving an arterial blockage.) </span></span>Like "tetraplegia," "brain attack" never caught on, possibly because it sounds less like a medical diagnosis than like the title of a trashy 1950s science fiction movie. Still, this example should stand as a warning to all who would attempt to change diagnostic terms from those that are near and dear to our hearts to those that are alien. <br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Of course, most of the medical terminology that has come down to us <a href="https://www.medicalacademic.co.za/news/the-history-of-medical-terminology/" target="_blank">comes from both Greek and Latin</a>. Moreover, there are plenty of words <a href="https://www.homeofbob.com/health/wordRootsAndAnatomy.html" target="_blank">in common use that combine Greek and Latin elements</a>. Words such as "appendicitis," dehydration," and "mononuclear." "Mononucleosis" is created from first a Greek element (monos), then a Latin element (nucleus), and then another Greek element (osis). I don't see anyone rushing to purify these terms by converting them to either all-Greek-based or all-Latin-based elements.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">For me, what matters most - what <i>should</i> matter most - is what people living with SCI themselves prefer. I sought the answer to that by joining several SCI support groups on Facebook, identifying myself as a physical therapist and posting a query as to whether anyone had a preference for either "quadriplegia" or "tetraplegia" and, if so, why. Although I did not get a large response (so my informal survey has no scientific validity whatsoever), the consensus seemed to be that we should leave well enough alone and stick with "quadriplegia." I did receive one particularly thoughtful and illuminating reply from someone who, though she had not herself sustained a spinal cord injury, was a close family member of someone who had. As it happens, she also identified herself as a Latin teacher and a classicist and she therefore began her response by acknowledging her familiarity "with the problematic Greek-and-Latin combining phenomenon in English words," adding that "it bothers some language fans more than others." (I replied that I could hardly imagine anyone being better suited to answer my question.) This respondent ultimately expressed a preference for "tetraplegia," explaining that "I favor 'tetraplegic' because it is unfamiliar-sounding and the first feeling I have on hearing it is curiosity, not fear."<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">What is notable about that response is that it validates this person's own feelings and lived experience relative to SCI, rather than falling back on deference to authority. That puts her sentiments in line with those who express a preference for "quadriplegia." Both are equally valid and it is my intention, going forward, to respect that preference, whichever it may be. None of what I have learned recently has undermined my belief that the right of patients and of all individuals to choose their own identifiers, names and designations (and, yes, even their own pronouns) should always be respected.</span></span><br /></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgm69KNOxfkVHcx4bAaOzJs4_jqjwJJT_KMdkCrPyCAGfcd89LQ6VWqVShhhfuYJvWT7V7JTt4y3qdGe9E_eidDsovj0rqaj9IPoY4MBRpjQ1bOS-Qwvp9zkWK91Z3Ta34CniHdNrUad_J5xQDKCMG63jCFywBguLbR7h4NZqxnQrCJfTqGa75uptVb/s401/Screen%20Shot%202023-03-06%20at%2010.47.13%20AM.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="401" data-original-width="269" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgm69KNOxfkVHcx4bAaOzJs4_jqjwJJT_KMdkCrPyCAGfcd89LQ6VWqVShhhfuYJvWT7V7JTt4y3qdGe9E_eidDsovj0rqaj9IPoY4MBRpjQ1bOS-Qwvp9zkWK91Z3Ta34CniHdNrUad_J5xQDKCMG63jCFywBguLbR7h4NZqxnQrCJfTqGa75uptVb/s320/Screen%20Shot%202023-03-06%20at%2010.47.13%20AM.png" width="215" /></a></div><br /><p><span style="font-family: times;">* * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * *
* *<br /></span></p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><i><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/s365/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="299" data-original-width="365" height="163" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/w200-h163/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" width="200" /></a></div></i></span><i>David
Balashinsky is originally from New York City and now lives near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. He is a licensed physical therapist and writes about bodily autonomy and
human rights, gender, culture, and politics. </i></span><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i>He currently serves on the board of directors for the <a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">Genital Autonomy Legal Defense & Education Fund</a>, (GALDEF),</i></span> the board of
directors and advisors for <a href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" target="_blank">Doctors Opposing Circumcision</a> and the leadership team for <a href="https://www.bruchim.online/" target="_blank">Bruchim</a>.</i></span></i></span> <br /><p></p><br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-41244696687165298082023-02-06T07:00:00.009-08:002023-02-13T03:20:32.604-08:00GALDEF STATEMENT ON THE INTERNATIONAL DAY OF ZERO TOLERANCE FOR FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION<p><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: times;">by <b>David Balashinsky </b> </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">February 6, 2023 is the twelfth anniversary of the <i>International Day of Zero Tolerance for Female Genital Mutilation</i>. This annual observance was established by the United Nations General Assembly as an occasion <a href="https://www.unicef.org/documents/international-day-zero-tolerance-female-genital-mutilation-2023" target="_blank">"to raise awareness, renew commitments and reiterate that female genital mutilation is an unacceptable harmful practice and a violation of women and girls' basic human rights."</a> <br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The <i><a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">Genital Autonomy Legal Defense and Education Fund</a></i> (<b>GALDEF</b>) supports the United Nations' goal of ending female genital cutting (FGC) worldwide. We agree that FGC is an inherently harmful practice that violates the fundamental right to bodily integrity of those who are subjected to it. As our <a href="https://www.galdef.org/values-statement/" target="_blank">Values Statement</a> makes clear, <b>GALDEF</b> stands in full "solidarity with female and intersex victims of genital cutting. . . ." Likewise, the United Nations' goal of eradicating FGC is consistent with <b>GALDEF</b>'s <a href="https://www.galdef.org/mission-vision/" target="_blank">Vision</a>: "To create a world where the rights of children to bodily integrity and future autonomy over their genitals and their sexuality are respected."</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">In light of our Values and Vision, <b>GALDEF</b> believes that it is incumbent upon us to join the many voices around the globe on February 6 calling for an end to FGC and we are proud to do so. At the same time, we believe that it is equally incumbent upon us to point out - and equally incumbent upon the international community to recognize - the ongoing disparity between the widespread condemnation of genital cutting of girls (or people with vulvas) and the continued tolerance of genital cutting of boys (or people with penises) and intersex children. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">We believe it is necessary to call attention to this disparity in part because of the harmful effects it is having on efforts to end FGC, itself. As the universal right (irrespective of sex) to genital autonomy has gained popularity, the position that genital cutting of girls should be prohibited under all circumstances while genital cutting of boys should continue to be permitted has become untenable. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2d-VP9E6Kxk" target="_blank">In recognition of this changing cultural landscape, defenders of male genital cutting (MGC) are therefore increasingly arguing that certain "benign" forms of FGC should be permitted.</a> At the same time, the widespread medicalization of MGC in the United States has provided a convenient model for proponents of FGC. The result is that, more and more, <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/hospitals-increasingly-carrying-out-female-genital-mutilation-procedures-298739" target="_blank">FGC is being performed by medical professionals, </a>undermining efforts to eliminate this practice. In both of these ways, then, the continued tolerance for MGC will only undermine efforts to end FGC.<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Apart from these practical, strategic concerns, however, is the matter of basic fairness and equitable treatment. Paradoxically, the United Nations' official theme for this year's observance of the <i>International Day of Zero Tolerance for Female Genital Mutilation</i> is<a href="https://www.unicef.org/media/133866/file/FGM-Key-Messages-2023-EN.pdf" target="_blank"> "Partnership with Men and Boys to Transform Social and Gender Norms to End Female Genital Mutilation." </a> Yet, while it is estimated that about 250 million girls and women worldwide have been subjected to genital cutting, it is also estimated that about one billion boys and men worldwide have been subjected to genital cutting. It is unknown how many intersex individuals worldwide have been subjected to intersex genital cutting (IGC).<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">We do not believe that a moral distinction can be made between the medically unnecessary genital cutting of children based upon nothing more than a child's sex or the appearance of that child's genitals. <b>GALDEF</b> believes that all children, regardless of sex, have a fundamental and inherent right not to have their genitals cut, scarred or surgically modified in any way without their consent and when not urgently and medically indicated. By the same token, we do not believe that the goal of ending FGC is "trivialized" or efforts to end it undermined in any way by making common cause with the movements to end MGC and IGC but, rather, will only be strengthened by doing so. A moral principle is always more powerful when applied universally. If the United Nations is to succeed in situating its campaign of zero tolerance for FGM on a solid moral foundation and if it is to succeed in its goal of ending FGM, it will have to revise its policy of tolerance for male genital cutting and adopt a position of universal respect for genital autonomy, regardless of sex.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">It is in this spirit of universal respect for genital autonomy and in observance of the <i>International Day of Zero Tolerance for Female Genital Mutilation</i>, February 6, 2023, that <b>GALDEF</b> reiterates its support of the right of genital autonomy for girls and for <i>all</i> children and calls upon all people of good will who value human rights to do the same.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhy_G8iz1NLjyxwPm36l8yoG8aTKPDJ2Lysn4paFP3zc_EAwsIOM8PlAz894TEcm_BjVcFtQHyVuChB3NaUumpPyPIdlgpsALqKCYXk2-pnHQISetMEoGCBQTgvhJSMHkZrV9AYyKVg9BN4FZU4VVjuOuv01sCe9ymbNSYXepbZbB_aATeaqEqx5U4X/s831/Screen%20Shot%202023-02-06%20at%207.09.28%20AM.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="817" data-original-width="831" height="197" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhy_G8iz1NLjyxwPm36l8yoG8aTKPDJ2Lysn4paFP3zc_EAwsIOM8PlAz894TEcm_BjVcFtQHyVuChB3NaUumpPyPIdlgpsALqKCYXk2-pnHQISetMEoGCBQTgvhJSMHkZrV9AYyKVg9BN4FZU4VVjuOuv01sCe9ymbNSYXepbZbB_aATeaqEqx5U4X/w200-h197/Screen%20Shot%202023-02-06%20at%207.09.28%20AM.png" width="200" /></a></span></div><span style="font-size: medium;"></span><br /><p><span style="font-family: times;">* * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * *
* *<br /></span></p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><i><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/s365/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="299" data-original-width="365" height="163" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/w200-h163/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" width="200" /></a></div></i></span><i>David
Balashinsky is originally from New York City and now lives near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. He is a licensed physical therapist and writes about bodily autonomy and
human rights, gender, culture, and politics. </i></span><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i>He currently serves on the board of directors for the <a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">Genital Autonomy Legal Defense & Education Fund</a>, (GALDEF),</i></span> the board of
directors and advisors for <a href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" target="_blank">Doctors Opposing Circumcision</a> and the leadership team for <a href="https://www.bruchim.online/" target="_blank">Bruchim</a>.</i></span></i><br /> </span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"></span></span><p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></p><br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-54011294684486836322023-01-03T05:29:00.003-08:002023-01-08T05:07:07.457-08:00One Cat's Short Life and Thoughts for 2023<p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: small;">by<b> David Balashinsky</b></span></span><br /></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">On New Year's Day, 2023, my wife received a call from the office manager of the animal hospital where she works as a veterinarian. The day before, after hours, someone had dropped off a sick stray or feral kitten. The kitten had been placed in a cloth carrier and left outside by one of the entrances. (Note to people who dump animals, including Good Samaritans: leaving a sick animal in a
carrier overnight in the dead of winter without food or water is a terrible idea.) Although the hospital was closed for the holiday weekend, by chance, the office manager had gone in to attend to some outstanding clerical work. That is the only reason the kitten was still alive when she found him. By then it was obvious that the kitten needed either urgent veterinary care to save his life or euthanasia to spare him needless suffering. After placing him in a cage with food and water and covering him with towels, the office manager called my wife. When the call came, we were both hunkered down, so we thought, for the rest of the day.<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">If you have dogs and cats living with you, as we do, one of the fringe benefits of being married to a veterinarian is free house-calls. On the other hand, being married to a vet has imposed obligations on me that I never imagined I would have to assume. For example, I always accompany my wife whenever she goes to the animal hospital on an emergency call in the middle of the night. I do this not only for her safety and to provide moral support but because there are no overnight staff at the hospital. Accordingly, there are times when I have to assume the role of veterinary assistant, also. Once, many years ago, my wife had to go in at about 2:00 in the morning in order to euthanize a hopelessly ill, elderly dog. I had to assist her while she ran the IV and injected the drug. My wife dealt with this almost as if it were nothing. For an experienced vet, this was standard protocol: the dog was beyond hope so euthanizing him was the only humane course of action. I, however, had never even witnessed a euthanasia, let alone having assisted in one. My job was to restrain the dog and apply pressure to one of the veins in his right foreleg while my wife inserted the needle (although he was so docile that it was more like embracing him than restraining him). He was about forty pounds, had grey shaggy fur and large brown eyes. </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">I
will never forget the searing emotional conflict between the pity that I felt for this dog
and the guilt that I felt for my role in ending his life.</span></span> And I will never forget how trusting, innocent and unknowing of his fate he seemed in his final moments. When it was done, I sobbed and sobbed and sobbed.<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">I wonder if the public fully appreciates the toll being a veterinarian can take on someone. What emotional fortitude must it take to end an animal's life, even though euthanasia is almost always the ethical choice (and my wife has a strict policy against performing "convenience" euthanasias). What degree of commitment and self-sacrifice are required to get up at 2:00 in the morning or simply to drop everything on a crappy New Year's day in order to attend to an animal in need. I am reluctant to cheapen these reflections with any mention of money but I also think, in fairness to veterinarians everywhere (and to my wife), that it should not go unacknowledged that, in cases like this, there is no compensation because there is no bill. (Who would it be sent to?) The ministrations with which my wife rang in the new year were performed strictly for the sake of the kitten's welfare.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Here is a picture of him:</span></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_d-O7u1xiwaDQQ3ipPcI3_Bpr_gDX9gPbV31rXP6EfQaZLYW8xgQt3LbrUkFj8tDHIjdF9Sl92Zt8REeO_QaWgZfYXoDNWxz3blzKmWQfeVu-bMQronynqYBiDMp9EWVFYjShxL9dDbTAVrCdftb16uYxcJYPpxuF6AdqCYwPb-2MAdzqZ7YrMPjC/s640/thumbnail_IMG_0255.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="480" data-original-width="640" height="222" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_d-O7u1xiwaDQQ3ipPcI3_Bpr_gDX9gPbV31rXP6EfQaZLYW8xgQt3LbrUkFj8tDHIjdF9Sl92Zt8REeO_QaWgZfYXoDNWxz3blzKmWQfeVu-bMQronynqYBiDMp9EWVFYjShxL9dDbTAVrCdftb16uYxcJYPpxuF6AdqCYwPb-2MAdzqZ7YrMPjC/w320-h222/thumbnail_IMG_0255.jpg" width="320" /></a> <br /></span></span></div><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">These are the most likely and obvious conditions from which, according to my wife, this kitten was suffering. He had an upper respiratory tract infection (the mucus dripping from his nose is visible in the picture above). He had pneumonia. He had fleabite anemia (fleas do not just cause itching and irritation to the skin but feed on their host's blood). He had hypothermia. He was malnourished and emaciated (he weighed under two pounds yet, based upon his likely age, which my wife was able to gauge by his teeth, he should have weighed five or six). He had diarrhea and his gut had likely been colonized by intestinal parasites.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Here are some pictures of my wife attending to him:</span></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVHBRMvov9nPfPSoa7NrJgFB8XcRB1FFEykna6Myy5LffCHbUalOQAofX12ts80Q3C_6pRb3mMA3wOeXrVdI5qSonh20Uv-Q0mjUl8IeD1Vx0Q7MZz4B4SM4hNdp6KHihlyAOdFasgK-nrxYNdw94oaELpq8EsCi5mKOjkONH8Ajg4UmW9GufUxGRs/s640/thumbnail_IMG_0254.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="480" data-original-width="640" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjVHBRMvov9nPfPSoa7NrJgFB8XcRB1FFEykna6Myy5LffCHbUalOQAofX12ts80Q3C_6pRb3mMA3wOeXrVdI5qSonh20Uv-Q0mjUl8IeD1Vx0Q7MZz4B4SM4hNdp6KHihlyAOdFasgK-nrxYNdw94oaELpq8EsCi5mKOjkONH8Ajg4UmW9GufUxGRs/s320/thumbnail_IMG_0254.jpg" width="320" /></a></span></span></div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><br /></span></span><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjBaCGcVQeEITeImWdUW88uVsmDzgvFwV10Ba6PL52UXweFGnxyZUV6JT8NjoWC2Cshkn2QcwlCN_GWHKokhhqRS6Jzq5ieSB4D77i9T0T5CMLHs32DCsOpBEuAaWbOUyb4Bc2QOEk3OTw-Q6UtDXnHfgSug4ABuSZa2Tj6ilYWLPy_Zmk8JBTocHA9/s640/thumbnail_IMG_0256.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="480" data-original-width="640" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjBaCGcVQeEITeImWdUW88uVsmDzgvFwV10Ba6PL52UXweFGnxyZUV6JT8NjoWC2Cshkn2QcwlCN_GWHKokhhqRS6Jzq5ieSB4D77i9T0T5CMLHs32DCsOpBEuAaWbOUyb4Bc2QOEk3OTw-Q6UtDXnHfgSug4ABuSZa2Tj6ilYWLPy_Zmk8JBTocHA9/s320/thumbnail_IMG_0256.jpg" width="320" /></a></span></span></div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><br /></span></span><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiakPwWGshFJ4XamVWztNLlYp82qJ2MLyNO3m8mErFuUxE223y2-PMazGiTFQu2VaWgkw14HgswdYxisfs5aR9h0-ZBgZQu9Y6gbriIsXiq--VsoESCmqYrfjMzSscZG8GGeTHsWp3UnUSqIKer8RfxzL8CAT5pGweSugDHgqWavzRiBN3je35iVGwQ/s640/thumbnail_IMG_0257.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="480" data-original-width="640" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiakPwWGshFJ4XamVWztNLlYp82qJ2MLyNO3m8mErFuUxE223y2-PMazGiTFQu2VaWgkw14HgswdYxisfs5aR9h0-ZBgZQu9Y6gbriIsXiq--VsoESCmqYrfjMzSscZG8GGeTHsWp3UnUSqIKer8RfxzL8CAT5pGweSugDHgqWavzRiBN3je35iVGwQ/s320/thumbnail_IMG_0257.jpg" width="320" /></a> <br /></span></span></div><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">My wife quickly got to work providing the emergency treatments that would be needed to save the kitten's life. All I could do, besides petting him and trying my best to comfort him when my wife wasn't working on him, was look on in awe. I felt privileged, although it came at an enormous cost for the kitten, to be a witness to the drama unfolding before me. I was reminded of the enormous admiration I have for my wife's skill and dedication. I allowed myself to hope that she could save the kitten's life and it occurred to me that watching her do it was probably among the best possible ways I could spend New Year's Day. This entire holiday season, after all, is my favorite time of year because I regard it as a time of renewal, rebirth, and new beginnings. I am always on the lookout for the deeper meaning in things and this kitten's struggle to survive and my wife's valiant efforts to save him seemed the ideal source for a homily about what the holiday season really means. I had already begun mentally composing it - the kitten's new lease on life would serve as a metaphor for the new year while my wife, by virtue of her diligence, generosity, and steadiness under trying circumstances, would serve as a paragon of how we ought to approach the new year, and life in general - when the kitten commenced his death throes and suddenly, quickly and quietly expired.<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Nature is heartless. Life itself sometimes seems sadistically cruel. What I had hoped would serve as an uplifting story with which to inaugurate 2023 became, instead, like so many other stories, one that ended in defeat and in death. I was ready to forget the whole miserable episode. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">But maybe the more important meaning in this is that, although success is never guaranteed, we still have to try. What if the Good Samaritan, misguided as she or he was, had not even bothered to try to rescue the kitten? Its fate would have been sealed. What if my wife had not intervened with emergency measures to try to save his life? It would have ended just the same but without the modicum of comfort that we were able to provide the kitten during its final hours. If 2023 doesn't look all that promising, that only means that we need to muster more resoluteness, more courage and more commitment to ending suffering, saving lives, expanding rights and making the world a better place, even though, sometimes, we will fail. Because, sometimes, we succeed. That's the thought I intend to carry with me into 2023.</span></span><br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-25183654184636588892022-11-01T10:44:00.005-07:002022-11-20T06:15:36.593-08:00Dear Rachel E. Gross: Welcome to Our World<p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: small;">by <b>David Balashinsky </b></span><br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The <i>New York Times</i> recently published an article by Rachel E. Gross, "<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/17/health/clitoris-sex-doctors-surgery.html" target="_blank">Half the World Has a Clitoris. Why Don't Doctors Study It?</a>" As stated in its subheading,</span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"> the premise of Gross's article is that</span></span> the clitoris is "'completely ignored by pretty much everyone,' . . . and that omission can be devastating to women's sexual health." One of the leading experts in the field of sexual medicine whom Gross interviews uses the metaphor of "a small town in the Midwest" to describe the prevailing attitude among physicians about the vulva. Paraphrasing him, Gross writes, "Doctors tend to pass through it, barely looking up, on their way to their destination, the cervix and the uterus." But if the vulva "is an underappreciated city," Gross continues, "the clitoris is a local roadside bar: little known, seldom considered, probably best avoided."</span></span><br /></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">On its face, there is nothing wrong with Gross's argument that the clitoris has been given short shrift by the medical profession. No one even marginally familiar with the history of anatomy and the medical profession's historical treatment of women<sup>1 </sup>can be surprised by that. The problem with Gross's article is its underlying assumption that medical knowledge of the clitoris stands in marked contrast to medical knowledge of the penis. More particularly, that physicians' general knowledge of the clitoris is as meager as it is simply because it is proportional to their concern for the sexual pleasure and satisfaction of people with vulvas. This lack of concern, Gross contends, not only contrasts with physicians' concern for the sexual pleasure and satisfaction of people with penises but ultimately is the chief reason for this difference in knowledge. As Gross explains (citing Dr. Rachel Rubin, a urologist and sexual health specialist), the "clitoris is intimately bound up in female pleasure and orgasm. And, until very recently, those themes have not been high on medicine's priority list, nor considered appropriate areas of medical pursuit." </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Reinforcing her argument that, when the medical profession does turn its attention toward women's reproductive health, its orientation is one of disease-prevention or cure (or facilitating or preventing pregnancy) as opposed to women's sexual pleasure, Gross quotes Dr. Frances Grimstad, a gynecologist at Boston Children's Hospital: "We don't do a great job . . . talking about sex from a pleasure-based perspective. We talk about it from a prevention standpoint. . . . We don't talk about sexual pleasure."</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Although the focus of her article is on the clitoris itself, Gross emphasizes the contrast between medicine's putative preoccupation with male sexual pleasure and its indifference to female sexual pleasure:<br /></span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Even in fields like urology, where male sexual pleasure and orgasm are considered integral, women's sexual health "is seen as hysteria, Pandora's box, all psychosocial, not real medicine, said Dr. Rubin. . . . Sexual health and quality of life is not something we focus on for women." (In contrast, Viagra is one of the most lucrative pharmacological drugs in recent decades, bringing in tens of billions of dollars to Pfizer since being introduced in 1998.)<br /></span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">It's
significant that Gross mentions Viagra here, particularly in support of
her thesis that male sexual pleasure and orgasm are of so much greater
concern to physicians than women's sexual pleasure and orgasm are. </span></span>To be clear, Viagra has nothing whatever to do with "male sexual
pleasure" </span></span></span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">and it is not male sexual <i>pleasure</i> but urinary function that is "integral" to urology. Strictly speaking, Viagra doesn't even have anything</span></span></span></span> to do with male orgasm since an erection is not necessary to have one. Yet, </span></span></span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">in
making this reference to a drug that is used exclusively to treat
erectile dysfunction and no other sexual dysfunction that afflicts
people with penises, Gross conflates <i>penile erection</i> with <i>sexual pleasure</i>. In other words, she reduces male sexuality to <i>performance</i>:
erection (and, presumably, ejaculation). This construct reflects and perpetuates traditional patriarchal
concepts of masculinity and masculine sexual prowess in which
penetration and insemination are viewed as paramount while penile <i>sensation</i> is regarded as irrelevant and even detrimental<sup>2</sup> to male sexual performance.</span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">This is entirely consistent with the most glaring and overarching flaw of Gross's article. Namely, that despite the fact that the medical profession has been every bit as indifferent - and, in fact, hostile - to the erotosensory experience of people with penises as it has to the erotosensory experience of people with vulvas, Gross goes out of her way to draw a false contrast between the two. I am not referring to the amount of attention given overall to penises as opposed to the amount given to vulvas in the medical literature, nor</span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"> am I suggesting that people with penises do not have parity with people
with vulvas in medical practice. Far from it. And I
am certainly not demanding inclusion of penises in an article about clitorises. (No, it
doesn't always have to be about men.) Yet, </span></span>virtually everything Gross has written here concerning physicians' lack of regard for the clitoris is equally true, and more so, of their lack of regard for the penile prepuce, or foreskin. In paragraph after paragraph throughout Gross's piece, one could simply replace the word "clitoris" with the phrase "penile foreskin" and practically wind up with a perfectly accurate and cogent article explaining the widespread dearth of medical knowledge of the male prepuce and the hugely deleterious consequences this ignorance has had on the sexuality, the sensory pleasure, the sexual satisfaction, the bodily integrity and the bodily autonomy of people with penises in the United States.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">This is not a trivial comparison, that between the (penile) foreskin and the clitoris. </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The penile prepuce</span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"> comprises up to 50% of the penile skin system. It is a complex, fully vascularized and densely innervated erotogenic structure that contains more
specialized light-touch sensory nerve fibers per unit of area than is found anywhere else on the penis, including the glans. It also plays a critical biomechanical role during intercourse, increasing pleasure for both partners <a href="https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/40/5/1367/658163" target="_blank">while preventing or minimizing dyspareunia for the female</a>. The penile prepuce also serves other functions, including protecting the glans penis, exactly as the female prepuce provides protection for the glans clitoris. In short, the penile prepuce is an integral part of male genitalia. It is no more an <i>adjunct</i> to male genitalia than the clitoris or any other structure is to female genitalia.</span></span></span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"> In fact, <a href="https://bjui-journals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06685.x" target="_blank">the evidence supports the proposition that the penile prepuce is as important to the sexual pleasure and fulfillment of people with penises as the clitoris is to the sexual pleasure and fulfillment of people with vulvas</a>. </span></span>The penile prepuce is indispensable, therefore,
to providing the full range of erotic
sensation, pleasure and fulfillment of which the person who has one is capable. </span></span></span></span></span></span></span><br /></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Notwithstanding the erotosensory similarities between the penile prepuce and the clitoris, Gross treats it as axiomatic that male sexual pleasure and fulfillment are prioritized by physicians whereas female sexual pleasure and fulfillment are not and that this disparate treatment is directly related to the fact </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">that
physicians' knowledge of penile structure is as comprehensive as their
knowledge of clitoral structure is lacking. In support of this proposition, </span></span>Gross documents "a tradition of neglect" of the clitoris. In particular, one of the factors primarily responsible for physician ignorance about the clitoris is simply that information about this body part generally is not included in medical school curricula. "Asked what she learned in medical school about the clitoris," Gross reports, "Dr. Rubin replied, 'Nothing that sticks to my memory. If it got any mention, it would be a side note at best.'" </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Yet, this is no less true of what medical students typically are taught about the penile prepuce. I put this same question (but substituting "clitoris" with "penile prepuce") to George Denniston, MD, MPH, the founder and President of <a href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" target="_blank">Doctors Opposing Circumcision</a>. In an emailed response, Dr. Denniston told me that, when he was in medical school, "to the best of my knowledge, nothing was ever discussed about the clitoris or the male prepuce." </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">This is one physician's experience but it is by no means exceptional. I contacted Adrienne Carmack, MD, a board-certified urologist and author of <i><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Reclaiming-Birth-Rights-Practices-Profession/dp/0990306003/" target="_blank">Reclaiming My Birth Rights</a></i> and <i><a href="https://www.amazon.com/Good-Mommys-Guide-Little-Penis/dp/0990306038" target="_blank">The Good Mommy's Guide to Her Little Boy's Penis</a></i>. (Dr. Carmack also serves on the board of directors of Doctors Opposing Circumcision.) I asked her the following questions: </span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>DB: What did you learn in medical school about the male prepuce?</span></span></span></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">AC: Nothing.</span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">DB: Was it discussed at all?</span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">AC: No.</span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">DB: Were its functions, its sensory capacity and its biomechanical role in intercourse taught to medical students or to interns during rotations?</span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">AC: No. </span></span></p></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">I also spoke with Leif Thompson, MD, a family medicine specialist practicing in Fairbanks, Alaska. Dr. Thompson, likewise, reported having been taught nothing about the penile prepuce in medical school. In a follow-up email to our conversation, Dr. Thompson shared the following:</span></span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">In 1996 I took human anatomy as the standard coursework for medical school training in the MD program at Oregon Health Sciences University. When it came to the section on the pelvic organs I was surprised that the male foreskin was not even mentioned once. Not in the lecture and not in any of the reading material that was prepared for us.<br /></span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">As a medical student I found this odd for two reasons. First, the foreskin is the site of the most common surgery in the United States. At that time, I was guessing that 80% of boys were circumcised, and if you include girls in this population, this surgery was being performed on 40% of the entire US population. Yet this part of the penis was not even mentioned.</span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The second reason I found this odd was, because unlike the male anatomy, the clitoral foreskin was indeed mentioned several times! A much smaller structure, not the site of any routine surgery, and its function, the protection of the clitoris, was mentioned.</span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Gross goes on to explain that, historically, the clitoris has been omitted not merely from medical school lectures but from medical school anatomy
books. As a case in point, </span></span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">she cites the experience of Dr. Helen O'Connell when she was in medical school (in Australia): "In
the 1985 edition of the medical textbook <i>Last's Anatomy</i> that she
studied, a cross-section of the female pelvis omitted the clitoris
entirely. . . ." </span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">This, too, is no different from the treatment accorded the penile foreskin in medical school textbooks.</span></span> A 2004 study entitled "An Analysis of the Accuracy of the Presentation of the Human Penis in Anatomical Source Materials" by Gary L. Harryman, MA (published in <i>Flesh and Blood</i>, edited by Denniston et al. [Kluwer Academic / Plenum Publishers, New York, 2004]; a link to this study can be found <a href="http://www.circumcisionharm.org/index.htm" target="_blank">here)</a> reviewed 90 different sources that included representations of the penis, including "definitions, photos, illustrations and drawings." The study was based on sources "available to medical students and medical professionals in five Los Angeles, California campus bookstores and two biomedical libraries" and included "medical text books, life-sized medical models, medical study aids, medical charts, medical dictionaries, medical encyclopedias, medical catalogues and (medical) general interest books." This is what the study found:</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">In the 90 sources, we found . . . 365 images of the penis. Of these 365 images, [only] 33%, showed anatomically correct depictions of the foreskin, while . . . 67%, showed penises from which the foreskin had been amputated. Of those . . . images [i.e., those in which the prepuce had been removed], only one includes an explanation of why the foreskin was absent.<br /></span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The study further found that </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Out of . . . 272 primary images of the penis [i.e., those that "present the penis as the direct subject of study or discussion"], only . . . 29% were anatomically correct in their depiction of the foreskin. . . . 71%, were anatomically incorrect (i.e., foreskin absent). . . . Out of . . . 93 secondary images of the penis, . . . 54% were anatomically incorrect in their depiction of the foreskin.<br /></span></span></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The study concluded that, more often than not,<br /></span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">the penis is misrepresented in the medical literature used in medical schools. The penis is routinely defined and depicted in a partially amputated condition, as if this were a natural state, without explanation or caveat. This study concludes that students are being misinformed about fundamental anatomy.</span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Similar to Dr. O'Connell's experience with the omission of the clitoris from <i>Last's Anatomy</i>, Dr. Thompson recounted to me his own experience with the practice of medical school text book publishers omitting or minimizing the penile prepuce: </span></span><br /></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">It is understandable why the anatomy professor did not mention the
[penile] foreskin. The anatomy texts that I had access to represented
the penis either without a foreskin, or a foreskin that was greatly
diminished from its true characteristics. Some texts showed a partially
absent foreskin cut away or retracted to show the deeper structures and
the glans of the penis, again, greatly diminished in size. Basically,
the depictions communicated that the foreskin (if it is present at all) is the skin that is in the way of the more important aspect of the penis.<br /></span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Gross cites the medical school experience of Dr. O'Connell as evidence that, when it comes to educating physicians, female sexual physiology and function receive much less attention than male sexual physiology and function do. Referring to <i>Last's</i> omission of the clitoris, Gross points out that, in contrast, </span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">[d]escriptions of the penis went on for pages. To [O'Connell], this widespread medical disregard helped explain why her urology peers worked to preserve nerves in the penis during prostate surgeries but not during pelvic surgeries on women.<br /></span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">What it does not explain - and what Gross and O'Connell both seem to fail to recognize, let alone acknowledge - is that, in men who have been subjected to circumcision, the only nerves left to preserve during prostate- or any other surgery are those that haven't already been removed by circumcision. The nerves that surgeons endeavor to spare during prostate surgery primarily are involved not in penile <i>sensation</i> but in <a href="https://www.webmd.com/prostate-cancer/nerve-sparing-surgery-prostate-cancer" target="_blank">producing penile erections and maintaining urinary function</a></span><span style="font-family: times;">.<sup>3</sup> <br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">This, again, points to widely-held and, I would argue, deeply-ingrained patriarchal attitudes - attitudes that Gross seems to reinforce - about male and female sexuality and, especially, about male and female genitalia. The penis is regarded as <i>active</i> - hence, masculine - whereas the vulva is regarded as passive and, therefore, feminine. (That, indeed, is why the erect penis is traditionally regarded as a symbol of male power.) In this view, the penetrative and inseminating role of the penis, possible only when it is fully erect, is prioritized to the exclusion of its sensory capacity. To this day, this view predominates not only within the medical field but throughout popular culture. In <a href="https://www.notkristenbell.com/miscellaneous" target="_blank">"Genital Cutting and Western Discourses on Sexuality,"</a> the anthropologist, <a href="https://www.notkristenbell.com/about" target="_blank">Kirsten Bell</a>, describes this attitude among her students in a course on gender that she was teaching that included the topic of female and male genital cutting:</span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Over the course of our discussions on this topic, one thing became clear: students did not think that carving up male genitalia had any damaging effects on male sexuality as long as the penis remained largely intact. My students reasoned that as long as the man retained the ability to ejaculate, his sexuality was unimpaired. They were so ready to assert that female sexuality has been totally annihilated by genital surgery of any kind and so reluctant to proclaim that anything short of full frontal castration will affect a man's sexuality in the same way, it seemed clear that something very interesting was being revealed. Importantly, their insistence seemed to have less to do with [male and female genital-cutting] practices themselves and more to do with underlying assumptions about the nature of female and male sexuality. . . .<br /></span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">These assumptions, Bell goes on to explain, are reflected in the attitude (Bell, here, is citing Lenore Tiefer) that "sexual prowess is central to masculinity."</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">In <a href="https://www.academia.edu/32233620/Circumcision_sexual_experience_and_harm" target="_blank">"Circumcision, Sexual Experience and Harm,"</a> (where Bell's passage above is originally cited) Brian D. Earp and Robert Darby point out that this attitude seems to be shared by </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">the medical profession itself</span></span>:</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Reading through the medical literature, one is liable to form the impression that the mere capacity to maintain an erection, ejaculate, impregnate one's female partner, or experience some degree of pleasurable sensation during sex, exhaust the scientific imagination on male sexuality. In other words, if these or other similar basic capacities are retained, many commentators are prepared to conclude that circumcision has negligible, if any, adverse effects on male "sexual function." . . .<br />. . . <br /></span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">A common assumption in this discourse, according to Marie Fox and Michael Thomson, is that "male sexual pleasure is not an issue provided the penis is adequate for penetration, thus privileging one popular understanding of male sexual function and pleasure." And yet, "the sensitivity protected by the foreskin, the erogenous nature of the foreskin itself, and sexual practices relying on an intact penis - such as docking - are all erased in these characterizations."</span></span><br /></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">If, on balance, the esteem in which the penile prepuce and the clitoris are held - and the erotosensory pleasure that each provides -</span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"> is not quite so different after all, the parallels in medical practice do not end there. In the opening paragraphs of her article, Gross provides a lurid description of a vulvar biopsy. </span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">If there was one thing Gillian knew, it was that she did not want a hole punch anywhere near her genitals. . . .<br /></span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">To Gillian . . . taking a chunk out of her most sensitive body part sounded a bit extreme.</span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">For the biopsy, she was placed in stirrups and given a spinal epidural to numb the area. Afterward, to stem the bleeding, the doctor put one hand over the other and pressed hard against her vulva. . . . Even through the anesthesia, she could feel the pressure against her pubic bone. She screamed.<br /></span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Anyone who shudders at the thought of a what a "hole punch" can do to a vulva should think long and hard about what a <a href="http://www.noharmm.org/instruments.htm#medical" target="_blank">Circumcision Clamp, a Plastibell, forceps and surgical scissors</a> do to the most sensitive part of an infant's penis. And anyone who is made squeamish by Gross's description of Gillian's biopsy should watch a video of an infant being subjected to a circumcision. (One is available in the excellent presentation given by Ryan R. McAllister, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ceht-3xu84I&list=PLE_MTfLKVnfWQ_Otsrw6gSJ7RCxEtLJc0&index=57&t=35s" target="_blank">"Child Circumcision: An Elephant in the Hospital.</a>" The clip of the actual circumcision begins at 10:24 but I encourage you to watch McAllister's entire lecture.)</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">One of the problems in gynecological healthcare to which Gross calls attention (citing a 2018 study in <i>Sexual Medicine</i>) is that "most providers 'neither know how to examine nor feel comfortable examining the clitoris.'" But this, too, is comparable to the problem that intact boys are faced with. Intact America <a href="https://intactamerica.org/new-survey-finds-that-4-out-of-10-uncircumcised-boys-have-had-their-foreskins-forcibly-retracted-by-the-age-of-7/" target="_blank">reported</a> that same year (2018) that, by the age of 7, up to 40% of intact boys had had their foreskins forcibly retracted by medical professionals who should have known better but, because of widespread medical ignorance about the normal physiology and development of the male prepuce, did not.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">A related but opposite sort of problem affects people with vulvas and people with penises. Gross reports that the 2018 <i>Sexual Medicine</i> study</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">found that a failure to examine the vulva and clitoris led doctors to regularly overlook sexual health conditions. Among women visiting Dr. [Irwin] Goldstein's clinic, nearly 1 in 4 had clitoral adhesions, which occur when the hood of the clitoris sticks to the glans and can lead to irritation, pain and decreased sexual pleasure.<br /></span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The condition of clitoral adhesions is remarkably similar to phimosis, which is when a post-pubescent person <a href="http://www.drmomma.org/2010/01/phony-phimosis-diagnosis.html" target="_blank">"is . . . or becomes unable to retract his foreskin. . . ."</a> </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">(The
hood of the clitoris, of course, is the female version of the male
foreskin. The clitoral hood and the male prepuce develop from the same
embryonic tissue and both are designated anatomically as "prepuces.") </span></span>But whereas physician ignorance has led to underdiagnosis of clitoral adhesions, physician ignorance has also led to </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="http://www.drmomma.org/2010/01/phony-phimosis-diagnosis.html" target="_blank">overdiagnosis and misdiagnosis of phimosis</a></span></span> in children with penises. At birth and throughout early childhood, the penile prepuce is tightly fused to the glans until it separates naturally at various ages all the way up through adolescence. Ignorance by medical practitioners about the normal physiological development of the penile prepuce not only leads to the misidentification of a non-pathological condition as a pathological one but results in unnecessary "corrective" circumcisions in children who had escaped this fate during infancy. (It is also worth mentioning here that, despite the relatively high incidence of clitoral adhesions, we never hear of medical professionals advocating the prophylactic amputation of girls' clitoral hoods during infancy in order to prevent the possible development of this condition later in life, just as we never hear organizations like the <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236061575_Cultural_Bias_in_the_AAP%27s_2012_Technical_Report_and_Policy_Statement_on_Male_Circumcision" target="_blank">American Academy of Pediatrics</a> or the <a href="https://dbalablog.blogspot.com/2021/03/omv-obgyns-facogs-mgc-call-for.html" target="_blank">American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists</a> assert that the "benefits" of surgical removal of the clitoral hood in infancy or early childhood "outweigh the risks.")</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Gross describes efforts to rectify the unacceptable state of affairs that she outlines in her article. One of these efforts aims to address the paucity of medical knowledge about the anatomical structure of the clitoris:</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Dr. O'Connell set out to investigate the full anatomy of the clitoris using microdissection and magnetic resonance imaging. In 2005, she published a comprehensive study showing that the outer nub of the clitoris . . . was just the tip of the iceberg. . . . The full organ extended far beneath the surface, comprising two teardrop-shaped bulbs, two arms and a shaft.<br /></span></span></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Yet an equally groundbreaking study of the penile prepuce was not undertaken until 1996, less than ten years before O'Connell's study and decades after amputation of the prepuce by medical practitioners had become a routine part of childbirth in the United States. This is reported in Jessica Wapner's 2015 article, <a href="https://mosaicscience.com/story/troubled-history-foreskin/" target="_blank">"The Troubled History of the Foreskin,"</a> which is available in the online magazine, <i>Mosaic</i>. <br /></span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">[A] pathologist named John Taylor . . . published the first description of the cells that make up the foreskin. An uncircumcised [sic] Englishman, Taylor was initially motivated by the prospect of his Canada-born children being circumcised. That's what led him to examine the foreskins of 22 uncircumcised [sic] corpses. He wanted to know whether the tissue had any functional value - if foreskin cells are specialised [sic] and serve some particular purpose, Taylor reasoned, that should be weighed when considering circumcision.<br /></span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Specialised [sic] cells were exactly what Taylor found. Measuring about 6.5 centimetres [sic] long when fully grown, the foreskin is a mucosal membrane that contains copious amounts of Meissner's corpuscles, touch-sensitive cells that are also present in our lips and fingertips. "We only find this sort of tissue in areas where it has to perform specialised [sic] function, Taylor told an interviewer. . . . The mucosal inner surface is kept wet by a natural lubricant, and the tip contains elastic fibres [sic] that allow it to stretch without becoming slack. "This is sexual tissue, and there's no way you can avoid the issue."<br /></span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">One of Taylor's most noteworthy discoveries was the "ridged band", [sic] an accordian-like strip of flesh about 10 to 15 millimetres [sic] long that is as sensitive as the fingertips. During an erection, the band is turned inside out. . . . In later work, Taylor and a colleague described the band as far more sensitive than the glans [the "head" of the penis], the part of the penis left exposed after circumcision. "The only portion of the body with less fine-touch discrimination than the glans penis is the heel of the foot," they wrote. The penis still works without a foreskin, of course. But the foreskin is erogenous tissue. . . .<br /></span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">That bears repeating. It is the foreskin, not the glans penis, that is the primary sensory structure of the penis. This is information that has been available to medical science and to medical practitioners for a quarter century. And it is information that has been <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/does-circumcision-reduce_b_9743242" target="_blank">confirmed by subsequent studies</a>. And yet this information remains generally ignored by medical school text book publishers and generally unknown (to give them the benefit of the doubt) by physicians.<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Another effort to raise the level of physician knowledge of the clitoris that Gross writes about is that undertaken by Jessica Pin who "began a social media campaign to get OB-GYN textbooks and training standards updated to cover this anatomy." Once again, and for precisely the same reasons, it has proved necessary for a similar project to be initiated in order to raise the level of physician knowledge of the penile prepuce. This project has been undertaken by <a href="https://www.yourwholebaby.org/" target="_blank">Your Whole Baby</a>, an organization whose mission is "to provide gentle education to parents-to-be and healthcare providers about the functions and care of the foreskin. . . . " As Your Whole Baby explains on its website,</span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">In the United States, many students in healthcare-related fields receive inadequate education on the structure and functions of the prepuce (foreskin), as well as proper care of the intact penis. As a result, medical professionals may perpetuate long-held myths surrounding the natural penis and contribute to the resistance toward leaving babies' penises intact. . . .<br /></span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Your Whole Baby has begun reaching out to authors and publishers in an effort to improve the quality of medical textbooks. . . . <br /></span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>On the matter of harm, another distressing but necessary development that Gross writes about is that "Increasingly, women are speaking out about injuries they sustained to this area during routine procedures." This reflects the increasing and overdue valuation that our society is now giving to personal narratives - undoubtedly, greatly assisted by the MeToo movement.<br /></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>But men are speaking out also. The <a href="http://www.circumcisionharm.org/index.htm" target="_blank">Global Survey of Circumcision Harm</a>, completed in 2012, received responses from more than 1,000 men, 100% of whom reported perceiving themselves as having been harmed in some way by the circumcisions to which they had been subjected. The website where the results of this survey can be found includes video testimonials by men who were harmed by circumcision. </span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>Another site, <a href="https://www.mendocomplain.com/about/" target="_blank">Men Do Complain</a>, </span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>exists to dispel the myth that men do not mind being circumcised . . . .</span></span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="font-family: times;">Men circumcised as children (and therefore without consent) often complain about their condition. . . . Men who complain about having had their foreskins amputated without their informed consent are consistently treated as having <i>something wrong with them</i> rather than being treated as having had something <i>wrong done to them</i> [MDC's emphasis].</span><br /></span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>Earp and Darby find that </span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>many men who were circumcised as infants do insist that they have been sexually harmed as a result of the procedure and strongly resent what was done to them without their consent. . . . [O]ften this absence of consent is as serious a cause of psychosexual distress as any overtly "physical" effects of the procedure.<br /></span></span></span></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> The same authors report that </span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">a 2015 YouGov poll concluded that 10% of circumcised American men wish that they had not been circumcised. . . . [A] more recent demographically diverse survey . . . found that 13.6% wished that they had not been circumcised, with nearly a quarter of that sub-group reporting that they would "seriously consider" changing their circumcision status if it were possible. . . . [notes omitted].<br /></span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Estimates of the percentage of males living in the United States who have been subjected to circumcision range from <a href="https://pophealthmetrics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12963-016-0073-5/tables/1" target="_blank">71.2%</a> to as high as <a href="https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/circumcision-by-country" target="_blank">80.5%</a>. Given that there are currently <a href="https://www.infoplease.com/us/census/demographic-statistics" target="_blank">101 million males 18 and over living in the United States</a>, and taking the lower of both of these sets of figures - that is, being conservative - ten million people with penises in this country object to what was done to their penises when they were infants.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">These first-person accounts and surveys, of course, represent <i>perceptions</i> of harm. "Objective" statistics are harder to come by. <a href="http://circumcisionharm.org/hammond%20cv.htm" target="_blank">Tim Hammond</a>, a longtime human-rights activist and lead author of a recently-completed study </span></span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">("Foreskin
Restorers: Insights into Motivations, Successes, Challenges and
Experiences with Medical and Mental Health Professionals" [2022];
Hammond T., Sardi L.; Jellison W., et al., publication of </span></span>which is pending in the <i>International Journal of Impotence Research</i>) shared with me what is currently known and understood about the additional harms associated with non-therapeutic circumcision, which he summarized as follows:</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Despite an impressive list of known immediate and short-term complications, the American Academy of Pediatrics has twice acknowledged that the precise risk and full extent of complications are likely not known. This is because complications are ill-defined, obstetric circumcisers rarely do patient follow-up, many complications become evident only as the penis matures, and there is no comprehensive record-keeping of complications. Some authors have reported a complication rate as low as 0.06 percent [but] at the other extreme, rates of up to 55 percent have been quoted. . . . This reflects the differing and varying diagnostic criteria employed; a realistic figure is 2-10 percent. A systematic review concluded that neonatal male circumcision complications are indeed common. An analysis of medicalized circumcisions found a complication rate of 4%. . . . Even if serious complications are statistically rare, with over 1.2 million newborn circumcisions performed annually in the U.S., a 0.06% to 4% complication rate means that 7,200 to 48,000 males per year . . . may suffer serious physical and/or sexual complications that likely also cause psychological distress or grief [internal references omitted].<br /></span></span></blockquote><p></p><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>Gillian, whose vulvar biopsy resulted in her losing the ability to reach orgasm, is quoted in Gross's article in words that powerfully convey her anguish about what she has suffered: "The devastation from this is something you can never repair. Ever." Yet, as tragic as Gillian's situation is, it also points up a crucial difference between the iatrogenic injuries suffered by the women interviewed in Gross's article and non-therapeutic penile circumcision. This is that, in Gillian's case, as in all the others that Gross describes, the harm done to these women's erotogenic tissue and the resulting damage done to their capacity to experience sexual pleasure was <i>unintended</i>. In contrast, in the case of penile circumcision, obliteration of all the erotogenic tissue of which the foreskin is comprised <i>is the whole point</i>. That is why penile circumcision was promoted and employed as a "prophylaxis" against masturbation during the nineteenth century. It is why John Harvey Kellogg is as infamous for his <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/19924?msg=welcome_stranger" target="_blank">views on masturbation</a> (and his enthusiasm for circumcision) as he is famous for the invention of Corn Flakes:</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span></span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">A
remedy which is almost always successful in small boys is circumcision,
especially when there is any degree of phimosis. The operation should
be performed by a surgeon without administering an anaesthetic, as the
brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the
mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment, as it
may well be in some cases. The soreness which continues for several
weeks interrupts the practice, and if it had not previously become too
firmly fixed, it may be forgotten and not resumed. If any attempt is
made to watch the child, he should be so carefully surrounded by
vigilance that he cannot possibly transgress without detection. If he
is only partially watched, he soon learns to elude observation, and the
effect is only to make him cunning in his vice.</span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>It is why Moses Maimonodes, 700 hundred years before Kellogg, wrote,</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>With regard to circumcision, one of the reasons for it 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. It has been thought that circumcision perfects what is defective congenitally.... How can natural things be defective so that they need to be perfected from outside, all the more because we know how useful the foreskin is for that member? In fact this commandment has not been prescribed with a view to perfecting what is defective congenitally, but to perfecting what is defective morally. The bodily pain caused to that member is the real purpose of circumcision. None of the activities necessary for the preservation of the individual is harmed thereby, nor is procreation rendered impossible, but violent concupiscence and lust that goes beyond what is needed are diminished. 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. . . . [This is excerpted from <i>Marked in Your Flesh - Circumcision from Ancient Judea to Modern America</i> by Leonard B. Glick, {Oxford University Press; 2005}; p.65.]<br /></span></span></span></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">To be sure, although the ostensible purpose of medicalized neonatal circumcision may, since the nineteenth century, have "evolved"</span></span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> from a deliberate reduction in the erotosensory capacity of the penis</span></span> into something else, the anatomical structure of the penis and its prepuce have not, so the end result of penile circumcision remains the same.</span></span></p><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>Another important way in which </span></span></span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>the "documented injuries to the clitoris" sustained by the women in Gross's article differ crucially from neonatal penile circumcision is that they were the unintended consequences of surgeries or procedures that had been deemed necessary either to correct pathological conditions or to diagnose them. In contrast, in the overwhelming majority of neonatal circumcisions, there is no pathological condition to correct - just a natural, healthy, functional prepuce.</span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>One possible point of comparison between the iatrogenic injuries to which Gross refers and penile circumcision is in the matter of informed consent. Gross points out that the risk of sustaining the particular type of injury suffered by one of the women profiled in her article was not mentioned in the consent form. </span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>But, however widespread the problem may or may not be of women being insufficiently informed about the risks to their sexual sensation posed by various surgeries, it's hard to imagine that it could be worse than the problem of parents being insufficiently informed when they are asked (<a href="https://intactamerica.org/press-release-having-a-baby-boy-get-ready-for-the-circumcision-sellers/" target="_blank">and often pressured</a>) to consent to their child's penile circumcision.</span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>The preliminary findings of a study ("A systematic quality assessment of neonatal circumcision consent forms issued by major hospitals in Masschusetts and New York") by the organization <a href="https://intaction.org/" target="_blank">Intaction</a> that is currently under way were shared with me by its chief researcher and author, Mathew Goodwin. Goodwin's investigation of<br /></span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></span></span></span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>the quality of over 20 neonatal circumcision consent forms at major hospitals in Massachusetts and New York State revealed a disturbingly large variance in the risks presented to parents. The lowest quality forms used a generic template that broadly applies to any procedure, states no specific risks of circumcision, and relies entirely on oral communication to secure parental permission. Upon further examination of the fine print in these forms, we found that parents were asked to consent to questionable terms, such as full authorization to the hospital to use the severed skin and tissue [not just] for research . . . but for commercial purposes. Disclosure of the hospital's financial incentives for collecting and selling infant foreskin was strategically absent.</span></span></span></span></span></span></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Goodwin found that the most serious deficiency of these forms was their failure to disclose "any of the known long-term harms and consequences to the individual" of penile circumcision. The forms also omitted any reference to the ethical consideration of the child's right to bodily autonomy and, instead, "promote[d] unsubstantiated health benefits [in order] to secure permission . . . from parents" and payment by third-party payers.<br /></span></span></span></span></span></p><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>It should go without saying that the consent forms that parents are given prior to circumcision of their child routinely omit the most significant "risk" of circumcision: the irreversible loss of the most erotogenically sensitive part of the penis. The consent forms also routinely fail to quantify this risk, which is, in fact, 100%. </span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">More basically, as Peter Adler has observed <span><span><span><span><span><span>in <a href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwiK57jGs4v7AhVRVTUKHbjZARcQFnoECB4QAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcommunity.lawschool.cornell.edu%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2020%2F12%2FAdler-et-al-final.pdf&usg=AOvVaw2s98gGmXGhI0DAhTtJAiBl" target="_blank">"Is Circumcision a Fraud?,"</a></span></span></span></span></span></span><span><span><span><span><span><span> "Legal scholars have argued that
parents do not have the legal authority to consent to the surgical
amputation of normal, healthy tissue from their infant children. . . ." </span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>Perhaps more relevant than any other factor is that no neonate ever consents to his own circumcision. And while infancy is transitory, circumcision is permanent. The person subjected to penile circumcision as a neonate or toddler has no way of undoing or reversing the harm that was done to his genitals and he is left without any meaningful legal mechanism of compensating him for the deprivation of his bodily autonomy.</span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>This is in no way to minimize the tragedies suffered by Gillian or the other women profiled in Gross's article. It is merely to point out that, for every Gillian, there is a <a href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/10/11/a-botched-circumcision-and-its-aftermath" target="_blank">Gary Shteyngart</a>, for every Jessica, there is a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/dec/17/male-circumcision-baby-goodluck" target="_blank">Goodluck Caubergs</a> and, for every Julie, there is a <a href="https://slate.com/technology/2004/06/why-did-david-reimer-commit-suicide.html" target="_blank">David Reimer</a>.<br /></span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p></p><p></p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">What I have attempted to show here is that two of Gross's major premises are wrong. To review, these premises are, first, that physicians' knowledge of penile anatomy is as comprehensive as their knowledge of vulvar anatomy is lacking; and, second, that male sexual pleasure and fulfillment are prioritized by physicians whereas female sexual pleasure and fulfillment are not.</span></span><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">In fact, far from being knowledgeable about the anatomy of the penis, physicians are every bit as clueless about a vitally important portion of it (the prepuce) as they are about a vitally important portion of the vulva (the clitoris). And, far from being concerned with male sexual <i>pleasure</i>, physicians are concerned almost exclusively with male sexual <i>performance</i>. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">This distinction - between male sexual pleasure and male sexual performance - is important not because it falsifies another one of the </span></span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">premises of Gross's article but because it confirms it. This other, deeper and implicit premise is that the disparate treatment given by the medical profession to penises and vulvas has its roots - like so much else - in patriarchy and sexism. Although Gross does not explicitly make this argument, I do not think any reasonable person can deny that <a href="https://time.com/6074224/gender-medicine-history/" target="_blank">traditional patriarchal concepts and attitudes about vulvas, penises, women and men have had a profound and lasting influence on Western medical practice.</a> If this is one of Gross's working assumptions - and I believe that it is - I think she's spot on, but in more ways than even she may realize.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">There is no doubt that the medical profession and the pharmaceutical industry in the United States pay a great deal more attention to penises than they do to vulvas. The problem is that, most of the time, it's the wrong kind of attention. (And with friends like these, who needs enemies?) <br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Superficially, the disparate treatment by the medical establishment of <i>adults</i> with penises and adults with vulvas might appear to support Gross's thesis that physicians have little concern for women's sexual pleasure in contrast to their abiding concern for men's. But when one steps back and takes in the broad perspective that includes the medical establishment's treatment of people with penises <i>from birth</i> onward, it is difficult to come to any conclusion other than that medicine's <i>actual</i> concern with the penis is limited exclusively to its ability to become erect, and physicians' <i>actual</i> concern with male sexual fulfillment is limited to the ability of a person with a penis to achieve an orgasm brought on by the act of penetration. The<i> sensory experience</i>
of intercourse itself (as opposed to the sensory experience of having
an orgasm, for which one does not need a partner) does not even appear to be on physicians' radar. Nor is it, I suspect,
on Gross's, which is why she seems to reflexively substitute penile <i>virility </i>or<i> function</i> for penile <i>sensation</i> (much as Kirsten Bell's students did)
when she contrasts medicine's interest in preserving or maximizing
the sexual fulfillment of people with penises with its lack of interest
in preserving or maximizing the sexual fulfillment of people with
vulvas. This is also why I suggested just now that, insofar as patriarchy's effects on penile integrity are concerned, Gross misses the larger picture and is, therefore, only half right. The medical profession's contempt for the clitoris and and its
contempt for the penile prepuce do not stand in contrast to one another but
are, in fact, of a piece. They are opposite sides of the same
patriarchal coin. To understand how, it is necessary to contextualize neonatal circumcision historically and socially.<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">The patriarchal roots of circumcision - as we know it today - in the Judaism of the sixth-century BCE<sup>4</sup> are well established. </span></span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span><span><span style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Explaining in 2001 (in </span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><a href="http://www.cirp.org/pages/cultural/kimmel1/" target="_blank"><i>"</i>The Kindest Un-Cut: Feminism, Judaism and My Son's Foreskin")</a></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span><span><span style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"> how he and his wife came to decide not to subject their son to circumcision, the sociologist Michael Kimmel writes that,</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p><blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">. . . what was ultimately decisive for us was the larger symbolic meaning of circumcision, and particularly the <span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">gendered politics of the ritual. After all, it is c<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">ertainly not circumcision that makes a <span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">man Jewish. . . . </span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">No, circumcisi<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">on means something else: the rep<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">roduction of patriarchy. Abr<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">aham cements his relationship to God by a symbolic genital mutilation of his son. It is on the body of his<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"> son that A<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">bra<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">ham writes <span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">his own beliefs. In a religio<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">n marked by the <span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">ritual exclusion of women<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">, such a marking not only en<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">ables Isaac to be included within the community of men - he can b<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">e part of a minyan<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">, can pray in the temple, can s<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">tudy T<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">orah - but he can also lay claim to all the privileges to which being a Je<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">wish
male now entitles him. Monotheistic religions invariably worship male
Gods, and exhibit patriarchal political arrangements <span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">between the sexes.<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"> . . .</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;">
</span><blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Circumcision<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"> . . . is the single moment of the rep<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">roduction of patriarchy. It's when patriarchy h</span></span>appens, the single c<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">rystalline moment when the rule of the fathers is rep<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">rodu<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">ced,
the moment when male privilege and entitlement is passed from one
generation to the next, when the power of the fathers is exacted upon
the son<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">s, a power which the sons will someday then enact on the <span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">bodies of their own sons. To circumcise our own <span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">son, then, would be, unwittingly<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"> or not, to accept as legitimate 4000 years not of Jewish tradition<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">, but of patriarchal domination of women.</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Another detailed analysis of the <span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">inextricability of<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"> </span></span>penile circumcision<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"> from<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"> traditi<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">onal </span></span></span>patriarc<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">hal power<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"> <span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">can be found in Miriam Pollack's monu<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">mental essay,<i> </i><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/circumcision-identity-gen_b_1132896" target="_blank">Circumcision: Identi<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">t</span>y, Gender and Power</a>. Pollack explains the cr<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">ucial role that penile circumcision plays in what she describes as</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><span><span style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">. . . the twin patriar<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">chal <span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">fears: the fear of woman and the fear of pleasure. Circumcision is both the <span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">vehicle and the product, the menace and the <span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">antidote, which <span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">s<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">imultane<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">ously assuages and perpetuates those ancient terrors. Th<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">is </span>is
the achievement and true function of circumcision. Circumcision
achieves this by violently breaching the maternal-infant bond shortly
after birth; by amputating and marking the ba<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">by's sexual <span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">organ be<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">fore he knows <span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">what he has lost<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">; by disempowerin<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">g, "taming," the mother at the height of her instinctual need to protect her infant; by bo<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">nding the baby to the communi<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">ty of men past, present and future and to a male-<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">imagine<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">d <span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">G-d [sic]<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">; by restructuring the family and the society in terms of <span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">male dominance<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">; and by ps<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">ycho-sexually wounding the manhood<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"> still asleep in the uns<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">uspecting
baby boy. In all of these ways - socially, politically, religiously,
ethnically, sexually, tribally, and interpersonally - the cutting o<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">f our baby boys' sexual organs is the fulc<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">rum around which patriarchy exerts its power. Circumcision is a ri<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">te
of male domination - domination and the entitlement of domination over
other men, women, and children both institutionally and personally. It
is the essence of patriarchy.</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Gloria Steinem, who, I think it's fair to say, knows a thing or two about patriarchy, </span></span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/05/male-circumcision-vs-female-circumcision/392732/" target="_blank">had this to say</a></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span> about circumcision:</span></span><br /><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span><span><span style="-webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">These patri<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">archal controls limit men<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">'s sexuality<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">, too, but to a much, much lesser degree. T<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">hat's why men are asked symbolic<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">ally to submit the sexual part of themsel<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">ves and their sons to patriarchal authority<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">, which seems to be the origin of male circumcision<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"> . . . Speaking for mysel<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">f, I s<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">tand with ma<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">ny brothers in eliminating that practice, too. <br /></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Steinem was speaking figuratively, of course. The individuals who are subjected to circumcision are not "men" and they certainly aren't "asked." That aside, Kimmel, Pollack and Steinem all recognize that penile circumcision, when imposed upon the body of an unconsenting child, is not just an artifact of patriarchy but is intrinsic to it and perpetuates it.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">In our own time, <a href="https://dbalablog.blogspot.com/2017/10/male-genital-mutilation-and.html" target="_blank">a point I have argued previously</a>, penile circumcision persists as a deeply ingrained cultural practice in which masculinity is inscribed on the bodies of children with penises. As I wrote several years ago,</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"></span></span></span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span class="text_exposed_show">The
language that parents often use to describe their sons' reaction to the
circumcision surgery is . . . highly revealing of the way in which they -
whether consciously or unconsciously - are apt to regard the
masculinizing ordeal of genital cutting through which their infant sons
must pass. It is not uncommon to hear parents who
have subjected their infant sons to circumcision speak in glowing terms
about "how tough" their "little guy" was throughout the ordeal. It is
also no coincidence that parents will often refer to their infant in
this context as a "little guy" or a "little man."<br />. . .</span><br /><span class="text_exposed_show"><span><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span class="text_exposed_show">Beyond
literally "toughening up" the glans penis (thereby making it more
"masculine"), there can be little doubt that, again, whether consciously or
unconsciously, the primary purpose of male genital cutting is
the<span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"> </span>"toughening up" of the boy himself. That deeply entrenched notions of gender and masculinity
are intrinsic to this custom are, if anything, demonstrated all the more by the <a href="https://nypost.com/2016/01/25/circumcision-intactivists-dont-want-you-or-your-kids-to-get-snipped/" target="_blank">ridicule and scorn</a> - the <i>gender policing</i> - to which men who publicly express their resentment about
having had part of their genitals removed without their consent frequently are
subjected.</span></span></span></span></span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Gross cannot be faulted for any supposition she may have that patriarchy adversely affects women's sexual health. But I do think it appropriate to question her implication that patriarchy, of which neonatal
circumcision is an integral part, does not also adversely affect men's sexual health - and not just
as much as it does women's but, in fact, much, much more. After all, say what you will about their neglect of the
clitoris, when presented with one in a clinical setting, physicians do not,
as a matter of course, cut it off. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Gross ends, if not on an optimistic note, at least on a positive one. Paraphrasing Dr. Rubin, she concludes, </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">There must be a concerted movement, one that transcends medicine's traditionally siloed specialties, to understand and map this anatomy. And for that to happen, other fields need to recognize female sexual pleasure as essential and worth preserving.<br /></span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">I would go further than that. Medical professionals, whatever "silo" they may occupy, ought to respect the sexual anatomy of everyone equally. They should not impose their own preconceived concepts of gender on the bodies of patients and especially not on the bodies of neonates, whatever sex that neonate might be or even might just appear to be at birth. Medical professionals should accord no less respect to the boundaries and integrity of prepuces than they should to clitorises. They should not abandon their ethical obligations when parents ask them to remove normal, healthy erotogenic tissue from their children's bodies. Medical professionals should be guided by a respect for the <i>whole</i> bodies, including the <i>totality</i> of their genital anatomy, of people with vulvas, people with penises, and intersex people, equally. Above all, they should recognize not only that the sexual pleasure of <i>every</i> human being is essential and worth preserving but that the <i>full sexual anatomy</i> of every human being - prepuce and all - is, likewise, essential and worth preserving.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></span><br /></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">1. </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">In </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="https://www.notkristenbell.com/miscellaneous" target="_blank">"Genital Cutting and Western Discourses on Sexuality,"</a> the anthropologist, <a href="https://www.notkristenbell.com/about" target="_blank">Kirsten Bell</a>,</span></span> <span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></span></span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">provides a short history of the Western conception of
the clitoris - its "rise and fall and rise," again - that is considerably
more nuanced than Gross's article might lead one to suppose. Citing the
work of Thomas Laqueur, Bell notes that </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">during the Renaissance, the
clitoris was routinely described as the organ 'which makes women lustful
and take delight in copulation.' . . .<br />. . .<br />In 18th-century Europe, a radical reconstitution of female sexuality took place. . . . [and] the idea that woman was inherently passionate was sacrificed in the effort to assert a fundamental, underlying difference in female biology.</span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"> </span><br /></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">2. Bell (see footnote 1, above) also cites examples in her paper of circumcision proponents who readily acknowledge that circumcision decreases penile sensitivity yet view this as one of its "benefits," enabling the man to "'last' longer." Bell observes that</span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></span></span></span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">although these commentaries are mostly from men circumcised at a later age, I believe that they articulate constructions of of male sexuality that are entrenched and pervasive. Importantly, these anecdotes speak to the role that sexual competence plays in constructions of contemporary masculinity, as many men clearly believe that any loss of sensitivity that accompanies circumcision is compensated by their enhanced sexual performance [notes omitted].<br /></span></span></span></span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">3. It should also be borne in mind that the author of <i>Last's Anatomy</i>, <a href="https://livesonline.rcseng.ac.uk/client/en_GB/lives/search/detailnonmodal?qu=Medical+Obituaries&qf=LIVES_HONOURS%09Titles%2FQualifications%09FRCS+1965%09FRCS+1965&rw=12&d=ent%3A%2F%2FSD_ASSET%2F0%2FSD_ASSET%3A384141%7E%7E0&dt=list&isd=true&h=8" target="_blank">Chummy S. Sinnatamby, was an anatomist from the United Kingdom</a> and that <i>Last's</i> <a href="http://www1.us.elsevierhealth.com/HHS/Help/aboutCL.html" target="_blank">publisher, back in the 80s, was also based in the U.K. </a>(which
is, presumably, why it was available to O'Connell in Australia). I do
not know how many of those pages of descriptions of the penis in <i>Last's
Anatomy</i> included accurate descriptions of the prepuce but it would not
be surprising if they did, given that <a href="https://wchh.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/tre.742" target="_blank">the incidence of neonatal circumcision had already begun to decline significantly in the U.K. by the1980s</a>, in contrast to the United States where, to this day, over 50%
of neonates who are born with penises are subjected to penile
circumcision. </span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">4. Glick, <i>Marked in Your Flesh</i>, cited above; p. 15.<br /></span></span></span></span></span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></span></span></span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times;">* * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * *
* *<br /></span></p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><i><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/s365/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="299" data-original-width="365" height="163" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/w200-h163/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" width="200" /></a></div></i></span><i>David
Balashinsky is originally from New York City and now lives near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. He is a licensed physical therapist and writes about bodily autonomy and
human rights, gender, culture, and politics. </i></span><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i>He currently serves on the board of directors for the <a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">Genital Autonomy Legal Defense & Education Fund</a>, (GALDEF),</i></span> the board of
directors and advisors for <a href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" target="_blank">Doctors Opposing Circumcision</a> and the leadership team for <a href="https://www.bruchim.online/" target="_blank">Bruchim</a>.</i></span></i></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-836639610665183812022-06-29T04:28:00.013-07:002023-01-22T05:21:06.542-08:00Abortion and Dred Scott<p><span style="font-family: times;">by <b>David Balashinsky</b> <br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">After close to half a century of having a constitutionally-recognized right to obtain an abortion, American women* have now had that right taken away. The Supreme Court of the United States, packed with anti-abortion ideologues, <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/donald-trump-abortion-supreme-court_n_5733400be4b0bc9cb048aef2" target="_blank">at least three of whom were placed there expressly for the purpose of overturning <i>Roe v. Wade</i> </a> (and, <a href="https://factpac.org/66-of-supreme-court-justices-are-there-in-spite-of-public-opinion/" target="_blank">arguably, a majority of them having been seated illegitimately</a>) has now deprived American girls and women of a <i>fundamental right</i> that they have had for almost fifty years. This has never before happened in our nation's history or in the history of Supreme Court decisions. There have been major reversals of Supreme Court precedents before, as more enlightened versions of the Court have fulfilled their duty to undo the damage done by previous conservative ones. But these other precedent-reversing decisions have always <i>expanded</i> liberty, not restricted it. This is the first time that a long-established and deeply-embedded right has been <i>taken away</i> by the Supreme Court. This is a right that <a href="https://reproductiverights.org/maps/worlds-abortion-laws/" target="_blank">a majority of women around the world (and an increasing majority, at that) currently possesses</a>. Not here. Not any more. In a nation "conceived in liberty," a nation that prides itself on being a beacon of freedom and democracy to the rest of the world, the basic question before the Supreme Court in <a href="https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/19-1392_6j37.pdf" target="_blank"><i>Dobbs versus Jackson Women's Health Organization</i></a> boiled down to this: Does the Constitution guarantee women the right to own their own bodies? In answer to that question, the Court has delivered a blunt "No." </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Abortion constitutes an ultimately irreconcilable moral, ethical and legal conflict between competing claims for an absolute right. The claim
made by abortion-rights opponents on behalf of the fetus (or zygote or embryo)
is for the absolute right to life of the fetus. But this right can only come at the expense of the right to bodily self-ownership of the girl or woman in whose body the fetus is gestating. At the same time, the claim made by abortion-rights supporters is for the absolute right of bodily self-ownership of girls and women of child-bearing age. In the case of abortion, this right can only come at the expense of the right to life of the fetus. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The majority in <i><a href="https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep410/usrep410113/usrep410113.pdf" target="_blank">Roe v. Wade</a>, </i>which, along with <a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6298856056242550994&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr" target="_blank"><i>Planned Parenthood of Southeast Pennsylvania v. Casey</i></a>, <i>Dobbs</i> now overrules, did not base its decision explicitly on a right of "bodily self-ownership" but on the right to privacy (which would seem to treat bodily self-ownership as a foregone conclusion): </span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="font-family: times;">The Constitution does not explicitly mention any right of privacy. In a line of decisions, however, going back perhaps as far as <i>Union Pacific R. Co. v. Botsford</i> . . . (1891), the Court has recognized that a right of personal privacy, or a guarantee of certain areas or zones of privacy, does exist under the Constitution. In varying contexts, the Court or individual Justices have, indeed, found at least the roots of that right in the First Amendment, <i>Stanley v. Georgia</i> . . . (1969); in the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, <i>Terry v. Ohio</i> . . . (1968), <i>Katz v. United States</i> . . . (1967), <i>Boyd v. United States</i> . . . (1886), see <i>Olmstead v. United States</i> . . . (1928) . . . ; in the penumbras of the Bill of Rights,</span></span><span><span style="font-family: times;"> <i>Griswold v. Connecticut</i> . . . ; in the Ninth Amendment . . . ; or in the concept of liberty guaranteed by the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment, see <i>Meyer v. Nebraska</i> . . . (1923). These decisions make it clear that only personal rights that can be deemed "fundamental" or "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty," <i>Palko v. Connecticut</i> . . . (1937), are included in this guarantee of personal privacy. They also make it clear that the right has some extension to activities relating to marriage, <i>Loving v. Virginia</i> . . . (1967); procreation, <i>Skinner v. Oklahoma</i> . . . (1942); contraception, <i>Eisenstadt v. Baird</i> . . . ; family relationships, <i>Prince v. Massachusetts</i> . . . (1944); and child rearing and education, <i>Pierce v. Society of Sisters</i> . . . (1925), <i>Meyer v. Nebraska, supra</i>.</span></span></span></p></blockquote><p><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"></span></span></p><blockquote><p><span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">This right of privacy, whether it be founded in the Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action, as we feel it is, or, as the District Court determined, in the Ninth Amendment's reservation of rights to the people, is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy. The detriment that the State would impose upon the pregnant woman by denying this choice altogether is apparent. . . .</span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Significantly, the majority in <i>Roe</i> did <i>not</i> regard the right to privacy (and, presumably, the right to bodily self-ownership) as absolute and therefore sought a middle ground between the right of a woman to terminate her pregnancy <i>and</i> what it regarded as a legitimate state interest in "promoting . . . the potentiality of human life." <i>Roe</i> thus incorporated a scheme in which pregnancy was divided into three trimesters:</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">For the stage prior to approximately the end of the first trimester, the abortion decision and its effectuation must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman's attending physician. . . .</span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">For the stage subsequent to approximately the end end of the first trimester, the State, in promoting its interest in the health of the mother, may, if it so chooses, regulate the abortion procedure in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health. . . .</span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">For the stage subsequent to viability the State, in promoting its interest in the potentiality of human life, may, if it chooses, regulate, and even proscribe, abortion except where necessary, in appropriate medical judgment, for the preservation of the life or health of the mother. . . .</span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">This is not a radical decision. Say what you will about its legal reasoning, <i>Roe</i> provided a pragmatic and eminently workable solution to the conundrum posed by the fundamentally irreconcilable claims of those on opposite sides of the abortion debate. Moreover, the more-or-less equitable compromise of <i>Roe</i> is reflected in the <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/majority-of-americans-dont-want-roe-overturned" target="_blank">widely prevailing beliefs and attitudes of a majority of the American people</a>.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span><span>For my part, <i>Roe</i> did not go far enough. For one thing, I have always been bothered by the idea that "the abortion decision . . . </span></span>must be left to the medical judgment of the pregnant woman's attending physician." It should be left to the girl or woman herself and to no one else.</span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Likewise, while I appreciate <i>Roe's</i> </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">conclusion that the "Fourteenth Amendment's concept of personal liberty and restrictions upon state action . . . is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy," I am also bothered by the fact that the majority pointedly rejected the idea that the right to privacy is absolute as is, by implication, the right to bodily self-ownership:</span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">. . . [A]ppellant and some amici argue that the woman's right is absolute and that she is entitled to terminate her pregnancy at whatever time, in whatever way, and for whatever reason she alone chooses. With this we do not agree. Appellant's arguments that Texas either has no valid interest at all in regulating the abortion decision, or no interest strong enough to support any limitation upon the woman's sole determination, are unpersuasive. . . . [A] State may properly assert important interests in safeguarding health in maintaining medical standards and in protecting potential life. At some point in pregnancy, these respective interests become sufficiently compelling to sustain regulation of the factors that govern the abortion decision. The privacy right involved, therefore, cannot be said to be absolute. In fact, it is not clear to us that the claim asserted by some amici that one has an unlimited right to do with one's body as one pleases bears a close relationship to the right of privacy previously articulated in the Court's decisions. The Court has refused to recognize an unlimited right of the kind in the past.</span></span></span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">If the right to privacy as established under the Fourteenth Amendment is not, in fact, absolute, that is why the decision in </span></span><i>Roe</i> should have been predicated, instead, on the Thirteenth Amendment, the amendment outlawing slavery and involuntary servitude. Any statute that prohibits abortion - especially without exception and during the pre-viability period - denies women ownership of their own bodies and, thereby, relegates pregnant women to the level of chattel. It reduces them to living, breathing state-controlled incubators. As for involuntary servitude, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/26/opinion/justice-alito-reproductive-justice-constitution-abortion.html" target="_blank">what are forced pregnancy and childbirth if not that</a>? </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The question is, if pregnant women do not own their own bodies, as <i>Dobbs</i> has determined, who does? Prior to the enactment of <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/article/abortion-law-texas.html" target="_blank">S.B.8</a> in Texas, presumably, abortion bans rested on the premise that women's bodies, once they become pregnant, become the property of the State. However, since Texas, in banning most abortions, has cleverly taken the State out of its enforcement mechanism, the bodies of pregnant women should more properly be understood to be the collective property of all other citizens. (So much for conservatives' professed hostility to socialism.)</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">My own view is that the ethics of abortion start from the premise that every woman has an absolute right of ownership and control of her body and this right outweighs all other competing or conflicting rights. It follows, therefore, that the right of ownership and control of one's own body includes the right to terminate a pregnancy.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">This is not to suggest that the <i>ethics</i> of abortion (as opposed to laws restricting it) should not involve weighing factors such as the the timing and the reason for an abortion. There are abortions that I regard as not just ethically unacceptable but morally repellent. An example would be an abortion <a href="https://academic.oup.com/bmb/article/98/1/7/468425" target="_blank">performed solely for sex-selection</a>; another would be <a href="https://dbalablog.blogspot.com/2019/06/pro-choice-means-means-pro-choice.html" target="_blank">an abortion imposed upon a woman without her consent</a>. This last example is as much a violation of bodily autonomy as denying a woman her right to an abortion would be. But, leaving this example aside, I can certainly imagine other cases of abortion that I would regard as unethical. Yet the conviction with which I hold my own ethical views does not entitle me to impose them on another person to the extent of usurping her ownership of her own body. An ethical precept may be compelling; it can and ought to carry a great deal of weight. But it cannot outweigh a <i>right</i>. Those who oppose abortion on ethical (or religious grounds) are free to use moral suasion (as opposed to coercion) to encourage women not to terminate their pregnancies. What they should not be free to do - whether acting as individuals or in concert through state mechanisms - is prevent women from exercising their fundamental right to terminate their pregnancies. That holds in every case across the spectrum of abortions, from those abortions that are ethically unambiguous (for example, to save the life of the woman carrying the fetus), to abortions in which the explicit reasons may be regarded (by those who would support abortion in more compelling cases) as insufficient to justify abortion, to those abortions that may be regarded as unambiguously morally repugnant. Even moral repugnance is not a sufficient justification for denying a woman her fundamental right of bodily self-ownership.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The essential holding of the current Supreme Court majority in <i>Dobbs</i> is that, because abortion is not mentioned by name, a right to have one does not exist under the Constitution. There are, of course innumerable things that are not mentioned in the Constitution but their omission does not imply that they can be proscribed. That is particularly true of rights. Indeed, the Ninth Amendment specifically states that "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." It was partly on the basis of this amendment that the majority in <i>Roe</i> recognized the right to abortion. But, as noted above, the decision in <i><a href="https://www.loc.gov/item/usrep410113/" target="_blank">Roe</a> </i>was based even more substantially on the right of privacy implicit in the Fourteenth Amendment. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The <i>Dobbs</i> decision offers numerous specific justifications for its overruling of <i>Roe </i>and for its blanket condemnation of <i>Roe</i> as "egregiously wrong from the start." But does anybody really believe that the majority in <i>Dobbs</i> consists of impartial jurists who are as neutral on abortion as they assert the Constitution is? I'm no constitutional scholar but it seems to me that if a jurist is appointed to the Supreme Court <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/19/trump-ill-appoint-supreme-court-justices-to-overturn-roe-v-wade-abortion-case.html" target="_blank">explicitly for the purpose of overturning <i>Roe</i></a>, as Gorsuch, Kavanaugh and Barrett all were, or if <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/03/politics/who-is-justice-samuel-alito/index.html" target="_blank">a jurist with a long history of hostility to <i>Roe</i></a><i> </i>sets out to overrule it, as Alito did, it should not be too difficult for him to selectively quote case law and <a href="https://www.heraldnet.com/opinion/viewpoints-the-imagined-history-of-abortion-laws/" target="_blank">cherry-pick history</a> in order to rationalize the desired legal outcome. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">It's also remarkable that the majority, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2022/06/24/us/politics/supreme-court-dobbs-jackson-analysis-roe-wade.html" target="_blank">in attempting to justify its overruling of <i>Roe</i> (and <i>Casey</i>) </a> argues that </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">what sharply distinguishes the abortion right from the rights recognized in the cases on which Roe and Casey rely is something that both those decision acknowledged: Abortion destroys what those decisions call "potential life" and what the law at issue in this case regards as the life of an "unborn human being." <br /></span></span></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">In other words, the right to an abortion is unlike any other because the exercise of that right results in the death of another person or potential person, depending upon one's view of fetal life. And, yet, one day prior to issuing its ruling in <i>Dobbs</i>, the same majority on the Court had no compunction about <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/23/us/supreme-court-ny-open-carry-gun-law.html" target="_blank">striking down a New York law</a> that restricted the right to carry a gun in public. Evidently, unlike abortion, guns are not implicated at all in the destruction of human life.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i>Dobbs</i> will forever be recognized as one of the most transparently ideological, perverse and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/24/opinion/roe-v-wade-dobbs-democracy.html" target="_blank">antidemocratic</a> Supreme Court decisions in our nation's history - perhaps in any nation's history. I can think of only one other that equals it in its wholesale diminution of the status of an entire class of persons to the level of legal subservience: the <i>Dred Scott</i> decision. <i>Dred Scott v. Sandford</i> was the 1857 decision written by chief justice Roger B. Taney which held that Black people, even those born in the United States but whose ancestors had been enslaved and brought to the United States as enslaved people, could not be citizens of the United States. Taney ruled, additionally, that enslaved Black people were, legally-speaking, property and, therefore, that any law that deprived slave-owners of their human property was, under the Fifth Amendment, unconstitutional.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">There is another Supreme Court decision that at least approaches <i>Dred Scott</i> and <i>Dobbs</i> in its broad denial of fundamental rights to an entire class of persons: the <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/478/186/" target="_blank"><i>Bowers v. Hardwick</i> decision of 1986</a>. This was the decision that confirmed that states may ban certain private sexual acts between consenting male adults. A</span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">lthough, as written, the statute being challenged banned oral and anal sex between anyone, regardless of sex or sexual orientation</span></span>, the <i>Bowers</i> case concerned the prosecution of two gay men. Accordingly, the question as framed in the majority's decision was </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">whether the
Constitution guaranteed a right to engage in "homosexual sodomy" and the Court ruled that it did not.</span></span> <i>Bowers</i> was regarded as a sweeping repudiation of the right of gay men to engage in sexual relationships. When the ruling was issued, attorney and former director of the Lambda Legal Education and Defense Fund, <a href="https://www.eriegaynews.com/news/article.php?recordid=201510tomstoddard" target="_blank">Tom Stoddard</a>, famously <a href="https://www.upi.com/Archives/1986/06/30/The-Supreme-Court-in-a-major-defeat-for-homosexuals/7557520488000/" target="_blank">said</a>, "Twenty-five years from now this will be viewed as the Dred Scott case of the gay rights movement." (<i>Bowers</i> was reversed seventeen years later by <i>Lawrence v. Texas</i>.)<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">I do not think we will need to wait twenty-five years to view <i>Dobbs</i> as the <i>Dred Scott</i> case not just of women's reproductive rights but of their status as formerly free and equal citizens and as human beings. Just as <i>Dred Scott</i> relegated Black people to the legal status of non-citizens and property, the <i>Dobbs </i>ruling has now established under the Constitution the prerogative of every state legislature to reduce the legal status of pregnant women to that of less-than-autonomous citizens who may legally be deprived of their right to ownership and control of their own bodies and reproductive lives. It's hard to put a word to the subservient legal status to which this Court has now given the states carte blanche to reduce women but it's not an exaggeration to say that women in states that ban abortion may now be regarded as not fully persons. Indeed, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/29/opinion/abortion-vaccine-mandate.html" target="_blank">as Michelle Goldberg reminds us,</a> Ellen Willis expressed it perfectly decades ago when she observed that "the central question in the abortion debate is not whether a fetus is a person but whether a woman is." In answer to the second part of that question, the Supreme Court has also now delivered a blunt "No."<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i>Dred Scott</i> was never overruled by a subsequent Supreme Court. It took the Civil War and ratification of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments to undo it. In fact, the <i>Dred Scott</i> decision is widely recognized as one of the precipitating factors that led ultimately to the Civil War itself. Will the <i>Dobbs</i> decision prove to be just as destructive? Undoubtedly. Will
it ultimately lead, as the <i>Dred Scott</i> decision ended up doing, to a major social and political upheaval and to a fundamental reordering of our
political and legal systems so that the right of women to own and
control their own bodies is universally recognized, codified, treated as inviolable
and placed, once and for all, beyond the reach of those who would
abridge or deny it? That, dear Reader, is up to you.</span></span></p><p><i><span style="font-family: times;">* While I acknowledge the fact that there are people capable of becoming pregnant who identify as male, I have consciously chosen to limit the use of sex-identifying words in this essay to "girls" and "women." In part, this is an editorial choice for simplicity. However, in the broad context of the historical struggle for women's equality and in the specific context of the struggle for women's reproductive rights, I also believe that taking the focus off of women - as historically understood to comprise the female half of a sexually dimorphic species - in the present case would be a disservice to them and to those struggles. I do not regard it as mere coincidence that reproductive rights and women's rights have been and are again being curtailed. Women are being deprived of their reproductive rights not in spite of the fact that they are women but because of it. Thus, to fail to identify women by name as a distinct class with a history of oppression in a discussion of abortion rights would be to negate its entire premise.<br /></span></i></p><div><p><span style="font-family: times;">* * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * *
* *<br /></span></p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><i><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/s365/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="299" data-original-width="365" height="163" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/w200-h163/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" width="200" /></a></div></i></span><i>David
Balashinsky is originally from New York City and now lives near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. He is a licensed physical therapist and writes about bodily autonomy and
human rights, gender, culture, and politics. </i></span><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i>He currently serves on the board of directors for the <a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">Genital Autonomy Legal Defense & Education Fund</a>, (GALDEF),</i></span> the board of
directors and advisors for <a href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" target="_blank">Doctors Opposing Circumcision</a> and the leadership team for <a href="https://www.bruchim.online/" target="_blank">Bruchim</a>.</i></span></i><br /> </span><br /><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"> </span></span></div><p><br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-66817615631323776432022-03-28T12:48:00.063-07:002022-10-03T05:32:58.624-07:00The Universality of the Cause of Genital Autonomy<p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: small;"><i>The following is the text of remarks that were delivered as a recorded address on 7 May 2022 to commemorate the <b>Worldwide Day of Genital Autonomy</b>. </i></span><br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;">by <b>David Balashinsky </b><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">May 7th, 2022 is the tenth anniversary of an important event in the struggle for the right not to be subjected to genital cutting: the ruling by the Regional Court of Cologne recognizing that nonconsensual, non-therapeutic penile circumcision constitutes an illegal act of bodily harm. That ruling is commemorated every May 7th as the <b>Worldwide Day of Genital Autonomy</b>. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">But a commemoration is not a celebration. We observe the anniversary of that ruling because it was so groundbreaking, but that also demonstrates how far we have to go. Instead of congratulating the Cologne Court for its decision, we should be asking, "How could any court, anywhere, conclude otherwise?" If we lived in a world in which fundamental human rights were universally respected, the Cologne ruling of May 7th 2012 would not be commemorated because it would not be exceptional. In a just world, rulings such as the one we remember today would be foregone conclusions and would not even be worth noting.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">But we do not live in a just world. The events of the past few months have brought that forcefully to the forefront of the world's consciousness. As I speak these words, the unprovoked Russian invasion of Ukraine has left thousands dead, millions displaced, leveled whole cities, threatens European peace and security and threatens the entire post-World-War-Two world order. In my own country, the right of girls and women to obtain safe, legal and timely abortions is under greater threat and already is being curtailed more than it has at any time during the past half century. </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span style="font-family: times;">Meanwhile, the epidemic of missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls continues unabated, </span></span>racial justice continues to be an unfulfilled dream and antisemitic and AAPI hate crimes as well as hate crimes against other minorities continue to proliferate. Elsewhere around the world, rape continues to be used as a weapon of war in such places as Sudan, the Democratic Republic of Congo and northern Ethiopia. In Afghanistan, girls and women are denied the most basic human rights, including the right to an education, and are treated virtually as prisoners in their own homes. In Chechnya, gay men are systematically rounded up, imprisoned and tortured. Globally, authoritarianism is ascendant while democracy is in decline.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">These, of course, are not the only human-rights violations going on in the world today, nor are the crises humanity is faced with limited to obvious and direct human-rights violations. As I speak these words, the world has barely begun to recover from the worst pandemic it has seen in over a century, with more than five million dead. Meanwhile, climate change, resulting from the burning of fossil fuels, poses a serious threat to the environment, to the world's economies, to millions of lives, even to civilization itself.<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">In short, there is no end of problems and no end of human-rights abuses that deserve our attention. So, why this one? Why focus on the right of genital autonomy?</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The short answer is that one doesn't <i>choose</i> to care about the right of genital autonomy, just as one doesn't <i>choose</i> to care about human rights more generally. The only choice we make is whether we are willing to apply our ethical beliefs consistently. That means looking beyond our prejudices and moral blind spots and finding the common denominator of all human-rights movements. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">That common denominator, I believe, is the right to be secure in one's person, and <i>that</i> means the right of bodily integrity. That is the most basic, the most important human right there is. It precedes every other right because, without it, no other right matters. As William Douglas put it, "The right to be let alone is indeed the beginning of all freedom." The right to be free from harm, from violence, from sexualized violence; the right to control one's reproductive health and to decide for oneself whether and when to have a child; the right to an open future; the right to control one's gender identity; the right to control one's sexuality; the right to embrace or reject one's parents' religious beliefs without having had them literally marked in one's flesh without one's consent; the right to experience the fullness of one's body and one's humanity; the right to be oneself - all of these can be distilled down to the right of bodily integrity and <i>that </i>right means nothing without the right of genital autonomy. For, if bodily integrity is the starting point of all other rights, that right is especially inviolable with respect to the most private, vulnerable and intimate parts of our bodies. If one accepts the premise that fundamental human rights belong to every human being equally, and that all human <i>bodies</i> - including children's bodies - have a right to exist without being harmed, scarred, surgically altered or modified without consent, one has no choice but to oppose every form of involuntary, non-therapeutic genital cutting.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The right to genital autonomy, then, is simultaneously universal <i>and</i> quintessential: the essence to which all other rights can be distilled. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">For me, personally, the right to genital autonomy is also the conclusion to which the many particulars of my <i>own</i> experience and identity inevitably lead. Accordingly, there is no type of genital cutting - from nontherapeutic neonatal penile circumcision to intersex surgery to infibulation - that does not contradict every belief I hold and, even more deeply, everything I <i>am</i>. I'm Jewish; <i>Jewish ethics</i> demand that I oppose genital cutting. I'm a healthcare worker; <i>medical ethics</i> demand that I oppose genital cutting. I'm a secular humanist; <i>humanism</i> demands that I oppose genital cutting. I'm a feminist; <i>feminism</i> demands that I oppose genital cutting. I'm a progressive; <i>progressivism</i> demands that I oppose genital cutting. I'm a supporter of abortion rights; the principle of <i>bodily autonomy</i> demands that I oppose genital cutting. I'm a human being; <i>my very humanity</i> demands that I oppose genital cutting.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Why care about genital autonomy? Because we are human, and genital autonomy is the most basic human right there is. Genital cutting, which deprives children of their right to genital autonomy, may not be the only human-rights violation occurring around the world today, but the consistent application of our ethical beliefs demands that, if we oppose <i>any</i> human-rights violation, we must oppose this one.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">I began by observing that today is an important anniversary in the struggle for genital autonomy. Yet, even as we commemorate the Cologne ruling of May 7th, 2012, let us rededicate ourselves to creating a world in which that ruling is no longer exceptional but, instead, is remembered as having been only the first in a series of similar rulings, statutory-, medical-, and cultural advancements that culminated in a world in which no such rulings ever again were necessary. When all children, everywhere, are protected from genital cutting, that will be when the <b>Worldwide Day of Genital Autonomy</b> represents not an event that we commemorate but an achievement that we celebrate.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"></span></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-cl-BsiWPECqd2bnGSM0AWMBhevNLavcHk9HL4-VKY0NZcKG5GGmgGy9aO_hpjGt_jDGH9EGkRe84eoT2Ch5ORLUftCbT-dbtTxUIlelcz08Y8U7GHi7FxJDC3qTU29FlCs-1GWk6WdAv_3UhLJ9bnSJU-dKLsP7BOZnwhNCDGZpsFzbLyNzBjIOz/s509/Screen%20Shot%202022-05-07%20at%205.24.58%20AM.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="509" data-original-width="477" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-cl-BsiWPECqd2bnGSM0AWMBhevNLavcHk9HL4-VKY0NZcKG5GGmgGy9aO_hpjGt_jDGH9EGkRe84eoT2Ch5ORLUftCbT-dbtTxUIlelcz08Y8U7GHi7FxJDC3qTU29FlCs-1GWk6WdAv_3UhLJ9bnSJU-dKLsP7BOZnwhNCDGZpsFzbLyNzBjIOz/s320/Screen%20Shot%202022-05-07%20at%205.24.58%20AM.png" width="300" /></a></span></span></div><br /><p></p><div><p>* * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * *
* *<br /></p><span style="font-size: medium;"><i><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/s365/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="299" data-original-width="365" height="163" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/w200-h163/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" width="200" /></a></div></i></span><span style="font-family: times;"><i>David
Balashinsky is originally from New York City and now lives near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. He is a licensed physical therapist
and writes about bodily autonomy and
human rights, gender, culture, and politics. </i></span><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i> He currently serves on the board of directors for the <a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">Genital Autonomy Legal Defense & Education Fund</a>, (GALDEF),</i></span> the board of
directors and advisors for <a href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" target="_blank">Doctors Opposing Circumcision</a> and the leadership team for <a href="https://www.bruchim.online/" target="_blank">Bruchim</a>.</i></span><br /> <br /><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"> </span></span></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-15879211172004200202022-03-28T09:05:00.022-07:002023-06-22T05:11:17.830-07:00Brendon Marotta's "The Abuse of Jewish Fragility": a Case Study in How to Undermine the Cause of Genital Autonomy through Jewish Scapegoating and the Use of Classic Antisemitic Tropes<p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: small;">by <b>David Balashinsky </b></span><br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">I got involved in <i>intactivism</i> (the name by which the cause of eradicating male genital mutilation is informally known) approximately nine years ago. Like many, my introduction to the movement and my initial involvement with it as an advocate were both through social media. Within the first few hours of my involvement, I came up against the strand of antisemitism that, unfortunately, runs through this movement in its social-media incarnation. I'm referring to unambiguously antisemitic jokes and comments and classic Jewish scapegoating. This antisemitism was by no means a majority of what I found among intactivists on Facebook but it was, nevertheless, conspicuous and ever-present. Needless to say, it was disappointing. Equally disappointing was the tolerance for it among some Facebook intactivist-group page administrators who, when I brought examples of antisemitism to their attention, not only remained silent about them but refused to remove them from their groups' pages. I spent many fruitless hours combating the antisemitism coming from some of my fellow intactivists who supposedly were on the same side of the barricades as I was (and still am) in the war against male genital mutilation and many fruitless hours combating the acquiescence and complicity of those administrators who tolerated the antisemitism in our midst.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">This is part of the context in which Brendon Marotta's <a href="https://www.hegemonmedia.com/p/the-abuse-of-jewish-fragility?s=r" target="_blank">latest blog post</a> must be understood. His post, entitled "The Abuse of Jewish Fragility," contains one antisemitic slur after the other and should not go unchallenged. I actually have no choice but to challenge it. After all, just a moment ago I criticized those Facebook intactivist page administrators for their complicity in antisemitism through their silence about it. If I say nothing about Marotta's unabashed antisemitism in the present case, what, then, am I, if not equally complicit?</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">There are several other specific, important and even urgent reasons to speak out against Marotta's Jew-baiting. First, there is a correlation between antisemitic hate speech and antisemitic violence. The one always precedes the other. To the extent that antisemitic hate speech increases, we can expect acts of antisemitic violence to increase also. That is why countering hate speech is an essential part of defending against antisemitic violence. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Then, of course, there is the simple and even more basic reason that a libel against a person, a race, a nationality, an ethnic group, a religion, a sex, a gender or a sexual orientation is wrong, unethical and injurious on its face and should not, as a matter of justice but also just on principle, go undisputed.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Still another reason why all who oppose antisemitism - and not just antisemitism but any sort of hate speech - cannot remain silent when they encounter it is that acquiescence - silence - contributes indirectly to a culture of normalization of hate speech. If one doesn't meet it head on, the only inference that others not already intellectually armed against it are left to make is that the hate speech is essentially valid or, at the very least, is no big deal. <br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">But still another reason - and this is as important to me as an intactivist as the others are to me as a Jew - is that the antisemitic rhetoric now coming from someone as <a href="https://www.imdb.com/title/tt7628146/" target="_blank">notable in our movement as Brendon Marotta</a> is precisely the sort of thing that threatens to undermine the legitimacy and credibility of our movement. It is no secret that there <i>have</i> been proponents of male genital mutilation - including both Jews and non-Jews - who would like to throw the baby out with the bathwater because they view the genital autonomy movement as being intrinsically antisemitic. Marotta's antisemitic post does nothing but provide these genital-mutilation proponents with more fodder. Antisemitism coming from intactivists validates their view and plays perfectly into their hands. They have only to point to Marotta's latest blog post and say, "You see? We told you so." This threatens to undermine the cause of genital autonomy itself.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">With that, I turn to Marotta's post, in which he portrays "Jewish people" and "Jewish organizations" as "abusers" and intactivists as "victims." In fact, Marotta couches his entire argument in the language of psychology and relationship violence:</span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">When someone is in an abusive relationship, they often have to construct a mental model of their abuser in order to survive. They use the mental model to understand what will set off the abuse. If I do this, will they attack me? . . .<br /></span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">. . . In an abusive relationship, this keeps the victim in a state of hyper-vigilance, because if at any point they fail to do this labor, they risk being harmed.</span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Unfortunately, this abusive relationship dynamic is the current dynamic between activists against genital cutting and Jewish fragility. If at any point those against circumcision express their thoughts or feelings in a way that triggers Jewish fragility, they risk abuse.</span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">This is so patently absurd and so manifestly antisemitic that it barely warrants any explication of <i>how</i> it is these things. And yet, I have an obligation to follow through and be specific. So - <br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The very act of framing the relationship between Jews and intactivists as one of "abusers" (Jews) and "victims" (intactivists) as Marotta does throughout his post is yet another iteration of the classic antisemitic myth of insuperable Jewish power. This trope goes back centuries but perhaps reached its zenith with the publication, in 1903, of <i>The Protocols of the Elders of Zion</i>, a fabricated pamphlet that purports to detail a Jewish plot for world domination. To this day, antisemites ascribe tremendous power and influence to Jews, even to the point of <a href="https://www.vox.com/22256258/marjorie-taylor-greene-jewish-space-laser-anti-semitism-conspiracy-theories" target="_blank">controlling the space lazers that supposedly were responsible for causing the 2018 California wildfires</a>. <i>"</i>The Jews<i>"</i> are habitually represented by antisemites as being the hidden puppet masters behind the powerful forces that we <i>do</i> see (the government and corporations) that control the lives and limit the freedoms of the virtuous non-Jewish masses. We supposedly own all the banks, all the media and everything else that matters and woe betide anyone who dares oppose our agenda. Marotta sounds every one of these themes: "Jewish organizations also have systemic power with the ability to deplatform people from social media, put them on law-enforcement watch lists, or remove them from banking and payment processors." Marotta's calumnies against Jews could not be more blunt or unambiguous: "The only people responsible for the abusive Jewish reaction to activists against circumcision are Jewish abusers." The point is further illustrated by a picture at the head of the post depicting a man's hand clenched into a fist, presumably representing Jewish might crushing the spirits of intactivists. <br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">It goes without saying that when Marotta refers to "Jewish organizations," "Jewish people" or "Jewish fragility," as he does throughout his piece, he means <i>the Jews</i>, collectively, as though we are all part of one hegemonic and monolithic entity: a worldwide cabal of evildoers. Nowhere in his post - not once - does Marotta specify that he is reserving his criticism for Jewish proponents of male genital mutilation. Neither, for that matter, does he ever once acknowledge the existence of antisemitism within intactivism, nor acknowledge the presence within intactivism of <a href="https://dbalablog.blogspot.com/2017/06/response-to-ej-dickson-plea-for-reason.html" target="_blank">so many Jews</a>. The word <i>Jewish </i>appears fifteen times in Marotta's post and, literally, every time it appears it is used in such a way as to equate <i>Jewishness </i>with support for genital mutilation and with suppression - "abuse" - of intactivists.<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Moreover, every time the word <i>Jewish</i>
appears, Marotta uses it to equate Jewishness with an unflattering, a
dysfunctional or a positively malevolent characteristic. This, too, is
classic antisemitism: attributing specific discreditable traits to Jews
as though these loathsome characteristics are quintessentially Jewish
and inextricable from Jewishness and from Jews. Thus, the phrase
"Jewish fragility" (or a close variant) appears nine times.</span></span> <br /></p><div class="elementToProof" style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, serif;"><span style="font-size: medium;">I
have learned, since publishing this essay in March,* that the phrase
"Jewish fragility" appears to be the concoction of the well-known
<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/28/opinion/christian-nationalists-capitol-attack.html" target="_blank">Christian nationalist</a> and <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/26/diplomat-online-activity-blood-and-faith-471755" target="_blank">antisemite, Fritz Berggren</a>. Berggren <a href="https://bloodandfaith.com/2021/02/28/jewish-fragility/" target="_blank">defines "Jewish fragility"</a> as <br /></span></div><blockquote><div class="elementToProof" style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, serif;"><span style="font-size: medium;">feelings
of discomfort a Jewish person experiences when they witness discussions
around race and theology. This may trigger anger, fear, guilt, and
violence. . . . <br /></span></div></blockquote><blockquote><div class="elementToProof" style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, serif;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Manifestations of Jewish fragility commonly include accusing others of what they do themselves. . . . <br /></span></div></blockquote><blockquote><div class="elementToProof" style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, serif;"><span style="font-size: medium;">One
manifestation of Jewish fragility was the reaction to Jesus Christ, who
verbally chastised them for hypocrisy. As a result, the Jews used
their power and influence (Jewish privilege) to have him executed. </span></div></blockquote><div class="elementToProof" style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span>By linking <i>Jewish </i>and <i>fragility</i> into a single entity - <i>Jewish fragility</i>
- Berggren reifies "fragility" as a quintessentially Jewish trait,
although, to be fair, he does <a href="https://bloodandfaith.com/2021/02/28/progressive-fragility/" target="_blank">the same for progressives and liberals</a>:
<br /></span></span></span></span></div><div class="elementToProof" style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span><blockquote><p style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">Progressive
fragility refers to feelings of discomfort a Progressive experiences
when they witness discussions around race and theology. This may
trigger anger, fear, guilt, silence, and threats of violence.</p></blockquote><blockquote><p style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">Progressives
may find it difficult to speak to unapologetic Whites. The Progressive
person may become defensive, and the White person may feel obligated to
comfort the Progressive because we live in a Progressive-dominated
environment.</p></blockquote>The essential points that Berggren is making </span></span>in
both of these constructs is that the worldview of those whom he labels
as "fragile" - whether Jews or progressives - is fundamentally wrong and
self-serving and that both groups occupy positions of overwhelming (and
undeserved) power.<br /></span></span></div><div class="elementToProof" style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman", Times, serif; font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><br /></span></span></div><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Apparently
following Berggern's lead, Marotta extends the concept of "Jewish
fragility" to the genital-autonomy movement. What Marotta seems to be
claiming, therefore, is that Jewish criticism of intactivism could not
possibly have any merit: that it is attributable exclusively to an
inability on the part of Jews to tolerate any criticism of
circumcision. This represents Jews - and, again, Marotta is not
speaking only of those Jews who oppose our movement but of all Jews,
since he uses "Jewish fragility" to refer to a Jewish trait - as not
only being congenitally thin-skinned but <i>entitled</i>: as though Jews
regard themselves as being special and beyond reproach, which is, of
course, another classic antisemitic stereotype. This is not just unfair
to Jews but perversely so. Among the most vociferous critics of
anything that can be claimed, with a modicum of historical and
epistemological accuracy to be "Jewish" (when such criticism is not
simply antisemitism pretending to be more than it is) are Jews
themselves. We're notorious for infighting and disagreeing with Jewish
religious and political orthodoxy. That, indeed, is one of the reasons
why there is such a schism among Jews now regarding the extent to which
we should or should not refrain from criticizing what many of us believe
to be the Israeli government's mistreatment of the Palestinians. And
it is one of the reasons why there is such <a data-auth="NotApplicable" href="https://dbalablog.blogspot.com/2020/10/an-open-letter-to-prime-minister-mette.html">division among Jews</a> on the topic and the practice of infant circumcision. None of these distinctions matters to Marotta: it's all <i>the Jews this</i> or <i>the Jews that</i>. Or, to be more precise, it's <i>Jews are the abusers</i> <i>and</i> <i>intactivists are their victims</i>.</span></span><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Other than the antisemitic myth of vast Jewish power, the predominant theme of Marotta's post is that of Jewish malevolence. This, too, is a classic antisemitic canard that Marotta not only recycles but reinforces by the repetition of the word <i>abuse</i> (or some variation of it) throughout his piece. That word - <i>abuse</i> - appears no less than thirty-three times, and every one of those times Marotta uses it to characterize what Jews allegedly do to intactivists (and without an iota of supporting evidence, incidentally). On the other hand, the word <i>victim</i> appears nine times and, every time, Marotta uses it exclusively to refer to intactivists.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">It was news to me that Jews ever encouraged violence against intactivists, and yet Marotta actually makes this claim:</span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">If at any point those against circumcision express their thoughts or
feelings in a way that triggers Jewish fragility, they risk abuse. This abuse can take the form of anything from slurs and insults to
actual incitements of violence. When Jewish people call activists and
survivors "Nazis" or "antisemites," they are inciting violence since
violence against people in those categories is socially permissible.</span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Just for some perspective here, in 2018, eleven Jews were murdered and six other people - four of them police officers - were injured in an act of <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/27/us/active-shooter-pittsburgh-synagogue-shooting.html" target="_blank">antisemitic violence at the Tree of Life Synagogue in Pittsburgh</a>. The very next year, <a href="https://www.ocregister.com/2020/05/12/u-s-anti-semitic-incidents-surge-to-all-time-high-in-2019-adl-report-shows/" target="_blank">2019, the ADL recorded the highest number of antisemitic incidents annually since it had begun tracking them 40 years previously</a>. <a href="https://www.adl.org/audit2019" target="_blank">Five of these incidents resulted in fatalities and over 90 of them were violent assaults</a>. <a href="https://www.jpost.com/diaspora/antisemitism/antisemitism-jews-target-of-58-percent-of-all-religiously-motivated-hate-crimes-in-us-678228" target="_blank">In 2020, Jews were the targets of 58% of all religiously-motivated hate crimes despite representing only about 2% of the population in the United States, according to FBI statistics</a>. In 2021, antisemitic incidents, including vandalism, harassment and assaults, <a href="https://www.adl.org/audit2021w" target="_blank">again reached a record high</a>, that is, to that date, "the highest number on record since [the] ADL began tracking antisemitic incidents in 1979." Just this past January, four attendees at a synagogue in Texas were taken hostage at gunpoint by a man who believed that Jews have so much power over the government that he (the hostage-taker) could extort one (a rabbi in New York) into making the government release a convicted terrorist from prison. This is the other part of the context in which Marotta's latest blog post must be understood. With thousands of antisemitic incidents occurring annually in the United States alone, with Jews being assaulted and murdered for being Jews, Marotta has taken it upon himself to denounce the scourge of Jewish "abusers" and taken up the cudgels on behalf of their "victims." How many intactivitsts have been assaulted or murdered this year, last year, or any year for speaking out against male genital mutilation?</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Besides accusing Jews of "abusing" and "inciting violence" against intactivitsts, Marotta accuses Jews of imposing "social sanctions" on intactivists and "deplatforming" them. Yet the only evidence he offers in support of this allegation is a link to an ADL article in which it announces a partnership with Big Tech to devise strategies to effectively combat online hate speech. But Big Tech and even the ADL do not treat intactivism, <i>per se</i>, as "hate speech." And the last time I checked, there were scores and probably hundreds of Facebook groups and pages dedicated to eradicating male genital mutilation. They're all still up and running and just as busy as ever. I, myself, am an administrator of five of them. I post anti-genital-mutilation comments, articles and videos almost every day and have done so for the last nine years and have never been censored or even warned by any social media platform that my intactivism constitutes a form of hate speech or risks running afoul of the platform's "community standards." On the contrary, it has been my experience that, when I <i>have </i>reported antisemitic or other types of hate speech to Facebook or another platform, it is almost impossible to get the platform to remove it. I haven't maintained a careful record of the statistics but I suspect that my experience is much like that of <a href="https://www.propublica.org/article/facebook-hate-speech-censorship-internal-documents-algorithms" target="_blank">others who have tried, and failed, to get hate speech removed from social media platforms</a> (or, conversely, had their own perfectly innocent posts taken down erroneously). In general, I would say that I succeed in getting Facebook to remove explicitly antisemitic hate speech less than half the time.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">It's hard to divine what Marotta's goal is in posting this attack on Jews. With his recent obsession with "<a href="https://www.hegemonmedia.com/p/what-is-systemic-pedophilia?s=r" target="_blank">systemic pedophilia</a>," the logical inference is that he is trying to curry favor with the Q-Anon crowd. But it's hard to see how that constituency might be induced to oppose genital cutting. Overwhelmingly, Q-Anon supporters tend to be precisely the sort of reactionary, aggressively patriarchal and easily-duped conformists who are most likely to endorse and perpetuate the deeply ingrained American custom - not the Jewish custom but the American custom - of nontherapeutic infant circumcision. Does Marotta think he can win them over by appealing to <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/aug/25/qanon-conspiracy-theory-explained-trump-what-is" target="_blank">their antisemitism</a>? Possibly. But that seems like a long shot, particularly if the goal is to eradicate MGM throughout our society: Q-Anon remains a cult with a minority following. And if Marotta is trying to appeal to the alt right more broadly, he will likely run up against the same devotion to circumcision that was <a href="https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2015/05/28/no-one-wants-to-live-in-a-world-of-uncircumcised-penises/" target="_blank">so eloquently articulated several years ago by one of that movement's leading lights, Milo Yiannopoulos</a>.<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">It's a shame to see an ally and an intactivist go over to the dark side, promote antisemitic stereotypes, risk alienating both Jewish and non-Jewish potential converts to our cause and undermine the credibility and legitimacy of the genital-autonomy movement. But, whatever his aims, this is what Marotta is now doing. Marotta's time and efforts would be far better spent doing what the vast majority of intactivists actually are doing: working to change a culture in which male genital mutilation has been medicalized and normalized, and doing so not by scapegoating Jews but by changing hearts and minds and by winning over those who do not yet share our convictions by appealing to them on the basis of our shared humanity, common decency and respect for fundamental human rights. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">*<i><span style="font-size: small;">This post was revised on 15 May 2022. Berggren's coinage of the phrase "Jewish fragility" was brought to my attention by Rebecca Wald, for which I here offer my acknowledgement and gratitude.</span></i><br /></span></span><br /></p><div><p>* * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * *
* *<br /></p><span style="font-size: medium;"><i><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/s365/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="299" data-original-width="365" height="163" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/w200-h163/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" width="200" /></a></div></i></span><span style="font-family: times;"><i>David
Balashinsky is originally from New York City and now lives near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. He is a licensed physical therapist
and writes about bodily autonomy and
human rights, gender, culture, and politics. </i></span><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i>He currently serves on the board of directors for the <a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">Genital Autonomy Legal Defense & Education Fund</a>, (GALDEF),</i></span> the board of
directors and advisors for <a href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" target="_blank">Doctors Opposing Circumcision</a> and the leadership team for <a href="https://www.bruchim.online/" target="_blank">Bruchim</a>.</i></span></i></span><br /> <br /><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"> </span></span></div>
<span class="post-author vcard"></span><p> </p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-36451995717737691912022-03-22T12:26:00.004-07:002022-12-09T02:58:15.725-08:00Maryland Acts To Protect Cats' Bodily Integrity. Human Males Will Have to Wait.<p></p><p><span style="font-family: times;">by <b>David Balashinsky</b></span> <span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"></span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"> </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Before I say anything else, let me state for the record that I am a
cat-lover and that none of my cats ever has or ever will be declawed. I
have long believed that cat declawing is both inhumane and unethical,
which is why I supported efforts to ban this practice in my
home state of New York and support banning the practice nationwide. As a New Yorker, I am proud that my state became the first to institute a statewide ban on cat declawing. <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/03/09/maryland-cats-declawing-illegal/?fbclid=IwAR0Fx6U_OjOQJuutIYBpQRYtgvxIcflkOSMe6xEceV_pXc-62p2HfdQfcWc" target="_blank">Maryland is now about to become the second state to do so</a>.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">
</span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Still, I have mixed feelings about these laws. The reason is that they create a legal protection for cats that, to this day,
is denied people like me. I am referring to human males and to the practice of removing boys' foreskins
when not medically indicated, a practice known as nontherapeutic penile circumcision or, simply, "circumcision." As much as I love cats, it is impossible for me not to view these anti-declawing laws from the vantage point
of someone who had part of his body cut off without his consent. Given that the part of me that was amputated without any rational reason or justification is just as important to me as cats' claws are to them, it is hard not to look at cats now without feeling some envy and resentment. I feel demeaned by the fact that my cats now have a greater legal right to bodily integrity than I would if I were the same age as they are.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">
</span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">A word about the male prepuce, or <i>foreskin</i>, is in order. Like cats' claws, the prepuce
has evolved and been retained through millions of years of evolution
because it serves important physiological functions. One of these is
providing protection for the glans penis in exactly the same way that
the clitoral hood, its homologous counterpart in females, provides
protection for the glans clitoris. (Anatomically, both the male
foreskin and the female clitoral hood are identified as the <i>prepuce</i>. Unlike boys, however, in New York, Maryland, and the rest of the United States, girls are allowed to keep theirs.) In addition, <a href="https://mosaicscience.com/story/troubled-history-foreskin/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">histological studies demonstrate that the male prepuce contains numerous sensory receptors</a>. These specialized, light-touch <i>mechanoreceptors</i> (known as <i>Meissner's corpuscles</i>),
are found in particularly dense concentrations in the body where
light-touch sensation is most important, including the finger tips, the
lips and, it should come as no surprise, the prepuce. Several studies
have demonstrated that the male prepuce is, in fact, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17378847" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">the primary sensory apparatus of the penis</a>. <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/does-circumcision-reduce-_b_9743242" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">All of the sensation that the prepuce enables an individual to experience is lost forever when this part of his penis is removed</a>. Moreover, once the glans penis has been permanently deprived of its natural protective covering, the glans, itself, becomes <i>keratinized</i> (dried out and "toughened up"), making it even less sensitive. In short, the male prepuce is not
"excess skin." It is an integral and essential part of a person's penis.
It is a part of his body that that individual has as much a right to keep as
he has to keep any other part of his body. And it is a part of his body that he has
as much a right to keep as cats have to keep their claws.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">
</span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">A word about nontherapeutic penile circumcision is also in order. Non-therapeutic neonatal penile circumcision (like cat declawing) is <i>always </i>performed without the consent of the one subjected to it. It <i>always</i>
entails the painful removal of a normal, functional and highly erotogenic body
part. And, in virtually all cases, penile circumcision is imposed on a child not because there is a pathological condition that needs to be
treated or a congenital deformity that needs to be corrected but,
rather, for reasons involving custom, social conformity, convenience,
socially-influenced aesthetics about human genitals, <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236061575_Cultural_Bias_in_the_AAP%27s_2012_Technical_Report_and_Policy_Statement_on_Male_Circumcision" target="_blank">specious medical rationalizations</a> and medical profiteering (often at
tax-payer expense through Medicaid funding).</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">
</span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Both cat declawing and penile circumcision, then, have a lot in common. </span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Both
entail the removal of a normal, functional body part. Both entail a surgical removal of healthy tissue
without any regard to the wishes of the
cat or infant human male who is subjected to it. Both practices are inhumane,
unnecessary, unjustifiable and unethical.</span></span></span></span> Not surprisingly, because the campaigns to ban both
practices are based on the same philosophical and moral principles,</span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">
many of those who oppose cat declawing also oppose nontherapeutic penile circumcision. </span></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Also
not surprisingly, just as there are parallels between the
practices themselves, there are parallels between the movements
to eradicate them. Consider the legislative history of the New York bill banning cat declawing. Passage of </span></span><a href="https://aldf.org/article/new-york-becomes-first-state-to-ban-cat-declawing/" target="_blank">Senate Bill S5532B / Assembly Bill A1303B</a>
did not happen overnight but was the culmination of a long, arduous
process that required its sponsors to persevere against the stiff headwinds of an
entrenched practice. The legislation had to overcome the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/22/nyregion/new-york-declaw-ban.html" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">opposition of the New York State Veterinary Medical Society (NYSVMS)</a>, which opposed it for <a href="https://vets.nysvms.org/viewdocument/declaw-position-paper" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">perfectly rational and, it could be argued, even humane reasons</a>.
It had to overcome the resistance of legislators who, no
doubt, initially scoffed at the notion that this is a matter worthy of
the legislature's time. It had to overcome the opposition of those who
believe that cat "owners" have a <i>righ</i>t to make such medical
decisions on behalf of their cats. And it even had to overcome the
opposition of those who profess to love cats and probably <i>do</i> love cats just as much as I do. It is
important to remember, in this regard, that
people who subject their cats to declawing are not evil, sadistic
monsters who want to harm their cats. These are people who love their
cats but who, for one reason or another, believe declawing to be
beneficial, appropriate and ethical. Thus, it was the combined resistance of
societal and institutional acceptance of cat declawing, including, especially, the normalization of it, that the bill's sponsors had to overcome in order to get it passed.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">These types of opposition to New York's anti-cat-declawing bill all have parallels in the campaign to eradicate nontherapeutic penile circumcision which, like the campaign to ban cat declawing, also
faces stiff institutional and cultural headwinds. Banning nontherapeutic circumcision is
opposed by medical trade associations (whose members profit handsomely
from the procedure), such as the American Academy of Pediatrics and The
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, both of which have
issued statements that implicitly or explicitly endorse nontherapeutic
circumcision while <a href="https://www.healthychildren.org/English/ages-stages/prenatal/decisions-to-make/Pages/Where-We-Stand-Circumcision.aspx" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">conceding that it is not medically necessary</a>. These <a href="https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/130/3/e756.short" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">position statements</a> include <a href="https://www.acog.org/-/media/For-Patients/faq039.pdf?dmc=1&ts=20200127T1118147812" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">one rationalization after the other </a>that
exaggerate the purported benefits of penile circumcision while minimizing or ignoring
its incontrovertible harms. In certain crucial respects, these organizations'
position statements on nontherapeutic circumcision are strikingly similar to <a href="https://vets.nysvms.org/viewdocument/declaw-position-paper" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">that of the NYSVMS on cat declawing</a>.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">
</span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Then there is the reluctance of legislators to take on this issue for
a variety of reasons, not least of which is their mistaken belief that a
ban on non-therapeutic circumcision would violate the first amendment's
guarantee of freedom of religion. Of course, numerous state
legislatures have demonstrated <a href="https://theconversation.com/unconstitutional-us-anti-fgm-law-exposes-hypocrisy-in-child-protection-109305" target="_blank">no such qualms about banning female genital cutting for religious reasons</a>. </span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">
</span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Added to this is the persistent cultural view of children as <i>property</i>. Many parents who support nontherapeutic penile circumcision claim that, because their children <i>belong</i>
to them, they (the parents) have a right to cut off part of their
children's genitals. This, too, mirrors the view of people who regard
companion animals as property, to do with whatever they choose.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">
</span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Finally, the genital autonomy movement has had to contend with the
deep-seated conviction of those who endorse nontherapeutic circumcision that this is not
something that one does <i>to </i>a child but <i>for</i> a child.
Those who practice genital cutting of any type - whether of boys, girls or intersex
children - sincerely believe that the genital surgery to which they are
subjecting their child will benefit that child. At the very least,
they regard it as harmless. Even when this blithe fantasy collides with the reality that <i>any</i> surgery is traumatic for an infant -
especially one performed on one of the most sensitive parts of the body
(and, typically, with insufficient or even no anesthetization) - still such
parents reason with themselves that, in any event, "the benefits
outweigh the risks" ("risks" serving, in this case, as a conceptual
stand-in for "harms"). Those who opt to have their sons circumcised thus
make a moral calculation that the overall good that results outweighs
the potential and even the actual harms of the surgery itself.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">
</span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Similarly, those who defend cat declawing do so on the principle that
it produces an overall good when the alternative is abandonment or
euthanasia. These cat-lovers likewise have made a moral calculation
that the overall good that results from having their cats declawed
outweighs the actual harms of declawing.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">
</span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">In both of these cases, however, it is not the person exercising this
surgical option who must live with the consequences of the surgery but
the cat or the human infant - and, of course, the man that that infant
will one day become, since circumcision is irreversible. Still, it must
be acknowledged that parents who impose their own penile preferences on their sons' bodies are not
evil, sadistic monsters who want to harm their sons. These are parents
who love their sons but who, for one reason or another, believe nontherapeutic circumcision to be beneficial, appropriate and ethical. This is no less true, by the way, of
parents who subject their daughters to what is known in our culture as female genital mutilation (FGM). The
parents in <i>these </i>cultures love their daughters just as much as we love
our sons. And when they choose genital cutting for their
daughters, they do not do so out of malice, nor do they regard it as "mutilation." They regard it as
beneficial, as something religiously mandated and as something <a href="https://www.dovepress.com/female-genital-mutilation-and-male-circumcision-toward-an-autonomy-bas-peer-reviewed-fulltext-article-MB" target="_blank">culturally meaningful</a>. Above all, like parents in our society, they
regard it as their right to make this decision on behalf of
their daughters.</span></span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">
</span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">If the similarities between cat-declawing and non-therapeutic penile circumcision were not plain enough, <a href="https://gothamist.com/news/update-cat-declawing-may-be-outlawed-in-ny-state" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">a statement by one of the New York bill's sponsors, Assemblymember Linda B. Rosenthal, which she made when she first introduced her legislation</a>, underscores the point:</span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"></span></span><br />
</p><blockquote>
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><i>There's no reason to do it unless the animal has [an]
infection that is never going away, or if there is a cancer or
tumor-related issue in the claw. It's basically done because humans
want it done, and I don't think it's our right to mutilate our animals
for our own satisfaction.</i></span></span></blockquote>
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">
</span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">Exactly the same can be said of nontherapeutic penile circumcision:</span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"></span></span><br />
<blockquote>
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><i>There's no reason to do it unless the infant has an
infection that is never going away, or if there is a cancer or
tumor-related issue in the prepuce. It's basically done because humans
want it done, and I don't think it's our right to mutilate our sons for
our own satisfaction.</i> </span></span></blockquote><p>
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">
</span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">All of which leads me to wonder how, in passing these anti-cat-declawing laws, these legislators can exude such compassion, empathy and respect for the bodily integrity of cats while remaining perfectly devoid of any comparable sentiments when it comes to the bodily integrity of human males. </span></span><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;">After all, don't we deserve to have the same rights as cats?</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><i><span style="font-size: medium;">Update: Maryland Governor Larry Hogan <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/maryland-bans-declawing-cats_n_62640a1be4b07c34e9e15723" target="_blank">signed the legislation banning cat-declawing in April of 2022</a> making Maryland the second state to ban this inhumane practice. As of now, however, there is no pending legislation in Maryland that would provide children with penises with the same legal protection for their genitals that Maryland now provides for cats' claws.</span></i><br /></span></span></p><div><p>* * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * *
* *<br /></p><span style="font-size: medium;"><i><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/s365/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="299" data-original-width="365" height="163" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/w200-h163/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" width="200" /></a></div></i></span><i><span style="font-family: times;">David
Balashinsky is originally from New York City and now lives near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. He is a licensed physical therapist and writes about bodily autonomy and
human rights, gender, culture, politics, and sometimes <a href="https://dbalablog.blogspot.com/2021/01/the-horseshoe.html" target="_blank">cats</a>. </span></i><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i>He currently serves on the board of directors for the <a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">Genital Autonomy Legal Defense & Education Fund</a>, (GALDEF),</i></span> the board of
directors and advisors for <a href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" target="_blank">Doctors Opposing Circumcision</a> and the leadership team for <a href="https://www.bruchim.online/" target="_blank">Bruchim</a>.</i></span><br /> <br /><br /><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"> </span></span></div>
<span class="post-author vcard"></span><p> </p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-88819061875465947752022-03-09T13:23:00.014-08:002022-12-11T03:28:39.816-08:00Democracy vs. Kyrsten Sinema<p><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: times;">by <b>David Balashinsky</b> <br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Back in January, when the world was a very different place, Kyrsten Sinema <a href="https://ktar.com/story/4842164/heres-the-full-text-of-sen-kyrsten-sinemas-speech-on-voting-rights-filibuster/" target="_blank">delivered a speech on the Senate floor</a> explaining her refusal to vote to eliminate the filibuster. Because two critical pieces of legislation, the <i><a href="https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/freedom-vote-act" target="_blank">Freedom to Vote Act</a></i> and the <i><a href="https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/john-lewis-voting-rights-advancement-act" target="_blank">John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act</a></i>, lack enough votes in the Senate to pass by the 60-vote threshold, eliminating the filibuster, which the Democrats could do on a simple majority vote, is the only way that these bills can pass in the senate and eventually become law.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Everything that need be said about Sinema on this topic already has been
said. In particular, I strongly recommend Michelle Goldberg's Opinion
piece in the <i>Times</i>, <i><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/04/opinion/sinema-manchin-senate.html?action=click&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article" target="_blank">"Sinema and Manchin's Nihilistic Bipartisanship.</a></i>" Even more to the point, the <i><a href="https://primarysinema.com/page/about" target="_blank">Replace Sinema Project</a></i> has issued its own <a href="https://primarysinema.com/page/theres-no-excuse-for-sinemas-obstruction" target="_blank">rebuttal</a> to the assorted errors, outright falsehoods and absurd rationalizations that comprise Sinema's stated objections to filibuster reform. Notwithstanding, I found it impossible to read a transcript of Sinema's speech without giving vent to my own reactions to it. First, though, some thoughts on the filibuster, itself.<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">There are as many <a href="https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/case-against-filibuster" target="_blank">good reasons to eliminate the filibuster as there are reasons why it is bad</a>. My view is that the Senate filibuster, in its current form, is simply anti-democratic because it obstructs the will of the majority. (Of course, the composition of the senate is, itself, anti-democratic, but that's another matter.) </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Supporters of the filibuster often try to defend it on the grounds that it prevents "the tyranny of the majority." It may be time to retire that argument. So long as the fundamental, constitutional rights of every person are guaranteed, majority rule by voting is not a form of tyranny but of fairness. It is the most reasonable solution for determining a course of action among more than two people. Majority rule is so inherently natural that most of us wouldn't even consider anything else. Who hasn't had the experience of having to make a collective decision about something - where to order take-out for the office party, or where to rent the airbnb for the family reunion - and deciding the question by putting it to a vote? When a simple majority - even by one vote - carries the day, no one ever says, "That's not fair! You need a margin of 20 percent to win!" Imagine a sport like baseball in which, at the end of nine innings and with a score of six to five, the team with six doesn't win. Rather, in order to prevent the "tyranny" of the victorious - that is, the better team or the one that had a better day, which would be very unsportsmanlike of it - one team would have to vanquish the other by a margin of at least 20% - say, six to four - in order to be declared the winner. Such a scheme doesn't prevent one form of tyranny - it simply creates another. It gives one side - in politics, the less popular side - proportionally greater power to determine an outcome and to establish public policy than the majority. That's an even more unjust form of tyranny: a tyranny of the minority, which is exactly what we now have in the Senate. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The 60-vote threshold to pass legislation simply negates the power of the majority. That doesn't foster compromise or civility. It does the opposite. It undermines the morale of the majority by proving that their votes don't matter. It undermines democracy itself by discouraging citizens from participating and voting - why bother? - rendering Americans embittered and cynical. Currently and in practice, it enables the Republican Party, which represents a minority of the electorate, to obstruct the will of the majority that wants to see their representatives do what it elected them to do (including passing the two voter-protection laws that have been stuck in the Senate). That's not my idea of democracy and I do not think that it was the founders' idea of democracy either, which is probably why the filibuster is nowhere to be found in the constitution. (Not that the constitution, as originally drafted, is so democratic either, but that's also another matter.)</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">In the real-world context of the <a href="https://www.npr.org/2018/10/23/659784277/republican-voter-suppression-efforts-are-targeting-minorities-journalist-says" target="_blank">Republican strategy to disenfranchise as many non-White</a> and <a href="https://newrepublic.com/article/159755/republican-voter-suppression-2020-election" target="_blank">non-Republican voters as possible</a>, the battle is not between Republicans and Democrats but between Republicans and Democracy. The Party of Trump has demonstrated time and again that it <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/10/politics/capitol-insurrection-donald-trump-republicans-congress/index.html" target="_blank">will stop at nothing to seize political power by any means, fair or foul, legal or illegal.</a> Refusing to lift a finger to oppose the Trumpist agenda of ending democracy is not a repudiation of partisanship, as Sinema would have us believe, but a unilateral surrender to it. The ground-rules of democracy itself - how elections are held, who gets to vote and whose votes get counted - are being subverted in such a way as to entrench, likely for generations, minoritarian rule by the Republican Party in the United States at both the state and federal levels and in all three branches of government. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">In this dark reality, it seems almost too good to be true that the Independents and Democrats in the Senate should have just enough votes to eke out a legislative victory that might very well be the last, best hope of preserving democracy in our nation. Well, it turns out that it <i>is </i>too good to be true, thanks in large part to Kyrsten Sinema. That is what makes her refusal to vote to do away with the filibuster so galling. <i>She actually has the power, right now,</i> to prevent what may ultimately prove to be an irrevocable Republican subversion of democracy but refuses to exercise it. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Sinema, of course, is not the only nominal Democrat thwarting the will of the Democratic Party and of the American voters. The other one is the <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/27/politics/joe-manchin-coal-interests/index.html" target="_blank">coal magnate and multi-millionaire Joe Manchin</a>. Manchin is as responsible for the unilateral surrender to the Republicans as
Sinema is but I am focusing here on her partly because I had much higher
hopes for her but, also, because, as I have mentioned already, having read Sinema's speech, I simply cannot allow to go unchallenged the naive and specious arguments with which Sinema attempts to justify her refusal to vote to get rid of the filibuster. What follows, then, is a semi-annotated rebuttal to her speech, excerpts of which appear in italicized block quotations. <br /></span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i>It is more likely today that we look at other Americans who have
different views and see the “other,” or even see them as enemies –
instead of as fellow countrymen and women who share our core values.</i></span></span></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">In this statement, as she does throughout her speech, Sinema treats the partisan estrangement between Republicans and Democrats as reciprocal and equal, as though the views of both are equidistant from the center. This is a false equivalence. For years, Republican strategists, politicians and right-wing hate mongers on Fox and other like-minded media platforms have been vilifying, demonizing and deliberately misrepresenting the views of Democrats and Independents in ways unlike anything that emanates from the center or the left. Republicans disparage Democrats as internal enemies of the United States and as a threat to our very way of life. In fact, <span>the idea that our nation and our way of life are under attack is now <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/01/capitol-riot-and-white-conservatives-extremism/617615/" target="_blank">the predominant theme of White-nationalist, Republican and Trumpist discourse</a>. This has been building for years, as Ronald Brownstein explains:<br /></span></span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span>Late
in the 2016 presidential campaign . . . Michael Anton, a conservative
scholar who later joined the Trump White House, described the race
between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton as the "Flight 93 Election." . .
. Anton insisted that a Democratic victory would change America so
irrevocably that conservatives needed to think of themselves as the
passengers on United Airlines Flight 93 on September 11 - the ones who
chose to bring down the plane to save the U.S. Capitol from al-Qaeda
hijackers. Letting the Democrats win, in other words, would doom the
country. . . .<br /></span></span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span>For
at least the past decade, GOP candidates and conservative-media
personalities have routinely deployed rhetoric similar to the Flight 93
argument. Only about 40 hours before the [January 6] insurrection, at a
campaign rally hosting an enthusiastic, virtually all-white audience in
rural Georgia, President Trump insisted that if Democrats won the
state's two Senate runoff elections . . . "America as you know it will
be over, and it will never - I believe - be able to come back again."</span></span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span>And,
of course, on January 6th, 2021, while inciting his mob before it assaulted
the capitol in order to prevent the certification of Biden's electoral
victory, <a href="https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial" target="_blank">Trump declaimed</a> "We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore."</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span>In his speech accepting the Republican Party's nomination for him to run for president again in 2020, Trump <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-rnc-speech/" target="_blank">declared</a>
"this election will decide whether we will defend the American way of
life, or whether we will allow a radical movement to completely
dismantle and destroy it."</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span>As <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/19/politics/pompeo-multiculturalism-tweet/index.html" target="_blank">CNN reported last year</a>,
the day before leaving office, former Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo
tweeted, "Wokism, multiculturalism, all the -isms - they're not who
America is. They distort our glorious founding and what this country is
all about. . . ." In the same story, CNN notes that in remarks he
delivered the previous July,</span></span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span>Pompeo
fanned the flames of division stoked by Trump, warning that "the very
core of what it means to be an American, indeed the American way of life
itself, is under attack" amid nationwide protests for racial justice
and against police brutality.</span></span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/22217696/republicans-trump-capitol-hill-storming-mob-responsible" target="_blank">Writing in Vox</a>, Zack
Beauchamp drew essentially the same conclusions as Brownstein, namely, that "The Capitol Hill mob was the logical culmination
of years of mainstream Republican politics."</span></span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span>The
animating force of modern Republicanism is this: Democratic Party rule
is an existential threat to America and is by definition illegitimate. .
. .</span></span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span>Whether
elite Republicans genuinely believe what they tell their base is beside
the point. The fact is their delegitimizing rhetoric has been the fuel
of the conservative movement for many, many years now.</span></span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span>Beauchamp
noted that, on the morning of January 6th, 2021 Lauren Boebert, a Republican
representative from Colorado, "tweeted that the efforts to overturn the
2020 election results amounted to a new American revolution. 'Today is
1776,' she wrote." Ten years earlier, Sharon Angle (a Republican
candidate for the U.S. Senate) had stated in an interview "that she
believed that Americans might need to take up arms against the tyranny
of Barack Obama and the Democratic congress."</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-bidens-washington/american-democracy-isnt-dead-yet-but-its-getting-there" target="_blank">Writing for the New Yorker</a>, Susan B. Glasser pointed out that</span></span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span>In
one alarming survey released this week, nearly thirty percent of
Republicans endorsed the idea that the country is so far "off track"
that "American patriots may have to resort to violence" against their
political opponents.</span></span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span>Ruth Ben-Ghiat <a href="https://www.blogger.com/#">reported</a> in the Washington Post that </span></span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span>In
June, an anchor of One America News suggested that execution might be
an apt punishment for the "tens of thousands" of "traitors" who, he
claimed, stole the election from former president Donald Trump. A
sitting member of congress, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) told Americans in
May that they "have an obligation to use" the Second Amendment, which is
not about recreation but "the ability to maintain an armed rebellion
against the government if that becomes necessary."</span></span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">. . . <br /></span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span>This
Republican culture of violence and threat builds on histories of racial
persecution and on policing used as an instrument of terror against
non-Whites. Habituation to such violence, reinforced by the
presentation of non-Whites as an existential threat to the future of
America (as in the "great replacement theory" that Tucker Carlson has
referenced on Fox News) makes it easier for the public to accept
violence around political events, like elections, as necessary to "save
the country." Tellingly, the participants in the January coup attempt,
which was billed as just this kind of patriotic act, included 57 local
and state GOP officials. . . .</span></span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Only last month, the Republican National Committee officially labeled the attempted coup against our government on January 6, 2021 as "<a href="https://www.salon.com/2022/02/04/rnc-officially-labels-jan-6-on-capitol-legitimate-political-discourse/" target="_blank">legitimate political discourse</a>." <br /></span></span></p><p class="css-axufdj evys1bk0"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Clearly, it's long past time to acknowledge that, while the majority of Americans who identify as Republicans may, indeed, be "fellow countrymen and women," they do not, in fact, "share our core values," as Sinema insists on giving them credit for doing. Our core values include respect for free and fair elections. They include respecting the <i>results</i> of free and fair elections. They include respect for the peaceful transfer of power from one presidential administration to the next. Our core values also include honesty, decency, integrity, fairness, equality, belief in facts and belief in science: the diametric opposite, in other words, of everything that Trump and his cult of followers represent. So, no, the majority of Americans do not share core values with Trump's base and the Republican Party in its current incarnation.<br /></span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i>It’s more common today to demonize someone who thinks differently than us, rather than to seek to understand their views.</i></span></span></blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"> Ah, but we <i>do</i> understand the views of Republicans, only too well. <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/11/10/why-do-some-still-deny-bidens-2020-victory-heres-what-data-says/" target="_blank">Sixty-eight percent of them believe the 2020 election was stolen.</a> Forty percent of them believe that "<a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/02/aei-poll-40-percent-republicans-conservatives-political-violence.html" target="_blank">political violence is justifiable and could be necessary</a>" in the near future.<br /></span></span><blockquote><p class="css-axufdj evys1bk0"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i>Our country’s divisions have now fueled efforts in several states
that will make it more difficult for Americans to vote and undermine
faith that all Americans should have in our elections and our democracy. </i><i><i>These state laws have no place in a nation whose government is formed by free, fair, and open elections. </i></i></span></span></p></blockquote><p class="css-axufdj evys1bk0"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">That is precisely why the filibuster needs to be eliminated: so that the two voting-reform bills that are stuck in the Senate can be passed on a simple majority vote. These bills would prevent or undo the damage to our democracy that these anti-democratic state laws would otherwise do, potentially, for the foreseeable future. Sinema, herself, acknowledges that "These state laws have no place" in our nation. Yet her response to these coordinated assaults on our democratic system of government is simply to surrender and to declare her surrender before the entire Senate. </span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i>Threats to American democracy are real.</i></span></span></blockquote><p class="css-axufdj evys1bk0"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Yes, they are, and they require real responses, not hand-wringing speeches justifying doing nothing to oppose these threats to American democracy.</span></span></p><blockquote><p class="css-axufdj evys1bk0"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i>Our politics reflect and exacerbate these divisions. . . .</i></span></span></p></blockquote><p class="css-axufdj evys1bk0"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">That is absolutely true. And one of the most powerfully destructive ways that our politics exacerbates these divisions is through the mechanism of extreme partisan gerrymandering. When a congressional district is drawn in such a way that a candidate can completely ignore the views of the minority within that district, the only real competition she or he is likely to face is during the primaries from ever more extreme fringes of her or his own party. That is exactly how political gerrymandering promotes extremism and, inevitably, the very divisions that Sinema claims to want to repair. Political gerrymandering is one of the structural flaws in our electoral system, so toxic to our politics and to our society, that the <i>Freedom to Vote Act</i> would remedy. If Sinema really wants to bridge political divisions and restore bipartisanship to our politics, she should be doing everything in her power to ensure passage of the <i>Freedom to Vote Act</i> - not forestalling any possibility of its passage by blocking filibuster reform. </span></span></p><p class="css-axufdj evys1bk0"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i> </i></span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i>These bills help treat the symptoms of the disease </i>[which, according to Sinema, is our nation's political polarization, or "division"]<i> – but they do not fully address the disease itself.<br /></i></span></span></blockquote><p class="css-axufdj evys1bk0"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">That is both a misreading and a misstatement of the crisis of democracy in America today. The disease is not "division": the fact that people disagree politically or on specific policies. Rather, the disease is that one major political party is, at this moment, rewriting election law so as to give an insurmountable structural advantage to Republican Party candidates while disenfranchising millions of Americans. That's the disease. </span></span></p><p class="css-axufdj evys1bk0"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">It's not difficult to understand <i>why</i>
the Republican Party no longer believes in democracy. Its strategists
and leaders grasp only too well that the Republican Party represents the
views and interests of a minority of citizens in this country; it knows
that changes in demographics as well as the ongoing, broad
liberalization of our society's views of race, gender, equality and
abortion rights make the Republican Party appealing to an ever-shrinking
share of the electorate; and it knows that, for all these reasons, the
only way Republicans can win elections in much of the country - and in
the electoral college - is by preventing
the "free, fair and open elections" that Sinema claims to support but
which, by her refusal to do away with the filibuster, she has, in fact,
chosen to allow the Republicans to prevent. </span></span></p><p class="css-axufdj evys1bk0"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">"Division," in and of itself, is neither dysfunctional nor pathological. Republicans have every right to disagree with Democrats and they have every right to try to convince voters that their vision for America is one Americans ought to support at the ballot box. That's how democracy is supposed to work. Indeed, disagreement can even be healthy for a democracy. But when one party no longer is willing to abide by the foundational ground rules of democracy, that is when democracy itself can be understood to be "diseased."</span></span></p><p class="css-axufdj evys1bk0"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i> </i></span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i>[E]liminating the 60-vote threshold will simply guarantee that we lose
a critical tool that we need to safeguard our democracy from threats in
the years to come.</i></span></span></blockquote><p class="css-axufdj evys1bk0"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">What Sinema doesn't seem to grasp is that eliminating the Senate filibuster is virtually the only tool that we have left to safeguard our democracy <i>right now</i>. Sure, it would be nice if things had not gotten to this point. But here we are. We can either recognize that our democracy is on the precipice and prevent its irrevocable descent into the abyss, or we can do what Sinema has chosen to do: nothing.</span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i>Our mandate . . . [i]t seems evident to me [is] work together and get stuff done for America. </i></span></span></blockquote><p class="css-axufdj evys1bk0"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">In a two-party system, that approach only works when both parties agree to abide by it. Unfortunately, ever since the Obama administration, the Republican Party has stuck tenaciously to a policy of rigid and relentless obstructionism. The Republican leader of the senators in Sinema's own legislative body, Mitch McConnell, said it himself back in 2010: "<a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2010/11/04/131069048/sen-mcconnell-insists-one-term-for-obama" target="_blank">our top political priority over the next two years should be to deny President Obama a second term in office</a>." <i> </i>He reaffirmed the Republican policy of refusing "to work together and get stuff done for America" once Biden was in office, declaring that <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/joe-biden/mcconnell-says-he-s-100-percent-focused-stopping-biden-s-n1266443" target="_blank">"one hundred percent of our focus is on stopping this new administration.</a><i>" </i>In 2020, McConnell boasted about <a href="https://americanindependent.com/mitch-mcconnell-block-bills-house-democrats-senate-republicans-gop-fox-news/" target="_blank">killing close to 400 separate pieces of legislation that had passed the House of Representatives, many with bipartisan support</a>. Clearly, working "together to get stuff done" is diametrically opposite the Republican Party leadership's political strategy. (And when some Republicans <i>have</i> demonstrated bipartisanship - not as an end in itself but simply because they were voting in the best interests of their own constituents - <a href="https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/republicans-death-threats-bipartisan-infrastructure-bill-1257048/" target="_blank">they have received death threats, apparently, from Republican voters</a>.)<i> <br /></i></span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i>We must commit to a long-term approach as serious as the problems we
seek to solve – one that prioritizes listening and understanding. One
that embraces making progress on shared priorities, and finding common
ground on issues where we hold differing and diverse views.</i></span></span></blockquote><p class="css-axufdj evys1bk0"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">How does one find common ground with people who believe that the Democratic Party represents a global cabal of pedophiles? How does one find common ground with people who believe that Obama is not a native-born American and a Christian but a foreign-born crypto-Muslim who is hostile to our nation's interests? How does one find common ground with people who believe that Sandy Hook and Covid19 are hoaxes created by nefarious forces, including our own government, for the purpose of depriving Americans of their civil liberties? How does one find common ground with people who claim, against all evidence, that Biden didn't win the election? How does one find common ground with members of a political party that, collectively, refuses to repudiate Trump and refuses to repudiate Trump's lies and his attempts to destroy our constitutional system of government? How does one find common ground with people who consider the insurrectionists who attempted the overthrow of our constitutional order on January 6th "patriots" and who regard those now charged for their participation in that shocking assault on our nation as "political prisoners"? More to the point, <i>should</i> we attempt to find common ground with such people? Isn't it more the case that reaching out a hand to them, searching for common ground and trying to "understand" them merely validates them and confers upon them a political and a moral legitimacy that they do not deserve?<i> </i><br /></span></span></p><p class="css-axufdj evys1bk0"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"></span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">
</span></span><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i>So I find this question answers itself:</i></span></span></blockquote><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i>Can two Americans of sharp intellect and good faith reach different conclusions to the same question? </i></span></span></blockquote><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i>Yes. Yes, of course they can. </i></span></span></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Except that Donald Trump has neither a sharp intellect nor is he acting in good faith - quite the reverse. So, indeed, that question <i>does</i> answer itself because the Republican Party is not what it was in the 1960s. It is now the Party of Trump. And if its spiritual and de facto leader is not acting in good faith, the party that supports, legitimizes and empowers Trump cannot - must not - be assumed to be acting in good faith, either.</span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i>Some have given up on the goal of easing our divisions and uniting Americans. I have not.</i> <br /></span></span></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">That's
commendable. But there's a principle in emergency medicine that
applies to our political crisis: First, stabilize the patient. The
long-term objective of restoring civility and bipartisanship to our
politics and our government is laudable. But a long-term strategy of
recovery and reclamation is not an appropriate response in an
emergency. That is the critical difference here. Sinema does not seem to
recognize that we are in uncharted territory: a break-the-glass moment
in our nation's history in which Republican subversion of the ground rules of our democracy, unless prevented by
passage of the <i>Freedom to Vote Act</i> and the <i>John Lewis Voting Rights
Advancement Act</i>, will be entrenched likely for decades, possibly for
generations. That can only be prevented by first eliminating the Senate filibuster so that these two voter-protection bills can pass by the simple majorities that already support them.<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Nothing less than democracy, itself, is at stake now. History will record that Sinema had the power to save democracy in the
United States before it let out its last gasp and she refused to do so.</span></span></p><p><i><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Update - 9 December 2022: Sinema has now <a href="https://www.azcentral.com/story/opinion/op-ed/2022/12/09/sen-kyrsten-sinema-of-arizona-why-im-registering-as-an-independent/69712395007/" target="_blank">announced</a> her intention to leave the Democratic Party. In her statement explaining this decision, she refers to "the edges" of the Democratic and Republican parties and cites "the loudest, most extreme voices" within those parties </span></span></i><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i>as
though both sides are equally to blame for the vitriol, partisanship and
outright assaults on our democracy that are making our system of
self-government dysfunctional. This </i></span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i>is just one more example of Sinema's attempting to distract from and to justify her betrayal of those who helped put her in office by creating a false equivalence between the Republican and Democratic parties. To be clear, it was not a mob of Democratic Party supporters that invaded the capitol and attempted to stage a violent coup preventing the legitimate transfer of power from one presidential administration to the next. And it was not Biden but Trump - the de facto head of the Republican Party - who, only this week <a href="called for the suspension of the United States constitution." target="_blank">called for the suspension of the United States constitution.</a></i></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i>Update - 11 Deceber 2022: Additionally, because Sinema is now no longer a Democrat, the Primary Sinema Project has now changed its name to the <a href="https://www.primarysinema.com/?link_id=3&can_id=7175477411c831e1223cfd45142d8deb&source=email-kyrsten-sinema-left-the-democratic-party-we-need-your-help&email_referrer=email_1763020&email_subject=our-new-name-replace-sinema" target="_blank">Replace Sinema Project</a>. I have edited this column to reflect that name change.</i><br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"></span></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * </span><br /></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span></span></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><i><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/s365/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="299" data-original-width="365" height="163" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/w200-h163/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" width="200" /></a></i></div><i><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: times;">David
Balashinsky is originally from New York City and now lives near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. </span></span></i><span style="font-size: small;"><span><i><span style="font-family: times;">He</span></i></span><span><i><span style="font-family: times;"> writes about bodily autonomy and
human rights, gender, culture, and politics.</span></i></span></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-family: times; font-size: small;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i> He currently serves on the board of directors for the <a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">Genital Autonomy Legal Defense & Education Fund</a>, (GALDEF),</i></span> the board of
directors and advisors for <a href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" target="_blank">Doctors Opposing Circumcision</a> and the leadership team for <a href="https://www.bruchim.online/" target="_blank">Bruchim</a>.</i></span> <br /></span><p><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-25987465218730252082022-03-08T12:50:00.008-08:002023-11-25T03:58:48.632-08:00Gaslighting, Thy Name Is Andrew Cuomo<p><span style="font-family: times;">by <b>David Balashinsky </b><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Let's begin by acknowledging a few facts. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">First: there were numerous allegations of inappropriate touching and comments of a sexual nature made against Andrew Cuomo <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2021/08/03/andrew-cuomo-denies-sexual-harrassment-502291" target="_blank">beginning in 2020</a>. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Second: the Office of the Attorney General of the State of New York investigated these allegations and issued a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/live/2021/08/03/nyregion/andrew-cuomo/report-finds-cuomo-sexually-harassed-multiple-women-and-retaliated-against-one-for-going-public" target="_blank">report</a> on 3 August 2021 in which it concluded that these claims were credible. As the report states in its Executive Summary,</span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">. . . we find that the Governor sexually harassed a number of current and former New York State employees by, among other things, engaging in unwelcome and nonconsensual touching, as well as making numerous offensive comments of a suggestive and sexual nature that created a hostile work environment for women. Our investigation revealed that the Governor's sexually harassing behavior was not limited to members of his own staff, but extended to other State employees, including a State Trooper on his protective detail and members of the public. We also conclude that the Executive Chamber's culture - one filled with fear and intimidation, while at the same time normalizing the Governor's frequent flirtations and gender-based comments - contributed to the conditions that allowed the sexual harassment to occur and persist.</span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Third: all of these allegations were <a href="https://www.politico.com/states/new-york/city-hall/story/2021/08/03/what-we-know-about-the-11-women-in-the-cuomo-harassment-report-1389422" target="_blank">made by women</a>. This matters because Cuomo has claimed that there is nothing sexual in nature about how he physically interacts with people: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/cuomo-kissing-and-hugging-is-my-usual-and-customary-way-of-greeting-2021-3" target="_blank">"You can go find hundreds of pictures of me kissing people, men, women. It is my usual customary way of greeting."</a><br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Fourth: in the face of these credible allegations of sexual harassment, overwhelming public pressure to resign (<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/10/nyregion/andrew-cuomo-resigns.html" target="_blank">including from many members of his own political party, up to and including President Biden</a>), the unequivocally damning findings of the Attorney General's report, and facing the likelihood of impeachment, Cuomo resigned in disgrace on 24 August 2021.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Fifth: Throughout this entire episode, Cuomo has denied doing anything that rises to the level of illegal sexual harassment, as defined under the law. Only this week, Cuomo <a href="https://www.rochesterfirst.com/news/live-andrew-cuomo-delivers-remarks-at-brooklyn-church/" target="_blank">reasserted this claim</a> as though the decision by several local prosecutors not to formally charge him amounted to a full exoneration:</span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Now, they did a report that said there were eleven cases against me.
Since then . . . five district attorneys have investigated the report of
the much-publicized eleven violations of law. And do you know how many
cases of the eleven they found to bring? . . . Zero. Zero. Zero
cases. Why? Because there is a difference between an individual's
opinion as to what they believe is offensive behavior and a legal
violation. You can have an opinion about what is right and wrong, but
that doesn't make your opinion the law.</span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">At the same venue where he delivered these comments, Cuomo explicitly equated not being prosecuted with being exonerated: "And now the truth has actually come forth and I feel vindicated."</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">A decision by a district attorney, or even several, not to indict someone is not the same thing as an exoneration, of course, just as a finding of "not guilty" by a jury is not the same thing as a finding of "innocent." </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Fortunately, none of this matters for my purpose here, which is not to argue that Cuomo is guilty, under the law, of having committed sexual harassment but, rather, to dispute the central premise of his claims of innocence. Namely, that those instances (those, that is, that are not in dispute) that have been described by numerous women complainants as sexually inappropriate touching and comments all amounted to nothing more than a misunderstanding due to "<a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/10/nyregion/cuomo-resignation-speech-transcript.html" target="_blank">generational and cultural shifts that I just didn't appreciate.</a>" Cuomo made this argument in his resignation speech: "In my mind, I've never crossed the line with anyone, but I didn't realize the extent to which the line has been redrawn." And he did so, again, the other day at God's Battalion of Prayer Church, in Brooklyn: </span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Last February, several women raised issues about my behavior. As I
said then, . . . my behavior has been the same for forty years in public
life. . . . But, that was actually the problem. Because for some
people, especially younger people, there's a new sensitivity. No one
ever told me that I made them feel uncomfortable. I never sensed that I
caused anyone discomfort. . . . But, I've been called old-fashioned, out of touch. And I've been told that my behavior was not politically
correct or appropriate. I accept that. . . . Social norms evolve and
they evolve quickly. . . . But I didn't appreciate how fast their
perspective changed. And I should have. No excuses. . . . However,
the truth is also that, contrary to what my political opponents would
have had you believe, nothing that I did violated the law or the
regulations.</span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Call this what you will - deflection, denial, gaslighting, a stratagem in which Cuomo tactically concedes a little bit of ground in order to occupy a more advantageous position from which to mount a defense - what Cuomo is doing here is making a feint of being out of touch and socially clumsy in order to render his sexually-inappropriate behavior wholly innocent of any inappropriateness. <i>It wasn't me - it's all in your head!</i> <i>You're misconstruing something that was totally innocent! </i>How many times have women been told things like these and made to feel as though the problem is all in their heads? That they're hypersensitive. That we are living in an age of political correctness run amok. That's gaslighting.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">That Cuomo not only would persist in his campaign of gaslighting his victims (and not just them but the public, too) but would choose a Black church in which to do so is reprehensible. And that he would invoke Black History Month, the Edmund Pettus Bridge and the names of John Lewis and Martin Luther King, Jr. in his self-serving campaign of gaslighting is <i>beyond</i> reprehensible.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">So, who or what, in Cuomo's telling, is <i>really</i> to blame in all this? Why, "cancel culture," of course:<br /></span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Don't underestimate the strength and the virulence of the cancel
culture. It's not just in politics. Today, even some members of the
press are afraid to ask questions that challenge the so-called
politically correct cancel-culture thinking. Do you know how many
reporters told me they knew the report against me was a fraud but they were
afraid to challenge MeToo claims?</span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Even as he offers denials, deflections and non-apology apologies for his conduct, Cuomo paints himself as a victim of "prosecutorial misconduct," "abuse of power" and "government corruption":</span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">So eleven months later, the truth is known. But it's too late. Justice too long delayed is justice denied. The report did the damage it was designed to do. My father was right. Politics can be a dirty business. <br /></span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Cuomo goes on to represent himself as a martyr and compares his struggle for justice against the accusations of sexual harassment to the civil rights movement:</span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Seeing what they did here broke my heart. And I'm trying to cross the bridge. And I'm trying to get from a negative place to a positive place. Romans Five: We can find glory in our sufferings because we know that suffering produces perseverance. . . . Congressman [John] Lewis said these words: "Do not get lost in the sea of despair. Be hopeful, be optimistic, our struggle is not the struggle of a day, a week, a month, a year but the struggle of a lifetime. . . . " I find inspiration in those words. Genesis tells us that good can come from suffering, and that life is about tomorrow, not yesterday. They broke my heart, but they didn't break my spirit. <br /></span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">All this in an attempt to avoid accountability for sexually harassing <a href="https://www.politico.com/states/new-york/city-hall/story/2021/08/03/what-we-know-about-the-11-women-in-the-cuomo-harassment-report-1389422" target="_blank">eleven different women on numerous occasions</a>. I can only imagine how Cuomo's sanctimonious and self-serving pietism must turn the stomachs of his victims.<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">If Cuomo is to be taken at his word, I think that the only fair thing to do is to compare his position to that of a similarly-situated person. To return to the essence of his argument, it is that the world has changed and that his only fault is having failed to change along with it. He claims that it's all about "generational and cultural shifts that I just didn't appreciate." What Cuomo is asking us to believe is that he, someone who came of age in the early 1970s, at the very time that second-wave feminism was burgeoning and exploding upon the public's consciousness, when "Miss" and "Mrs." became "Ms.," when women were routinely out in the streets protesting sex discrimination and criticizing the sexualization and rampant objectification of women's bodies, when the first sexual harassment cases were making headlines, when the very term <i>sexual harassment</i> entered both the legal and the popular lexicon, - that he, a graduate of Fordham University who went on to receive a law degree from Albany Law School (1982) and who entered public life working as a district attorney and a practicing lawyer at precisely the period during which sexual-harassment law was being established in case law, culminating in its codification in the Civil Rights Act of 1991, when sexual-harassment training was being instituted in colleges and universities, offices and factories, becoming nearly ubiquitous and, in
many cases, mandatory - that somehow, Cuomo missed all this. He wasn't aware of any of it. That claim shouldn't even be dignified by taking it seriously.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">But let me not be accused of failing to give Cuomo the benefit of the doubt. Cuomo's claim is that all of these monumental social and legal changes throughout the 70's, 80's, 90's and beyond somehow occurred without his knowing about any of them because of the "generational and cultural" milieu in which he has lived the entirety of his life. As I said, I think a reasonable test of this claim would be to compare Cuomo with someone from the same generational and cultural milieu. In order to be fair, such a comparison should be to someone who shares not one but several demographic characteristics with Cuomo - and the more particulars in which Cuomo and this <i>control</i> agree, the more reasonable the test. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Toward which end I volunteer myself. I am the same age as Cuomo. I am from the same state as Cuomo. I am from the same city as Cuomo. I am even from the same borough as Cuomo (Queens). We are both White, cis-gender, hetero males. We both come from middle-class families, we are both college-educated and we are both considered professionals. I'm even a registered Democrat, just like Cuomo. It's true that I am not trained as an attorney, although I was trained and served as an investigator for the Sexual Harassment Committee at the college that I attended. That could count against me and for Cuomo, of course, but any such advantage to him and disadvantage to me in this respect is more than offset by the fact that Cuomo's father, by all accounts, was an honorable man, whereas mine was not only an inveterate sexist but a serial sex-abuser. If either of us might be expected not to know how to recognize borders or where "the line" is, it shouldn't be the former governor.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">All of these circumstances - these points of similarity between Andrew Cuomo and me - enable me to state with certainty that "the line has [<i>not</i>] been redrawn," unbeknownst to Cuomo. He doesn't get to use that as an excuse. Running one's finger down the spine or caressing the abdomen of a woman state trooper who isn't one's wife or girlfriend (and doing so in pubic, even if she is) has not been permissible at <i>any</i> time in my life that I can remember. Likewise, asking creepy questions about a subordinate's sexual-assault history and whether she is into dating older men, and the various other sexually-harassing things that Cuomo is credibly alleged by these eleven women to have done. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Two points must be borne in mind here: first, I speak as someone whose "generational and cultural" background is identical to Cuomo's and, second, this generational and cultural background is what Cuomo would have us regard as exculpatory of his behavior. It is <i>precisely</i> because our backgrounds are so similar that I no more believe Cuomo is genuinely, naively and innocently ignorant of where "the line" is than I believe he didn't cross it.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"></span></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * </span><br /></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span></span></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><i><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/s365/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="299" data-original-width="365" height="163" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/w200-h163/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" width="200" /></a></i></div><i><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: times;">David
</span></span></i><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i>Balashinsky is originally from New York City and now lives near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. He is a licensed physical therapist and writes about bodily autonomy and
human rights, gender, culture, and politics. </i></span><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i>He currently serves on the board of directors for the <a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">Genital Autonomy Legal Defense & Education Fund</a>, (GALDEF),</i></span> the board of
directors and advisors for <a href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" target="_blank">Doctors Opposing Circumcision</a> and the leadership team for <a href="https://www.bruchim.online/" target="_blank">Bruchim</a>.</i></span></i></span></span> <br /></span><p><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-8872051768728369932021-12-27T15:12:00.004-08:002022-07-10T04:47:28.580-07:00Compulsory Penile Surgery and Abortion Rights: Let's End the Gendered Double Standard on Gendered Double Standards<p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: small;">by <b>David Balashinsky </b></span><br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">In the wake of <a href="https://www.bedsider.org/features/1776-4-things-you-can-do-for-texas-right-now?gclid=Cj0KCQiA5aWOBhDMARIsAIXLlkdxCLM4udzIkeiALVWadleKDTvtVogRR7Bg3diMdG_Ut2Fn0z4PUQ4aAgRYEALw_wcB" target="_blank">SB8</a>, the Texas anti-abortion statute that empowers bounty hunters and vigilantes to sue anyone who helps a girl or woman exercise her constitutional right to terminate her pregnancy, at least one Texas urologist has seen a 15% increase in the number of men seeking vasectomies. This is reported in yesterday's Washington Post and, while one angle of <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/12/26/men-across-america-are-getting-vasectomies-an-act-love/" target="_blank">this particular article</a> is the increased rate of vasectomies as a response to the decreasing availability of abortion services, the other is the emergence of "parody legislation" (it could also be called "parity legislation") that would require men to undergo vasectomies. As the Post reports, "In their own form of protest, state lawmakers in Alabama, Illinois, and Pennsylvania introduced legislation that highlights the gendered double standards with regards to reproductive rights." Women's bodies are regulated and their freedoms curtailed by states such as Texas in ways that men would never contemplate, let alone submit to were they faced with a comparable restriction of their bodily autonomy. That, at least, is the theory behind such parody laws: to get people to think about the disparate effects that abortion restrictions have upon the rights and dignity of people with uteruses but not on those without. As Christopher M. Rabb, one of the sponsors of these proposed bills <a href="https://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/Legis/CSM/showMemoPublic.cfm?chamber=H&SPick=20210&cosponId=36286" target="_blank">explains</a>, </span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">For far too long, the public debate around abortion, contraception and related reproductive matters has thrust government into the center of restrictions on the bodily autonomy of women and girls.</span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Rarely is there a meaningful dialogue around public policy focusing on the personal responsibility of cisgender men in this sphere.</span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The rights of cisgender men have always been paramount in our society with little focus on their responsibility as inseminators to change their behaviors for the good of their partners, families and society at large.</span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Rabb's proposed legislation "blew up in a way he didn't expect," prompting "thousands of hate-filled emails, Facebook posts and even death threats." Afterward, Rabb commented on the reaction:</span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">I underestimated the vitriol that this proposal brought. The notion [that] a man would have to endure or even think about losing bodily autonomy was met with outrage, when every single day women face this and it's somehow okay for the government to invade the uteruses of women and girls, but it should be off limits if you propose vasectomies or limit the reproductive rights of men.</span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Rabb's heart may be in the right place, yet his statement seems oblivious of the fact that more than 80% of men living in the United States today have been subjected to a radical penile surgery as neonates and that, to this day, more than half of all males born in the U.S. still are subjected to this harmful and medically-unnecessary surgery. Because penile circumcision is irreversible, the boys, the adolescents and the men that these infants become will never fully experience either bodily autonomy or sexual autonomy. The shape, the appearance, the sensory-capacity and the function of their genitals was decided for them, without their consent, before they were capable of resisting and making known their own wishes (other than through their anguished screams during the surgery itself). Likewise, the nature and the diminished quality of their sex lives was decided for them before they could effectively object and exercise their right to own and control their own bodies. If that isn't a denial of bodily autonomy, I don't know what is.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">While a fine distinction might be made between "reproductive rights" and the <i>sexual rights</i> that necessarily follow from the right of bodily autonomy (since not all sex aims at reproduction and not all reproduction originates in sex), it is undeniable that the term "reproductive rights" is meant to refer broadly to a woman's right to control her sexuality and every other aspect of her life that is liable to be affected by an unwanted pregnancy. The underlying rationale of anti-abortion statutes, after all, is to control not just reproduction but women's sexuality. If laws denying women ownership and control of their own bodies and control of their own sexual lives constitute an abridgement of their "reproductive rights," it follows, then, that the "reproductive rights" of men also are routinely limited in this country.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Clearly, the outrage directed at Representative Rabb isn't based on an objection to denying men bodily autonomy or reproductive rights - at least not consciously - since, statistically speaking, many of the same people who object to his proposed legislation undoubtedly also endorse and practice male genital cutting. The more plausible explanation is simply that these objectors simultaneously hold multiple sets of contradictory views and "gendered double standards" regarding bodily autonomy. On the one hand, they claim to support individual liberty and freedom of choice, yet they would deny girls and women exactly these by impeding and obstructing their access to safe, legal, affordable and timely abortions. More to the point, they maintain a particularly "gendered double standard" in their opposition to Rabb's proposed legislation, presumably, because it would impinge male "reproductive rights," yet they countenance or even actively support legislation that is just as much an intrusion (if not more) upon the reproductive rights of girls and women. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">But there is still another whole level of gendered double standard here. Many of those who are so up-in-arms at the mere mention of legislation that would subject men to compulsory penile surgery do not object in the least when the compulsory penile surgery in question is non-therapeutic neonatal circumcision which, because of its permanence, affects men every bit as much as (and, in crucial ways, much more than) it does the infants these men were when they were subjected to it. And it goes without saying that penile circumcision is incomparably more invasive, damaging and risky than vasectomy is. Yet one form of compulsory penile surgery elicits a yawn while the other elicits outrage. The explanation for <i>this</i> double standard is that, in our highly gendered culture, non-therapeutic circumcision is regarded as <a href="https://dbalablog.blogspot.com/2017/10/male-genital-mutilation-and.html" target="_blank">an important male rite of passage that serves to inscribe male bodies with masculine gender</a>. In contrast, vasectomy, because it obstructs male fertility, undermines masculine gender. Thus, support of male genital cutting and outrage at the mere mention of compulsory vasectomy are, in fact, opposite sides of the same gendered coin.<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">These sorts of double standards are to be expected of those who oppose abortion rights. They are even to be expected of those who celebrate the sexuality (and even promiscuity) of some (mainly hetero, cis males) but not of others (females and LGBTQ+ persons). These are double standards that feminists and abortion-rights advocates are right to criticize.<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">What is more disappointing and difficult to comprehend is the double standard of those feminists and abortion-rights supporters themselves who claim to base their support of abortion rights on the more fundamental right of bodily autonomy yet remain silent in the face of - <a href="https://dbalablog.blogspot.com/2020/02/on-bodily-self-ownership-open-letter-to.html" target="_blank">or even actively participate in</a> - the denial of that right when it comes to the right of persons born with penises to own their own genitals and to control their own sexual lives. This, too, is a gendered double standard: the notion that "My Body - My Choice" applies only to women and to female bodies but not to men and male bodies or to intersex bodies. Thus, as gratifying as it is to see the gendered double standards that harm women (regarding <i>their</i> sexuality and reproductive rights) called out, it is galling to see the gendered double standards that harm men given a pass.<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">While Representative Rabb is making a valid statement by his proposed legislation (given that he entertains little or no expectation that the legislation itself ever will become law), I would like to see him champion the right of bodily autonomy for boys, men (or people with penises) and intersex persons with as much pluck and conviction as he champions the right of bodily autonomy for girls and women (or people with uteruses). The same holds for all abortion-rights advocates. The right to abortion rests on the same ethical and moral foundation as the right <i>not</i> to be subjected to genital cutting. That foundation, common to both, is the right of bodily autonomy. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * </span><br /></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span></span></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><i><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/s365/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="299" data-original-width="365" height="163" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/w200-h163/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" width="200" /></a></i></div><i><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: times;">David
Balashinsky is originally from New York City and now lives near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. </span></span></i><span style="font-size: small;"><span><i><span style="font-family: times;">He</span></i></span><span><i><span style="font-family: times;"> writes about bodily autonomy and
human rights, gender, culture, and politics.</span></i></span></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /> </span><p><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-71632192026784624862021-11-21T12:23:00.010-08:002022-06-07T13:35:50.162-07:00What Kyle Rittenhouse Can Do to Heal America<p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><b><span style="font-size: small;">by David Balashinsky</span></b> <br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Much has been made by Kyle Rittenhouse's champions of the right to self-defense and of this young man's justification, therefore, in killing Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber. Tomorrow, Rittenhouse is scheduled to be interviewed on Fox where he will have an opportunity to tell his side of the story. I hope he will do more than offer a self-serving account of why he did what he did. There is absolutely no need for him to provide any further rationalization or justification for his having shot Rosenbaum, Huber and Gaige Grosskreutz since, f</span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">rom a legal standpoint, he has already been exonerated.</span></span> </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Under oath, Rittenhouse has <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/10/us/kyle-rittenhouse-testimony.html" target="_blank">stated, "I didn't do anything wrong."</a> What if we were to take Rittenhouse at his word, meaning that he did not go to Kenosha secretly hoping to try out his semi-automatic rifle on BLM protesters but because he sincerely wanted to do some good there. (I know, it's a stretch. After all, Rittenhouse was <a href="https://www.kenoshanews.com/news/local/state-seeks-to-admit-video-of-rittenhouse-in-separate-incident-threatening-to-shoot-men-with/article_cddeb29f-5a86-5151-ab20-a3834456304e.html?utm_campaign=snd-autopilot&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter_" target="_blank">recorded on video</a> several weeks earlier saying how much he wished he had his AR with him so he could "start shooting rounds" at several men he observed exiting a CVS.) If Rittenhouse's aim was only to do good, maybe he can do some good now. The nation is deeply divided and hurting. Rittenhouse could use the platform that comes with fame (or notoriety) to deliver a message that might help heal the nation's wounds - not unlike when Rodney King went above and beyond what anybody had a right to expect of him under the circumstances and asked, "Can't we all just get along?" Here are my suggestions to Mr. Rittenhouse on how he can rise to the occasion and help heal the nation.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><b><i>First - acknowledge your own culpability.</i></b> All of the tragic events involving you, Rosenbaum, Huber and Grosskreutz that unfolded the night you showed up at the protest in Kenosha, Wisconsin occurred because you were openly carrying an assault rifle. The mere fact that you were carrying that weapon made the protesters there view you as a threat to their safety, and rightly so. Carrying a weapon in public is not a neutral act and it isn't an innocent state of being prepared to defend oneself should the need arise. It is an act of intimidation. It is a form of bullying. It is a threat to others. And in conflicts where tempers are high, exactly like the one in Kenosha, carrying an assault rifle is a provocation. Simply by being there with a lethal weapon, you had a role in provoking the response that led, ultimately, to your shooting Joseph Rosenbaum. If your aim was not to provoke or to intimidate, this would be a great time to acknowledge that bringing an assault rifle to that protest was a colossal miscalculation on your part. You should take this opportunity to encourage wannabe vigilantes across the country to learn from your mistake.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i><b>Second - express remorse for the deaths of Rosenbaum and Huber and sympathy for their families and loved ones.</b></i> Maybe it's just that I don't want to believe that you went to Kenosha because you were seeking an opportunity to shoot people. If you didn't, and if you pulled the trigger multiple times only in self-defense, surely you can take no joy or satisfaction in the deaths of the men you shot. So, instead of basking in the glow of adulation that gun-fanatics and right-wing extremists already are heaping on you, renounce that adulation and ask them and the nation to join you in remembering the men who died and to reflect on the systemic racism that was the cause of the unrest in Kenosha in the first place. Whatever they were doing in Kenosha that night, and whatever threat you perceived to your life or safety, Rosenbaum and Huber didn't deserve to die for it. Their lives also mattered, and they should be remembered as human victims, not as nameless, faceless, two-dimensional excuses for the taking of human life.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><b><i>Third - don't be a tool of the right-wing media.</i> </b> You have already been lionized as a hero by those who want to use you as a poster boy in support of their political agendas. But these opportunists are not going to have to carry the burden through life that you are of having taken human lives. It's easy for them to put you on a pedestal; it's also expedient for them to do so. But you're the one who's going to have live with the consequences of your actions. This would be a good time to remind your fellow Americans that the taking of human life is never a good outcome. It's nothing to be celebrated. Even veterans who have killed for the noblest of causes do not, as a rule, take any joy in having ended another person's life. Why not take this opportunity to reject the increasingly violent rhetoric of the right wing - and of some within the Republican Party in particular - and remind Americans of all political stripes that we are Americans first (and people, even before that) and that violence and killing have no place in our political discourse, much less in our streets.<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><b><i>Finally - don't be a tool of the second-amendment extremists.</i></b> It has long been recognized that guns don't make us safer. They actually have the opposite effect. (I'm sure Mr. Grosskreutz can attest to that.) There is no doubt in my mind that, had you done everything exactly as you did that night with the sole exception of bringing a gun to the protest, Joseph Rosenbaum would be alive today, Anthony Huber would be alive today and Gaige Grosskreutz would not have been seriously injured. Nor would you have had to endure the ordeal of standing trial for murder, let alone having to live with your role in the deaths of these men on your conscience for the rest of your life. Second-amendment extremists live in a fantasy world where guns are fetishes and real-life mass shootings have no more moral significance than the wanton killing that occurs in video games. Your experience belies that fantasy and demonstrates, in all its horrors, the grim reality of an irrationally and dangerously armed population. Use what I hope you have learned from this experience to reject the culture of guns and tell those who want to exploit your encounter with the men you shot that guns, especially when carried openly, do not lead to peace and tranquility but to conflict, death, and, ultimately, to a shredding of the social fabric that makes civil society possible.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i><b>Update:</b></i> Subsequent to the publication of this piece, Rittenhouse did, in fact, express something that at least approaches regret. As <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/kyle-rittenhouse-says-hindsight-traveling-kenosha-probably-not-best-idea-1656985" target="_blank">Newsweek reports</a>, Rittenhouse stated, "Hindsight being 20/20, [it was] probably not the best idea to go down there." Rittenhouse said this while appearing as a guest on the right-wing podcast, <i>You Are Here</i>. The Newsweek article further reports that,</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Co-host Sydney Watson at one point celebrated Rittenhouse, stating "it was kind of impressive, when you think about it, that all the people that you shot at, you killed probably two of the worst on the planet. Congratulations. Good job you.</span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">[Rittenhouse] responded, "It's nothing to be congratulated about. If I could go back, I wish I would have never had to take somebody's life."</span></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Rittenhouse deserves at least some credit for resisting these efforts to glorify his actions that night, but, as of this writing, the fact remains that he could and should do much, much more. Particularly, if he is truly regretful for his actions in Kenosha that resulted in the needless deaths of two men and the injury of a third.<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * </span><br /></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span><i></i></span></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><i><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/s365/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="299" data-original-width="365" height="163" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/w200-h163/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" width="200" /></a></i></div><i><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: times;">David
Balashinsky is originally from New York City and now lives near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. </span></span></i><span style="font-size: small;"><span><i><span style="font-family: times;">He</span></i></span><span><i><span style="font-family: times;"> writes about bodily autonomy and
human rights, gender, culture, and politics.</span></i></span></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /> </span><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-58512972617181050362021-10-12T06:14:00.001-07:002022-02-20T09:51:52.174-08:00"My Body - My Choice": Abortion Rights, Genital Autonomy and the Vaccine Mandate<p><span style="font-family: times;">by <b>David Balashinsky </b><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">There is no right more important than the right of bodily self-ownership. I cannot conceive of a right that is even a close second. Without a territorial boundary that demarcates one's entire body as belonging exclusively to oneself and prohibiting all others from trespassing on it or restricting one's control over it in any way, liberty means nothing. Without the right to exercise sole authority over one's body, full personhood is impossible. (It should go without saying that when I refer to "personhood," I am speaking about persons who actually have been born - not zygotes, embryos or fetuses.) Bodily self-ownership is the starting point of personal liberty. Or, as William O. Douglas put it, "The right to be let alone is indeed the beginning of all freedom."<br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Because I have always had a healthy contempt for authority, I am biased toward personal liberty. At the same time, I recognize that ours is a quintessentially social species. Just as individuals have rights, groups of individuals, acting together, also have rights. That is particularly true when the group in question is a society or a nation. In that case, group rights are especially compelling when they are legitimately exercised in pursuit of the public good. I believe that the guiding principle of any rational and just political system, therefore, should be maximizing personal liberty while simultaneously maximizing the public good. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">These two ideals - personal liberty and the public good - exist in equilibrium. An increase of one often entails a decrease in the other and, yet, both are necessary. We routinely sacrifice some of our personal liberties for the public good. The entire concept of laws - which mostly limit what individuals are allowed to do but also sometimes compel us to do things we otherwise might not - is based on this principle. A law that prevents an individual from driving drunk is one example of laws that limit our personal liberties. A law against smoking in a restaurant is another. Likewise, laws against public spitting or urination. Some laws compel us to do things; military conscription is an example of this. Other laws are conditional, imposing obligations on us as a condition of being permitted to engage in certain activities. Obtaining a valid license before practicing medicine or nursing or physical therapy is an example of a conditional regulation. No one is obliged to work in healthcare but, if one <i>chooses</i> to work in healthcare, one must accept the conditions under which she or he may be permitted to do so. Completing the required degree program and getting that license is one of these conditions. Abiding by a code of ethics is another. Another is getting vaccinated so that one doesn't spread a highly contagious and deadly disease to one's patients and colleagues.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">While both concepts - personal liberty and the public good - represent goods in and of themselves, both also have the potential to be misused, or <i>weaponized</i>. For example, claims on behalf of the public good - typically made by governments - can be and are used to justify abridging individual liberties. This is often what occurs when repressive governments prohibit public demonstrations or other forms of expression that are critical of the government. The rationale typically provided is that it is for the public good - usually to maintain "public order" - despite the fact that curtailments of individual rights almost never have anything to do with the public good but, rather, are imposed in order to preserve the power of the ruling party in government. Lately, there has been a discouraging and frightening <a href="https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-world/2021/democracy-under-siege" target="_blank">increase in this sort of authoritarianism and repression around the world</a>, from Hong Kong to Belarus and beyond. This is even happening in our own country <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/21/us/politics/republican-anti-protest-laws.html" target="_blank">as more and more Republican-controlled state legislatures enact statutes criminalizing public protests</a>.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">But just as the claim of the public good can be used to curtail individuals' civil liberties and justify harm to individuals, the claim of personal liberty can be used to justify or excuse harm to society and harm to <i>other</i> individuals. Until recently, the gun-rights lobby demonstrated probably the most extreme example of this phenomenon. Believers in an individual's absolute right to own any and all kinds of weapons are not concerned in the least by the harm to others and to others' rights that <a href="https://journals.lww.com/jtrauma/Abstract/2019/01000/Changes_in_US_mass_shooting_deaths_associated_with.2.aspx" target="_blank">necessarily ensues</a> from an unlimited, "personal-liberty" right to own military-grade weapons with high-capacity magazines. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">A more recent example of the misuse of the claim of personal liberty is the refusal by many Americans (<a href="https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/the-red-blue-divide-in-covid-19-vaccination-rates/" target="_blank">mostly Republicans, it turns out</a>) to get any of the Covid-19 vaccines that have been <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/safety-of-vaccines.html" target="_blank">proven safe, effective</a>, are widely available and absolutely free. As a result, the Covid pandemic rages on in the United States, with deaths now surpassing 700,000. Had every American, who could have done so, done his civic duty by getting vaccinated, the pandemic likely would be behind us now and life and the economy would have returned to normal.<br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">It may not be surprising to see antisocial behavior on the part of those who condemn virtually anything that benefits society as <i>"Socialism!" </i>(they use the word as a pejorative because, apparently, they regard anything that produces the greatest good for the greatest number of people as an assault on their individual liberties). What <i>is </i>surprising, however, and disconcerting - and I speak as someone who has worked directly with patients in hospitals for more than 20 years - is the <a href="https://www.npr.org/2021/09/18/1037975289/unvaccinated-covid-19-vaccine-refuse-nurses-heath-care-workers" target="_blank">refusal even by some healthcare workers</a> to get vaccinated. As a result of their intransigence, New York and several others states have recently had to institute a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/16/nyregion/new-york-vaccine-mandate-hospitals.html" target="_blank">vaccine mandate for healthcare workers</a>. In response to this mandate, some of these opponents (<a href="https://www.wtvr.com/news/local-news/my-body-my-mask-sen-chase-defends-maskless-indoor-campaign-event" target="_blank">and others</a>) <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/26/nyregion/health-workers-vaccination.html" target="_blank">have appropriated the phrase, <i>My Body - My Choice</i></a>. To me, this represents a new low in the history of those whose rights aren't being violated appropriating the discourse of those whose are. This is either a shrewd if transparent tactic or just plain <i>persecution envy</i>. We see this in the Men's Rights Movement which, although there certainly are kernels of truth in<i> </i>what it has to say about sex discrimination, is based on the manifestly false premise that it is boys and men, not girls and women, who are, in fact, more often victimized and systematically oppressed. Claiming persecution also has become a favorite tactic of Christian Conservatives and Evangelicals.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Invoking <i>My Body - My Choice</i> in support of anti-science, antisocial, anti-vaccine obstinacy is a misappropriation of the phrase in several important ways but what is particularly objectionable is the insensitivity that it shows toward those for whom the phrase has real meaning. As is widely recognized, <i>My Body - My Choice</i> has been the battle-cry of the abortion-rights movement for at least the past half century. There is a reason for this. It encapsulates the fundamental issues raised by abortion: bodily self-ownership and the exclusive right of the individual, <i>as the owner of that body</i>, to exercise her own choices about it. Every human being must be free to chart her or his own course in life and to control her or his own destiny. Above all, every human being has a fundamental right to exercise absolute ownership of her or his body. For girls and women, that necessarily and unquestionably entails the right to terminate a pregnancy.<sup>1</sup><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">It also necessarily entails the right to bodily integrity which is why,
although its use in this context is not as widely familiar, <i>My Body - My Choice</i> also has been taken up by the <a href="https://genital-autonomy.de/" target="_blank">genital-autonomy movement</a>. It is frequently phrased as <i><a href="https://www.yourwholebaby.org/his-body-his-choice" target="_blank">His Body - His Choice</a></i>
in recognition of the fact that, whereas genital cutting of girls is illegal and
rare in the United States, genital cutting of boys is still
legal and widespread.<sup>2</sup><sup> </sup></span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">For this reason, the genital-autonomy movement here necessarily advocates on behalf of the right of boys not to be subjected to non-therapeutic circumcision. Despite the unequal legal status of girls and boys insofar as the right to genital integrity is concerned (one of those truths about which men's-rights activists happen to be right), or rather, because of it, I prefer the universality of <i>My Body - My Choice</i>. Taking sex out of the equation emphasizes that growing up with one's genitals intact and unharmed is a <i>human</i> right.<sup>3</sup></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">The sex-neutral <i>My Body - My Choice </i>also emphasizes that the right to abortion and the right to genital integrity stand on the same ethical and philosophical foundation: the principle that every individual is born with an innate right
of bodily self-ownership. It is the denial of <i>this right, and specifically in these</i> <i>contexts</i>
- the profoundly significant and life-altering human-rights violations
that are forced childbirth and involuntary circumcision - to which the
phrase <i>My Body - My Choice</i> is an appropriate response. It is not
a catchall for every law and regulation to which those who are irrationally jealous of their personal
liberty might object. There simply is no comparison between either compulsory
childbirth or forced genital cutting and being expected,<i> </i>as a condition of employment in healthcare, to get vaccinated against a deadly disease in the middle of a pandemic. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Invoking <i>My Body - My Choice </i>in opposition to
something as benign (not to mention positively beneficial) as the Covid vaccine is a misappropriation of this phrase, then, in part because it trivializes it. In sharp contrast to the Covid-vaccine mandate, whether we are speaking of preventing girls and women from obtaining timely and safe abortions or whether we are speaking of genital cutting, when an individual is deprived of her or his right of bodily self-ownership in either of these two ways, real harm ensues.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">A girl
or woman who, against her will, is forced by the state (or, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/08/texas-abortion-vigilantes-sb8-citizens-sue" target="_blank">under
a provision of SB8 in Texas, by any private citizen in the United States who wants to score ten grand</a>) to undergo the ordeal of a pregnancy and
childbirth has no remedy available that can undo the harm that will
have been
done to her. Her
life will be irrevocably changed. If she keeps the child, doing so
will have major ramifications for her education, her employability, her
financial
stability and economic independence and her ability to choose to have a
family when she is ready to. It will affect every almost aspect of her
personal life, her social life and her professional life. Even if
her child is adopted, the girl or woman who bore her will have gone
through not just the trauma of forced pregnancy but the additional
trauma of giving up a now, fully formed human being who is her
offspring. Conversely, if she is forced to obtain an illegal abortion,
she runs a considerable risk of medical complications and serious
injury including sepsis, hemorrhage, sterility and <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/09/18/texas-abortion-provider-alan-braid/" target="_blank">death</a>, to say nothing
of the potential legal sanctions. Pregnancy and childbirth, themselves, pose <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22270271/" target="_blank">much greater risks to woman's health and life than abortion does</a>, and <a href="https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/adolescent-pregnancy" target="_blank">those risks increase significantly for younger women and girls.</a> Beyond all this is the affront to personal dignity and autonomy - the negation of one's full personhood - that is an inevitable part of being denied the right to make one's own reproductive
decisions and the right to exercise exclusive control over one's own body. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">What is getting vaccinated
against Covid-19 in comparison to any of this? The most common effects of the available vaccines are not dying or getting seriously ill. More importantly, a vaccinated healthcare worker is <a href="https://www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/mounting-evidence-suggests-covid-vaccines-do-reduce-transmission-how-does-work" target="_blank">much less likely to spread Covid-19 to others</a>. Needlessly infecting one's fellow healthcare workers (to say nothing of one's patients), besides causing them harm and being, therefore, unethical on its face, also results in a <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2020/11/17/the-infection-of-hundreds-of-thousands-of-healthcare-workers-worldwide-poses-a-threat-to-national-health-systems/?sh=4b1fde863499" target="_blank">further depletion</a> of <a href="https://www.npr.org/2021/08/10/1026577164/hospitals-face-a-shortage-of-nurses-as-covid-cases-soar" target="_blank">already critically understaffed hospitals.</a><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">As with forced childbirth, in the case of forced circumcision there is no
remedy. Amputation of the prepuce is irreversible - it can
never be undone and its harms are life-altering and life-lasting.
Non-therapeutic male circumcision <a href="https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17378847/" target="_blank">removes the primary sensory structure of the penis</a>. As a result, those who are subjected to this surgery in infancy or childhood can never know what intercourse is
supposed to
feel like. They are permanently prevented from experiencing the <i>degree</i> of sexual intimacy and
bonding - the shared, mutual sensuality - that is only possible
when both partners have fully intact genitals. If this were not enough, as with any surgery, circumcision subjects the victim to a <a href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/for-professionals/complications/" target="_blank">range of risks and complications</a>, from meatal stenosis to excessive scarring to complete loss of the penis, to sepsis, hemorrhage and even death. Also, as with any invasive surgery, non-therapeutic circumcision necessarily subjects the victim to pain. Beyond all this is the affront to personal dignity and autonomy - the negation of one's full personhood - that is an inevitable part of being denied the right to make one's own decisions about one's sexuality and the right to decide for oneself which parts of one's body one is permitted to keep and which parts get cut off.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Again, what is a vaccine mandate, <i>as a condition of employment</i>, in comparison to any of this?</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Another crucial distinction between the vaccine mandate and either
forced childbirth or involuntary circumcision is that the vaccine
mandate has a rational, reasonable and justifiable
public-health objective. In contrast, there is no justifiable public-health
objective in denying women the right to abortion or <a href="https://jme.bmj.com/content/28/1/10" target="_blank">in subjecting male minors to involuntary circumcision</a>. Not only are the public-health claims in support of neonatal circumcision - namely a reduction in risk for transmission of STIs - <a href="http://artemide.bioeng.washington.edu/InformationIsPower/Pediatrics-2013-Frisch-peds.2012-2896.pdf" target="_blank">not supported by the evidence</a> but what evidence there is <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10654-021-00809-6?fbclid=IwAR0ueaPVYx557ex9ytrVq58m0KpL4AfODfJjECs_6nghqKv8ncXQ-X_gz30" target="_blank">now actually points in the opposite direction</a>. <br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Of course, the most significant difference between forced childbirth or forced circumcision and the vaccine mandate (and this is a difference not of degree but of kind) is that - the label <i>mandate</i> notwithstanding - no healthcare worker is being forced against her or his will to get vaccinated. The mandate is being instituted simply <i>as a condition of employment</i>. Healthcare workers who do not want to get vaccinated remain free to choose not to do so. They simply are being required to forego, as a consequence of exercising that choice, the
privilege of working in healthcare. They may not like that choice, but it is still a choice. That is fundamentally different from denying someone access to abortion and it is fundamentally different from subjecting someone to genital cutting without consent - both of which deny the victim <i>any</i> choice in what happens to her or his body.<br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">In addition, the choice for healthcare workers that the vaccine mandate actually allows them to make is not between bodily autonomy and a forfeiture of bodily autonomy. It is between retaining one's job at the cost of a relatively small degree of one's bodily autonomy and retaining one's absolute bodily autonomy at the cost of one's job. Even <i>that</i> is still a choice. Giving up one's job - even one's profession, if it comes to it - is no small thing, and I am not minimizing it in the least. But one's job doesn't even begin to compare in importance to one's body. We routinely accept conditions of employment, precisely because they are undertaken voluntarily, that we would never accept if they were imposed on our bodies without our consent. That is the difference between forced childbirth and genital cutting as opposed to the vaccine mandate as a condition of employment for healthcare workers. It is the difference between the fundamental right to own one's body and the everyday compromises we all make in order to hold down a job. And, while everyone may be entitled to a job, not everyone is entitled to a job in healthcare. That is because working in healthcare is a privilege - not a right. Bodily autonomy, on the other hand, including the right to abortion and the right to grow up with one's genitals intact, is a right - not a privilege. <br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;">1. It seems strange that the right to terminate a pregnancy is not explicitly and universally recognized as a fundamental human right and that that right has not been formally codified. And, yet, even here, in the U.S.A. - a nation that cherishes the ideal of personal liberty - women's and girls' right to own and control their own bodies is <a href="https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2021/07/state-policy-trends-midyear-2021-already-worst-legislative-year-ever-us-abortion" target="_blank">under relentless assault</a>, is now <a href="https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-geography-of-abortion-access" target="_blank">widely and significantly curtailed throughout much of the nation</a> and the constitutional right itself, as recognized a half century ago in <i>Roe v. Wade</i>, is <a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/abortion-rights-are-at-the-greatest-risk-since-roe-v-wade-was-decided-in-19721/" target="_blank">hanging by a thread</a>. (The Senate can remedy this by passing the <a href="https://actforwomen.org/the-womens-health-protection-act/" target="_blank">Women's Health Protection Act</a>. The <a href="https://www.npr.org/2021/09/24/1038931908/house-democrats-abortion-rights-bill" target="_blank">House did so </a>last month.)<br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;">2. It also seems strange that the right not to have part of one's genitals cut off without consent is not explicitly and universally recognized as a fundamental and universal human right. And yet, here we are in 2021 and 3,000 times every day in the United States an infant boy is subjected to a traumatic and totally unnecessary genital surgery for no other reason than that the practice has become a self-perpetuating cultural norm. Worldwide, <a href="https://data.unicef.org/topic/child-protection/female-genital-mutilation/" target="_blank">at least 200 million girls and women have been subjected to female genital cutting</a> (FGC) and <a href="https://www.who.int/hiv/pub/malecircumcision/neonatal_child_MC_UNAIDS.pdf" target="_blank">more than one billion boys and men have been subjected to male genital cutting (MGC)</a>. <a href="https://www.statnews.com/2017/07/25/intersex-children-surgery/" target="_blank">It is not known how many intersex individuals are subjected to genital cutting every year</a>. <br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;">3. It is a paradox that abortion restrictions and involuntary
circumcision are both so alike and yet so different. Feminists cite the
unequal <i>effects</i> of abortion restrictions - because they apply to
(biological) girls and women only - as an example of systemic,
sex-based discrimination. MRAs, for their part, cite the practice of
male genital cutting (MGC) - hence the unequal effects of anti-FGM
statutes because they protect girls but not boys from genital cutting -
as an example of systemic, sex-based discrimination that affects only
boys and men. Both are right and it is perplexing that feminists and MRAs have not generally made common cause with one another on the principle of bodily
autonomy. They should, because, in theory, at least, their shared belief in bodily autonomy ought to make them natural allies. <br /></span></p><p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span style="font-size: medium;"> * * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * </span><br /></span></p><span style="font-size: x-small;"><span><i><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/s365/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="299" data-original-width="365" height="163" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/w200-h163/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" width="200" /></a></div><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: times;">David
Balashinsky is originally from New York City and now lives near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. </span></span></i></span><span style="font-size: small;"><span><i><span style="font-family: times;">He </span></i></span><span><i><span style="font-family: times;">has been a physical therapist for over 20 years and writes about bodily autonomy and
human rights, gender, culture, and politics.</span></i></span></span></span><span style="font-size: x-small;"><br /> </span><p><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-63608396331630015712021-08-29T03:11:00.016-07:002021-08-29T10:35:57.514-07:00Whose Flag?<p><span style="font-family: times;">by <b>David Balashinsky</b></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;">A friend recently posted the following meme on Facebook:</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-caXDebcXK_E/YStibZVA-uI/AAAAAAAAAUg/9gIPM2EmQEYQJQ8qyCv0plGUndwWGLylwCLcBGAsYHQ/s724/Screen%2BShot%2B2021-08-29%2Bat%2B6.32.14%2BAM.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="724" data-original-width="484" height="320" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-caXDebcXK_E/YStibZVA-uI/AAAAAAAAAUg/9gIPM2EmQEYQJQ8qyCv0plGUndwWGLylwCLcBGAsYHQ/s320/Screen%2BShot%2B2021-08-29%2Bat%2B6.32.14%2BAM.png" width="214" /></a></span></div><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"> </span><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">I usually avoid taking the bait when I see memes like this but this one seemed so belligerent and so obnoxious that I could not let it go without asking, "Who is telling you to apologize for our flag?" The implication that Americans are being asked to apologize for the United States flag is only one of several falsities artfully woven into this work of propaganda but, because this notion stood out as being even more goading than the others (which is saying something), this seemed like a logical place to start. Although my friend never directly answered my question, her response did get me thinking about how this meme epitomizes the right wing's misuse of our nation's flag and the subtle and not-so-subtle ways in which it cleverly packages animosity toward the values actually represented by the United States flag within an outward show of devotion to it. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">First, some context: It is no secret that, especially since the Vietnam War, the right wing has sought to appropriate the U.S. flag as a political symbol of its view of America. The left, itself, bears some responsibility for this. I am old enough to remember when the U.S. flag was desecrated, burned and otherwise disrespected in protest of the U.S. war against Vietnam and in protest of any number of other evils perpetrated by the government of the United States. (Its <a href="https://www.salon.com/2014/03/08/35_countries_the_u_s_has_backed_international_crime_partner/" target="_blank">support of repressive, military dictatorships around the world</a> and, especially, <a href="https://www.salon.com/2015/02/10/7_fascist_regimes_america_enthusiastically_supported_partner/" target="_blank">in Latin America</a> throughout much of the latter half of the 20th century comes to mind.) </span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">There is an undeniable logic to this form of protest. Since the flag symbolically represents the nation and since policies that are carried out by the government are carried out on behalf of the nation (and in the name of the People of the United States), U.S. government policies, the administration that enacts them, the nation itself and the flag that represents it are all links in a chain. It stands to reason that, if one wants to condemn a policy that has the U.S. flag figuratively stamped all over it, stamping all over the flag, in turn, seems a valid and appropriate way to do it.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">The problem, however, is that this form of protest by the left has played disastrously into the hands of the right, not just allowing it to appropriate the nation's flag as a symbol of right-wing<i> </i>values but enabling it to exploit the flag in an ostentatious display of its own professed patriotism. This has reinforced the fiction that right-wingers and conservatives are more patriotic than left-wingers and liberals and that right-wing values are intrinsically more patriotic than left-wing values. That is why the U.S. flag is ubiquitous on the lapel pins, the podiums, the buildings, the lawns, the websites, the pick-up trucks and motorcycles, even the clothing of right-wingers. And, of course, in right-wing memes on social media. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">But despite the success that the right wing has had in appropriating our nation's flag as a symbol of <i>its</i> values, these are <i>not</i> the values that the flag actually represents. And, generally, when the right wing waves the flag, it does so not as a statement of patriotism but as a form of "virtue signaling" and for the purposes of propaganda, as in the meme above. To this patriotic American, this is an even more offensive desecration of the flag than burning it. An even greater desecration of the flag occurs <a href="https://longislandwins.com/news/state/why-were-there-confederate-flags-at-the-pro-covid-19-reopening-rally-in-east-meadow/" target="_blank">when it is waved alongside the flag of the pro-slavery and seditionist Confederacy</a>. And a desecration even greater than this occurred <a href="https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/capitol-rioter-beat-dc-officer-with-pole-flying-american-flag/2539161/" target="_blank">when the flag was used, literally, as a weapon by Trump's insurrectionists in their attempted coup on his behalf on January 6th</a>. That is why I believe it has been a gigantic mistake on the part of the left to let conservatives and other right-wingers get away with their appropriation of our nation's flag. It is long past time that the nation's flag be reclaimed - not as a symbol of the left (although I do believe that the <i>ideals</i> articulated in the nation's founding documents are fundamentally liberal, rooted, as they are, in the European Enlightenment) - but as a non-partisan symbol of the nation's shared ideals and of the nation broadly, including everyone within it.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Which brings me to why this meme is so offensive and how it succeeds at being so antagonistic. By claiming the flag as <i>his</i> through the use of the first person - "this is <i>my</i> flag" (my emphasis) - what the creator of this meme is really saying is that it is not yours nor mine. This contradicts both the letter and the spirit of our nation's original and traditional if unofficial motto: <i>e pluribus unum</i> - "from many, one." Making the nation's symbol exclusive of one's political enemies is a favorite tactic of the right wing, but it is not just a rhetorical device. <a href="https://www.vox.com/21313021/trump-white-nationalism-supremacy-miller-bannon-immigration" target="_blank">White nationalists</a>, the <a href="https://www.adl.org/resources/backgrounders/christian-identity" target="_blank">Christian Identity movement </a></span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">and</span> <span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/28/opinion/christian-nationalists-capitol-attack.html" target="_blank">Christian nationalists</a> all, to varying degrees, actually envision the United States (or at least much of its geographical territory) as a White, Christian homeland in which non-White, non-Christian residents are less authentically American (and less authentically human, even) and not truly part of the fabric of the nation's polity. That's what the <a href="https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/ideology/alt-right" target="_blank">alt-right movement</a> is all about and it was precisely to this quandom undercurrent (until Trump legitimized it and brought it fully out into the open) of White nationalism, racism, religious bigotry, antisemitism and xenophobia to which Trump very deliberately appealed in 2015 and <a href="https://www.vox.com/21313021/trump-white-nationalism-supremacy-miller-bannon-immigration" target="_blank">throughout his occupancy of the office of President of the United States</a>. Referring to the flag as "my flag" rather than as "our flag" clearly signals that this meme has little or nothing to do with patriotism and everything to do with White nationalism. "My flag," as it is used in this meme, is a repudiation of the sentiments of unity and camaraderie with all other Americans - the shared love-of-country that is the lifeblood of the American spirit - and serves no other purpose than to marginalize those Americans who are not in the same demographic group that overwhelmingly comprises the Republican base.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Is it a stretch to tie Trump and Trumpism to this meme? Not really. The person who originally shared it on Facebook (at least the version that I saw when it was re-posted by my friend) is <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZsOp-lvtOU" target="_blank">Ina Holiday, a Las Vegas "entertainer and singer,"</a> and former candidate for the Nevada State Assembly whose Facebook page includes a goodly amount of anti-vaccine, anti-mask and pro-Trump memes and posts.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">More to the point, it is also not a stretch to interpret this meme as a reaction against the Black Lives Matter movement. Thanks to the efforts of Colin Kaepernick (and those who have joined him), our nation has lately been forced to reckon not just with its history of racism but with the systemic manifestation of that racism which persists to this day. (This is even more true since the murder of George Floyd.) Not unlike the flag-desecration of those who protested against U.S. policy and warfare in Vietnam in the 1960s, Kaepernick's symbolic gesture of kneeling during the playing of the national anthem is intended to admonish the United States - albeit in a vastly less confrontational and more respectful way than flag-burning - for its racism by strategically directing that admonition toward the national anthem, a symbol of the United States that is probably second only to the flag itself in terms of significance and veneration. The meme, of course, makes no mention of the BLM movement or of the increasingly widespread consciousness of racism that we are seeing today but, given the current political and social context, it is hard to imagine that anything else could be intended by the reference to "skin color, race [and] religion." </span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Just as denying the existence of racism is a form of racism, attempting to invalidate any criticism of systemic racism on the grounds that such criticism is unpatriotic is also a form of racism. To the extent that the BLM movement and Critical Race Theory (another favorite bogeyman of conservatives) constitute critiques of our nation's <i>systemic</i> and institutionalized racism, this meme seems intended to invalidate them by treating them as an attack on the nation's flag and, therefore, on the nation itself. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">It achieves this partly through the affectation of grievance but also through the use of innuendo. Both the second and third statements in the meme ("I will not apologize for [the flag]" and "It does NOT [sic] stand for skin color. . . .") employ the same rhetorical technique: an assertion is phrased negatively and in opposition to what the creator of the meme intends us to believe is a previous assertion to which he is merely - but with justified indignation - responding. Thus, by declaring that he will <i>not</i> apologize for the flag, the audience is led to believe that someone else has demanded that he should. And by declaring that the flag does <i>not</i> stand for skin color, the audience is led to believe that someone else has claimed that it does. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">One of the purposes of this meme, then, is to inspire those who view it with this same feeling of righteous indignation against the long-overdue reckoning of our nation's history of systemic racism. In other words, to get them riled up against the movement for racial justice. Another is to raise the alarm that the <i>meaning</i> of the flag is being deliberately subverted. The theme that both the flag and its meaning are under siege is visually represented (and rather artfully, too, to give credit where credit is due) by depicting the flag perseveringly and defiantly waving before a landscape that is clearly intended to be seen as a battleground. The land in the foreground is barren, the trees stripped of much of their foliage while, in the distance, the sky glows red and orange as though from the fires of a recent or ongoing bombardment. We are meant to understand from all this that it is not just the flag and its meaning that are under assault but the heart and soul of our very nation. </span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">The idea that our nation and our way of life are under attack is now<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/01/capitol-riot-and-white-conservatives-extremism/617615/" target="_blank"> the predominant theme of White-nationalist, Republican and Trumpist discourse</a>. Writing for The Atlantic, Ronald Brownstein described the history and the current state of "the ominous tenor of contemporary Republican messaging":<br /></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Late in the 2016 presidential campaign . . . Michael Anton, a conservative scholar who later joined the Trump White House, described the race between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton as the "Flight 93 Election." . . . Anton insisted that a Democratic victory would change America so irrevocably that conservatives needed to think of themselves as the passengers on United Airlines Flight 93 on September 11 - the ones who chose to bring down the plane to save the U.S. Capitol from al-Qaeda hijackers. Letting the Democrats win, in other words, would doom the country. . . .<br /></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">For at least the past decade, GOP candidates and conservative-media personalities have routinely deployed rhetoric similar to the Flight 93 argument. Only about 40 hours before the [January 6] insurrection, at a campaign rally hosting an enthusiastic, virtually all-white audience in rural Georgia, President Trump insisted that if Democrats won the state's two Senate runoff elections . . . "America as you know it will be over, and it will never - I believe - be able to come back again."</span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">And, of course, on January 6th, while inciting his mob before it assaulted the capitol in order to prevent the certification of Biden's electoral victory, <a href="https://www.npr.org/2021/02/10/966396848/read-trumps-jan-6-speech-a-key-part-of-impeachment-trial" target="_blank">Trump declaimed</a> "We fight like hell. And if you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore."</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">In his speech accepting the Republican Party's nomination for him to run for president again in 2020, Trump <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-rnc-speech/" target="_blank">declared</a> "this election will decide whether we will defend the American way of life, or whether we will allow a radical movement to completely dismantle and destroy it."</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">As <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/19/politics/pompeo-multiculturalism-tweet/index.html" target="_blank">CNN reported last January</a>, the day before leaving office, former Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo tweeted, "Wokism, multiculturalism, all the -isms - they're not who America is. They distort our glorious founding and what this country is all about. . . ." In the same story, CNN notes that in remarks he delivered the previous July,</span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Pompeo fanned the flames of division stoked by Trump, warning that "the very core of what it means to be an American, indeed the American way of life itself, is under attack" amid nationwide protests for racial justice and against police brutality.</span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Also last January, <a href="https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/22217696/republicans-trump-capitol-hill-storming-mob-responsible" target="_blank">writing in Vox</a>, Zack Beauchamp drew essentially the same conclusions as Brownstein (in the Atlantic) namely, that "The Capitol Hill mob was the logical culmination of years of mainstream Republican politics."</span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">The animating force of modern Republicanism is this: Democratic Party rule is an existential threat to America and is by definition illegitimate. . . .</span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Whether elite Republicans genuinely believe what they tell their base is beside the point. The fact is their delegitimizing rhetoric has been the fuel of the conservative movement for many, many years now.</span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Beauchamp noted that, on the morning of January 6th, Lauren Boebert, a Republican representative from Colorado, "tweeted that the efforts to overturn the 2020 election results amounted to a new American revolution. 'Today is 1776,' she wrote." Ten years earlier, Sharon Angle (a Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate) had stated in an interview "that she believed that Americans might need to take up arms against the tyranny of Barack Obama and the Democratic congress."</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><a href="https://www.newyorker.com/news/letter-from-bidens-washington/american-democracy-isnt-dead-yet-but-its-getting-there" target="_blank">Writing for the New Yorker last spring</a>, Susan B. Glasser pointed out that</span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">In one alarming survey released this week, nearly thirty percent of Republicans endorsed the idea that the country is so far "off track" that "American patriots may have to resort to violence" against their political opponents.</span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Last month, writing for the Washington Post, Ruth Ben-Ghiat <a href="https://www.blogger.com/#">reported</a> that </span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">In June, an anchor of One America News suggested that execution might be an apt punishment for the "tens of thousands" of "traitors" who, he claimed, stole the election from former president Donald Trump. A sitting member of congress, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) told Americans in May that they "have an obligation to use" the Second Amendment, which is not about recreation but "the ability to maintain an armed rebellion against the government if that becomes necessary."</span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p>. . . <br /></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">This Republican culture of violence and threat builds on histories of racial persecution and on policing used as an instrument of terror against non-Whites. Habituation to such violence, reinforced by the presentation of non-Whites as an existential threat to the future of America (as in the "great replacement theory" that Tucker Carlson has referenced on Fox News) makes it easier for the public to accept violence around political events, like elections, as necessary to "save the country." Tellingly, the participants in the January coup attempt, which was billed as just this kind of patriotic act, included 57 local and state GOP officials. . . .</span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">The meme that I have been discussing here is a distillation of the Republican worldview of imagined or affected persecution, that America and "the American way of life" are under assault from within (by Democrats, otherwise known as "radical leftists," and the BLM movement), and that part of the epochal struggle for the heart and soul of America, indeed, its very survival, includes a propaganda war currently underway for the meaning of our nation's national symbol, the U.S. flag. On this front, the meme's creator steadfastly holds the line against those fifth-columnists who demand that he apologize for the flag and who would see <i>his</i> flag debased as it only could be by the suggestion that its broader meaning might actually have something to do with skin color, race and religion.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">So, what does the flag, with its red and white stripes and white stars on a blue background represent? Of course "it does not stand for skin color, race or religion" but, equally, it does not "stand for" freedom (or "FREEDOM"), as the meme's creator claims. At face value, the flag symbolizes merely what we all learned in elementary school that it does. The stars in the upper left-hand corner represent the number of states currently in the Union while the thirteen red and white stripes represent the original thirteen colonies that declared independence from Britain on July 4, 1776. There are deeper meanings associated with the design of the flag, too, including its colors and the symbolism of its particular design. Most sources credit <a href="https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Charles_Thomson#:~:text=The%20colours%20of%20the%20pales,signifies%20vigilance%2C%20perseverance%20%26%20justice." target="_blank">Charles Thompson</a>, the secretary of the Continental Congress from 1774 to 1789, who was instrumental in designing the Great Seal of the United States, with the use of red, white and blue (for the Seal) and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_the_United_States#Colors" target="_blank">attribute their symbolic intent, which comes from heraldry and which subsequently became associated with the colors of the flag, itself, to the following quote by Thompson</a>:</span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">White signifies purity and innocence, Red, hardiness & valor, and Blue, the colour of the Chief, signifies vigilance, perseverance & justice.</span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">Ultimately and most importantly, the flag is a national and non-partisan symbol of the nation and of the unity of its states and of its people.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">To be clear, no one is being asked to apologize for the flag. What their fellow Americans are being asked to do by the Black Lives Matter movement and others is to recognize the reality that the enslavement of Black people was the original sin of our nation's founding, <a href="https://news.berkeley.edu/2019/09/17/constitutions-biggest-flaw-protecting-slavery/" target="_blank">written into our very constitution</a> (its liberal ideals, notwithstanding). Acknowledging our nation's past wrongs, the legacy of those wrongs and the wrongs that persist to this day is not an assault on the flag nor a demand that anyone apologize for the flag. To suggest otherwise is to denigrate the cause of racial justice by defining it as conflicting with what the flag represents when, in fact, in a very real sense, this <i>is</i> what the flag represents: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal. . . ."</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">My own view of the flag, looking beyond its obvious, superficial symbolism, is that it represents the <i>ideals </i>that our nation was founded on. It represents not only the best that America has been in the past and is now but could be in the future. It ought to inspire feelings of togetherness and camaraderie, mutual understanding, compassion, reconciliation, resoluteness, justice, courage and, above all unity. That means having the rectitude, the strength, the wisdom and the will to acknowledge the ways in which our nation has erred and working together to create "a more perfect union," one that truly embodies justice and equality for all.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;">When I think of our nation's flag, then, and what it means to me, I experience overwhelmingly <i>positive</i> feelings, including pride. In contrast, when I see the flag used as it is in this meme, I see only an angry, paranoid, scapegoating and militant belligerence. This meme manages to turn what should be a positive and uplifting symbol into a hate-filled one. It weaponizes the U.S. flag and, what is worse, weaponizes it against other Americans. It perverts the transcendent symbolism of the flag - its very spirit - by converting it from unity and love-of-country to hatred of one's political enemies. And that may be the biggest desecration of all.</span></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Ir1UjNV-Sio/YSojPa02VnI/AAAAAAAAAUQ/nrmzbMg69dASE3oeBaBI85mLye6a2ahowCLcBGAsYHQ/s640/640px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.webp" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="337" data-original-width="640" height="169" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Ir1UjNV-Sio/YSojPa02VnI/AAAAAAAAAUQ/nrmzbMg69dASE3oeBaBI85mLye6a2ahowCLcBGAsYHQ/s320/640px-Flag_of_the_United_States.svg.webp" width="320" /></a></div><br /><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><br /></span><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-14683589238142764542021-05-09T08:47:00.027-07:002023-12-22T16:11:19.831-08:00An Appeal to Nurses<p><span><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif;"><span><span><span title=""><span><span title=""><span dir="ltr"><span dir="ltr"><span><span><span><span title=""><span><span title=""><span><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title=""> <span style="font-family: times;"><span title="">This is an appeal to nurses everywhere but, especially, here in the United States. </span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span style="color: black; font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif;"><span><span><span title=""><span><span title=""><span dir="ltr"><span dir="ltr"><span><span><span><span title=""><span><span title=""><span><span><span><span title=""><span style="font-family: times;"><span title="">Like you, I work in healthcare. I am a licensed physical
therapist with over 20 years of experience helping people recover
functional mobility following strokes and other debilitating injuries
and illnesses.</span></span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-family: times;"> Although we
don't know one another, the fact that you are a nurse tells me that
you share the same concern for the well-being of others that motivates
most of us who work in healthcare. It also means that we have a historical connection, since the first physical therapists were nurses. As a physical therapist, I'm proud to work in healthcare, I'm proud of my profession, and I'm especially proud to work in a profession that has its roots in nursing because nursing epitomizes what healthcare is all about:</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"> helping people get better.</span></p><div><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="color: black;"><span><span><span title=""><span><span title=""><div dir="ltr"><span dir="ltr"><span><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title=""></span></span></span></span></span></div></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title="">Unfortunately,
although healthcare is among the most honorable and rigorously scrutinized of human endeavors, it is not without its share of historical missteps. Sometimes, these have been well-meaning interventions that simply did not withstand the test of time. From bloodletting to lobotomy to the use of IV ethanol as a tocolytic agent to the widespread prescription of Thalidomide to routine <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/episiotomy-childbirth-guidelines_n_1799394" target="_blank">episiotomies</a> and unnecessary hysterectomies, the history of medicine is replete with treatments and practices that once were considered state of the art but that subsequently have come to be recognized as not only medically unnecessary but, in many cases, even harmful.</span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title="">Regrettably, medicine also includes episodes that are even less honorable and that are impossible to reconcile with contemporary standards of medical ethics and human rights. The <a href="https://www.teenvogue.com/story/the-history-of-coerced-sterilization-in-the-united-states" target="_blank">forced sterilizations of thousands of marginalized women</a> (mostly poor women and women of color)
is one example. The notorious <a href="https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/history/40-years-human-experimentation-america-tuskegee-study" target="_blank">"Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male"</a> is another. Still another is medicine's disgraceful history of <a href="https://dbalablog.blogspot.com/2023/08/cured-what-gay-rights-movement-can.html" target="_blank">labeling homosexuality a "psychiatric disorder" and subjecting gay men and women to electroconvulsive therapy, "aversion therapy," even lobotomies in a misguided attempt to "cure" them of their gayness</a>.<a href="https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/history/40-years-human-experimentation-america-tuskegee-study" target="_blank"><br /></a></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title="">Unfortunately, for as long as medical practice has existed,
medical <i>mal</i>practice and human-rights violations committed in medicine's
name seem to have existed alongside it. That is why those of us who are
medical professionals have a special obligation to speak out when
medical practice fails, as it has so many times in the past, to live up to its own ethical standards,
beginning with the cardinal principle, <i>primum non nocere</i>: "first, do no harm."</span></span></span></span></p></div><div><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span title="">That
is why I am reaching out to you today, as one healthcare professional to another. The history of discredited medical practices - discredited both ethically and by the failure of evidence to support them - is, even now, not completely behind us. To this day, and about 3,000 times every day (more than one million times every year), children are subjected to a harmful and medically-unnecessary genital surgery in
fully accredited hospitals throughout the United States under the guise of medical care. I am
referring to non-therapeutic neonatal penile circumcision and these are
the facts about this surgery:</span></span></p></div><div><ul><li><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span title="">Despite
being medically unnecessary, non-therapeutic penile circumcision remains
one of the most commonly performed surgeries in the United States.</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span title="">The
medical profession acknowledges that neonatal penile circumcision is
unnecessary yet permits this lucrative genital surgery to continue and profits from it anyway.</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span title="">There
is not a single claimed "health benefit" of penile circumcision that
cannot be achieved through less invasive, less harmful, less costly and
less painful methods, such as</span><span><span title=""></span></span></span></li><ul><li><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span title="">the
use of antibiotics to treat UTIs, as is routinely done in the case of
females (who develop UTIs ten times as often as males do)<br /></span></span></li><li><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span title="">the use of condoms and other safe-sex practices to prevent the transmission of STIs.</span></span></li></ul><li><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span title="">Non-therapeutic neonatal circumcision is always performed without the consent of the person subjected to it.</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span title=""><span><span title="">Any
intact, adult male can undergo circumcision if he wants to and, although
very few men actually make this choice, those who do are not harmed in
any way by having waited until they are adults and capable of
exercising informed consent</span></span>.<br /></span></span></li><li><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span title="">When
performed on infants, circumcision is excruciatingly painful yet often
is performed without any anesthetic and always performed without adequate
anesthetic.</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span title="">Penile circumcision removes a natural, essential, sensitive and functional body part.</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span title="">The penile prepuce (or <i>foreskin</i>) is the primary sensory organ of the penis
with a greater concentration of specialized light-touch receptors than
is found in the glans or in any other part of the penis or, for that matter, in any other part of the body
except the fingertips and lips. All of that sensory function is
permanently lost to circumcision.</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span title=""><span><span title="">Non-therapeutic neonatal circumcision is irreversible</span></span>.<br /></span></span></li><li><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span title="">The overwhelming majority of men who remain intact value their foreskins and do not want to have them surgically removed.</span></span></li><li><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span title="">Consistent with this, many men who <i>were</i> subjected to non-therapeutic neonatal
circumcision <a href="http://www.circumcisionharm.org/index.htm" target="_blank">report</a> that, had they been allowed to make this choice for themselves, they would not have
chosen to have this part of their genitals removed.
Beyond <a href="https://www.mendocomplain.com/" target="_blank">objecting</a> to the irreparably diminished capacity for erotic experience that necessarily results from this surgery, they resent having been deprived
of their fundamental right to bodily autonomy: the right to make their own decisions about their
bodies, including which healthy parts they get to keep and which healthy parts get cut
off</span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">.</span></span><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span><span title=""> </span></span></span><br /></li></ul></div><div dir="ltr"><div style="color: black;"><div class="x_x_x_x_x_x_x__2zOpJb7ZbCN0X1DoeFyiYw x_x_x_x_x_x_x_JWNdg1hee9_Rz6bIGvG1c x_x_x_x_x_x_x_allowTextSelection"><div><div class="x_x_x_x_x_x_x_rps_8333"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span><span title=""> </span></span></span></span></span></span></div><div style="font-size: 12pt;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span style="font-family: times; font-size: medium;"><span><span title="">Perhaps
you haven't really thought much about non-therapeutic circumcision
before. The fact is, this genital surgery is performed so routinely that even many healthcare providers seldom think about the
reality of what this genital surgery is and what it entails. That
needs to change. My hope is that, when you consider the facts about
non-therapeutic circumcision, you will come to view it differently from the way you may have been accustomed to viewing it up until now - just as we now view other discredited medical practices differently from the way they were viewed by previous generations. <br /></span></span></span></span></span></span></div><div><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span style="font-size: medium;">My
own perspective, which I also hope you will come to share if you don't already, is that of a
healthcare provider who believes that it is unethical to subject a healthy child - whether female, male or intersex - to a
medically-unnecessary genital surgery. At the same time, my perspective
- which I hope you do <i>not</i> share and never will - is that of someone
who was subjected to this surgery. Although, if it hasn't happened to you, I
don't expect you to fully comprehend what it's like to have had part of your genitals cut off without your consent, I <i>do</i> trust
that your capacity for empathy - that same human quality that prompted
you to become a nurse in the first place - will enable you to understand the perspective of the many men like me who object to what was done to our bodies and, ultimately, move you to share <span><span><span title="">our outrage.</span></span></span></span> </span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title="">If
you do already, the good news is that we are not alone.
Non-therapeutic neonatal circumcision has been condemned by many of the
world's leading human-rights advocates, psychologists, attorneys,
bio-ethicists, physicians and professional medical organizations. Here,
in the United States, one of the organizations that is leading the
way is <a data-auth="NotApplicable" data-linkindex="0" href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" title="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/">Doctors Opposing Circumcision</a>.
Doctors Opposing Circumcision is an organization that was founded more
than 25 years ago by George Denniston, MD, MPH in order to help bring
about an end to the unconscionable practice of subjecting unconsenting
children to medically-unnecessary genital surgery. DOC is comprised of
like-minded physicians and others who share the principles, the ethics
and the core values that all of us, as healthcare providers, are
obligated to uphold. These ethical principles include: <br /></span></span></span></span></span></span></p></div><div><ul style="text-align: left;"><li><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title=""><i>beneficence</i>: the principle that the care and services we provide must benefit the patient</span></span></span></span></span></span></li><li><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title=""><i>nonmalificence</i>: the principle that we must not harm or injure our patients </span></span></span></span></span></span></li><li><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title=""><i>justice</i>: the principle that all patients should be treated equally and fairly<i> <br /></i></span></span></span></span></span></span></li><li><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title=""><i>respect for autonomy</i>:
the principle that every human being, regardless of age, sex, religion,
race, ethnicity or anything else, has a fundamental and absolute right
of bodily self-ownership. </span></span></span></span></span></span></li></ul></div><div><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span><span title=""><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title="">Non-therapeutic neonatal penile circumcision
violates every one of these ethical principles. </span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span><span title=""><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title="">It also violates both the spirit and the letter of most of the specific provisions of the <a href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwib5vO4kvf7AhWkgXIEHftdAesQFnoECAoQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fnursing.rutgers.edu%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2019%2F06%2FANA-Code-of-Ethics-for-Nurses.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1ylEZDh83otzC0x4ZTlN_g" target="_blank">American Nurses Association Code of Ethics for Nurses</a>, especially Provision 3: "The nurse promotes, advocates for, and protects <i>the rights, health, and safety of the patient</i> [my emphasis]."</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span><span title=""><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title="">For all of these reasons, Doctors
Opposing Circumcision is working to end what, for too long, has been a cure in search of a disease - a deeply entrenched cultural practice masquerading as medical care. </span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p></div><div><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span><span title="">I hope you will take a few minutes to listen to Dr. Denniston explain, <span><span><span title=""><span><span><span title=""><a data-auth="NotApplicable" data-linkindex="1" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWfHO8yQaRY&t=6s" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" title="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SWfHO8yQaRY&t=6s">in his own words, why DOC exists and why this cause is so important</a></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span>.</p></div><div><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title="">After listening to Dr. Denniston, I hope you will listen to <a data-auth="NotApplicable" data-linkindex="2" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Csaal-MqXB4&list=PLE_MTfLKVnfWQ_Otsrw6gSJ7RCxEtLJc0&index=51" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" title="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Csaal-MqXB4&list=PLE_MTfLKVnfWQ_Otsrw6gSJ7RCxEtLJc0&index=51">the firsthand accounts of a group of nurses</a>
- medical professionals like yourselves - who decided that they could no
longer in good conscience participate in the harmful
practice of non-therapeutic neonatal penile circumcision. In 1995, these conscientious objectors went on to found the organization, <a href="http://childrightsnurses.org/index.php/about-us/" target="_blank">Nurses for the Rights of the Child</a>. As explained on its website, </span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span style="font-size: medium;"></span></span></span></span></span></p><blockquote><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title=""><i>Nurses for the Rights of the Child</i> is a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting the rights of infants and children to bodily integrity. As health professionals, we specifically seek to protect non-consenting infants and children from surgical alteration of their healthy genitals. <br /></span></span></span></span></span></span></blockquote><p></p></div><div><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title="">I encourage you to visit the NRC website in order to learn what your fellow nurses are doing to protect children from medically-unnecessary genital surgery. <br /></span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title="">I also encourage you to read this <a data-auth="NotApplicable" data-linkindex="3" href="https://birthbootcamp.com/should-i-circumcise-my-baby-guest-post-by-dr-adrienne-carmack-urologist/#null" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" title="https://birthbootcamp.com/should-i-circumcise-my-baby-guest-post-by-dr-adrienne-carmack-urologist/#null">short column by Adrienne Carmack, MD,</a> a board-certified urologist and one of the board members of Doctors Opposing Circumcision. For a comprehensive, evidence-based review of non-therapeutic penile circumcision, see <a href="https://evidencebasedbirth.com/evidence-and-ethics-on-circumcision/?fbclid=IwAR2VdHOie9D6an6Ib1SYudG1QZG-LGbJOed7WZ22RBS4EKkDSVDpHuMIFEU" target="_blank">Evidence and Ethics on: Circumcision</a> by Rebecca Dekker, PhD, RN and Anna Bertone, MPH.<br /></span></span></span></span></span></span></p></div><div><p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title="">Finally, I urge you to visit the <a data-auth="NotApplicable" data-linkindex="4" href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" title="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/">website of Doctors Opposing Circumcision</a>.
Here you can find useful information and resources,
including information on conscientious objection if you are currently involved in obstetrics and neonatal care. Nurses for the Rights of the Child also provides information on conscientious objection in a <a href="http://childrightsnurses.org/index.php/activism/conscientious-objection-brochure/" target="_blank">brochure that can be downloaded from its website</a>. Once you have come to
the unavoidable conclusion, as many of us in healthcare already have, that participation in medically-unnecessary
and non-consensual genital surgeries is incompatible with the ethical duties of healthcare
providers, you will find it difficult, if not impossible, to do so. Both the
DOC and NRC websites have guidance for medical professionals that can help.</span></span></span></span></span></span></p></div><div><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title="">And
if you have any other questions or would like to discuss this further,
please do not hesitate to contact me directly at my
email address: balashinsky@yahoo.com.</span></span></span></span></span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title=""><br /></span></span></span></span></span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title="">Thank you, <br /></span></span></span></span></span></span></div><div><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span title=""><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title=""><br /></span></span></span></span></span></span></div><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span><span title=""><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title="">David Balashinsky, P.T.</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></div><div dir="ltr"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span><span title=""><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title=""> </span></span></span></span></span></span></span></div><div dir="ltr"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span><span title=""><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title=""> </span></span></span></span></span></span></span></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span><span><span title=""><span><span><span style="font-size: medium;" title=""><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGQKnPJoWANfhDccMM21qNX2CYrZTJ1aQR2QyvA3c3oPb3Z4yJIi1qee1oAAZzcUgIog07MyEzpYv_EBkYL4xWBnDY9Gml7p1xWN8SVUkFA19-OuYS2NJvAxi3X5J5ps8Mimv6PCzv9L9buwtZcNFEzU4HJE9wPc2d5N-YAg2EfzmTiVO9EPlaTrSgMuc/s419/Screen%20Shot%202023-08-23%20at%204.39.23%20AM.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="419" data-original-width="285" height="147" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhGQKnPJoWANfhDccMM21qNX2CYrZTJ1aQR2QyvA3c3oPb3Z4yJIi1qee1oAAZzcUgIog07MyEzpYv_EBkYL4xWBnDY9Gml7p1xWN8SVUkFA19-OuYS2NJvAxi3X5J5ps8Mimv6PCzv9L9buwtZcNFEzU4HJE9wPc2d5N-YAg2EfzmTiVO9EPlaTrSgMuc/w100-h147/Screen%20Shot%202023-08-23%20at%204.39.23%20AM.png" width="100" /></a></div></span></span></span></span></span></span></span></div></div></div></div></div></div><span style="font-family: times;"><i>About me: I am originally from New York City and now live near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. I have been a physical therapist
for over twenty years and began my career at NYU Medical Center in New York. I now do inpatient rehabilitation in a major central NY hospital system. I currently serve on the
board of directors of the <a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">Genital Autonomy Legal Defense & Education Fund, (GALDEF)</a>, the board of
directors and advisors for <a href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" target="_blank">Doctors Opposing Circumcision</a> and I also serve on the leadership team for <a href="https://www.bruchim.online/" target="_blank">Bruchim</a>, an organization that fosters welcoming spaces for Jews opting out of circumcision.</i></span><br /> <p><span style="font-family: times;"> </span></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-86343932580602438932021-03-01T05:18:00.020-08:002022-10-22T02:43:23.578-07:00OMV!, OB/GYNs, FACOGs & MGC: A Call for Consistency<p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">by <b>David Balashinsky</b> <br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">There are few things more offensive to one's sense of right and wrong than a double standard by which a harm is condemned in one case but a blind eye turned to a comparable (or worse) harm in another. And there are few instances of such a double standard more flagrant than the outrage currently being directed at <i>Vagisil</i> for its new <i>OMV!</i> product line by several prominent OB/GYNs.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">For those unacquainted with <i>OMV!</i> and the controversy surrounding it, <i>OMV!</i> is a "personal care" product manufactured by <i>Vagisil</i>. <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/18/well/vagisil-omv-teens.html?smtyp=cur&smid=fb-nytimes&fbclid=IwAR0SXE1NWdKLgeN33f3tZlPsmu5TT8zEzzvlznH7b97XHH_MQ9_BRQDlFR8" target="_blank">The New York Times</a>, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2021/02/12/vagisil-feminine-wash-teens-backlash-gynecologists/?commentId=e972a264-f617-4cab-acf8-e24eb142a939" target="_blank">The Washington Post</a> and <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/vagisil-jen-gunter-controversy_ca_602165a3c5b6f38d06e5d0f9" target="_blank">HuffPost </a> have all reported on this within the past few weeks. The criticism of products that are marketed to women as palliatives for the pathological condition of having a vulva is not new. What <i>is</i> new is that <i>Vagisil</i> has recently launched a "feminine hygiene" product line - and an advertising campaign to promote it - that specifically targets teenagers. This is also the cause of the particular outrage about this product. As Dr. Jen Gunter (as quoted in WAPO) puts it,</span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Society's always looking for ways to make people with vaginas feel ashamed. I hate that industry with a passion because it capitalizes on vaginal and vulvar shame. But to see it marketed to teens? Not on my watch.</span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The objections to <i>OMV! </i>all sound similar themes and I agree with every one of them. "Feminine deodorant" wipes or sprays are unnecessary. The vagina, as Dr. Gunter is fond of saying, is "like a self-cleaning oven." (I love that simile, although I also think that anything that reinforces the link in people's minds between women, housework and especially kitchens is probably best avoided.) They are potentially and likely harmful. They do not so much address a problem as invent one by pathologizing the vagina and the vulva. In this respect, such products are the quintessential "solution in search of a problem" or (to put it more precisely) "cure in search of a disease." Worse, by pathologizing female genitalia, these products contribute to a culture of body-shaming that undoubtedly adversely affects women's and young women's self-esteem. There is even an argument to be made that such products represent an updated version of ancient, patriarchal notions of women as being essentially malignant and corrupting influences upon their male counterparts (think Eve and the apple). This peculiar, bipartite and contradictory concept regards women as temptresses with bodies ideally suited to that purpose yet, at the same time, regards that part of women's bodies that is <i>most</i> female and <i>most</i> tempting as the mephitic wellspring of so much pollution and evil that have been unleashed upon <i>man</i>kind. I don't think it's unreasonable to argue that products that exploit the concept of the vulva and the vagina as being inherently foul and malodorous are a contemporary manifestation of a very ancient, patriarchal view of women and of women's bodies, although this argument becomes a little harder (though not impossible) to make when the founders of two prominent companies that traffic in such garbage (<i>Vagisil</i> and <i>Goop</i>) are women.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">So, whence <i>my</i> particular ire? It is this. In promoting an unnecessary product that shames female bodies and that has the potential to cause and in some cases does cause physical harm to female genitals, <i>Vagisil</i> is not doing anything worse than what the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) has done and continues to do in endorsing an unnecessary genital surgery that shames male bodies and that causes physical harm to male genitals. Yet four of the most vociferous critics of <i>Vagisil</i>'<i>s</i> <i>OMV!</i>, including Jen Gunter, MD, Heather Irobunda, MD, Jennifer Lincoln, MD and Staci L. Tanouye, MD, are all Fellows of the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology. My question for these FACOGs (which I posed, in vain, to several of them on Twitter and Instagram) is this: Why the double standard? I agree that vulvas don't need "fixing" in any way at all. Why won't ACOG agree that neither do penises?<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">For context, here is some background. <a href="https://www.who.int/hiv/pub/malecircumcision/neonatal_child_MC_UNAIDS.pdf" target="_blank">Most neonatal circumcisions are performed by obstetricians</a> (section 4.2, p. 22 in the linked United Nations report). As for ACOG, it is a professional organization consisting of obstetricians and gynecologists (obstetricians are generally trained in gynecology and gynecologists are generally trained in obstetrics, <a href="https://www.newh-obgyn.com/blog/obstetrics-care-is-essential-for-you-and-your-babys-health" target="_blank">hence the acronym OB/GYN</a>). <a href="https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/130/3/e756#:~:text=The%20American%20Academy%20of%20Pediatrics%E2%80%99%20%28AAP%29%20statement%20on,concerning%20circumcision%20of%20males%20and%20its%20possible%20benefits." target="_blank">ACOG has officially endorsed the American Academy of Pediatrics' 2012 Technical Report on neonatal male circumcision.</a> The AAP concedes that <a href="https://www.healthychildren.org/English/ages-stages/prenatal/decisions-to-make/Pages/Where-We-Stand-Circumcision.aspx" target="_blank">"existing scientific evidence is not sufficient to recommend routine circumcision" and that "the procedure is not essential to the child's current well-being. . . . "</a> Nevertheless (and possibly because neonatal circumcision generates hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue annually) the authors of the <a href="https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/130/3/e756#:~:text=The%20American%20Academy%20of%20Pediatrics%E2%80%99%20%28AAP%29%20statement%20on,concerning%20circumcision%20of%20males%20and%20its%20possible%20benefits." target="_blank">AAP's 2012 Technical Report</a> argued that "it is legitimate for . . . parents to take into account
their own cultural, religious and ethnic traditions, in addition to
medical factors" when opting to subject their sons to circumcision (note
that "medical factors" is listed last) and it concluded, therefore, that "the benefits of newborn male circumcision justify access to this procedure for those families who choose it." The Technical Report acknowledged, incidentally (or not so incidentally), that among the reasons often cited by parents in the U.S.A. for making this "choice" are "hygiene and cleanliness of the penis" and "[s]ocial concerns." Hence, when they referred to the "benefits" of neonatal circumcision, the authors of the AAP Technical Report were not referring to <i>medical</i> benefits so much as to what they believed were benefits as broadly construed to include <i>social</i> benefits. This distinction was further clarified in a commentary written by Andrew Freedman, MD (one of the members of the Task Force that prepared the AAP's Technical report) that was subsequently <a href="https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/137/5/e20160594" target="_blank">published in </a><a href="https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/137/5/e20160594" target="_blank">Pediatrics</a><i>.</i> As Dr. Freedman explained,</span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">To understand the recommendations, one has to acknowledge that when parents decide on circumcision, the health issues are only one small piece of the puzzle. In much of the world, newborn circumcision is not primarily a medical decision. Most circumcisions are done due to religious and cultural tradition. In the West, although parents may use the conflicting medical literature to buttress their own beliefs and desires, for the most part parents choose what they want for a wide variety of nonmedical reasons. There can be no doubt that religion, culture, aesthetic preference, familial identity, and personal experience all factor into their decision. Few parents when really questioned are doing it solely to lower the risk of urinary tract infections or ulcerative sexually transmitted infections. Given the role of the phallus in our culture, it is not illegitimate to consider these realms of a person's life in making this nontherapeutic, only partially medical decision.</span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The upshot of all this is that ACOG has formally adopted a position supporting a parent's right to subject her or his child to circumcision for cultural reasons, for aesthetic reasons, for religious reasons, for reasons of "hygiene" and "cleanliness," for any reason or for no reason. In the United States, "just because" is a sufficient justification for performing an irreversible and medically-unnecessary genital surgery on an infant male. ACOG Fellows are, of course, physicians who presumably have taken an oath to abide by a code of ethics. Among other things, that code prohibits the use of surgery when less invasive, more conservative treatment options are available. The <a href="http://www.womendocs.com/acogethics/acogcode.pdf" target="_blank">Code of Professional Ethics of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists</a> also enshrines the principle of autonomy: the right of the individual to make informed choices about her or his own body. Yet, with its endorsement of the 2012 AAP Technical Report on infant male circumcision, ACOG invites its Fellows to violate these same ethical guidelines. That is why I have singled out the four FACOGs mentioned above. While none of them performs non-therapeutic infant circumcisions as far as I am aware (Dr. Lincoln explicitly informed me on Twitter - before she blocked me - that she doesn't), all of them are dues-paying members of ACOG who proudly include <i>FACOG</i> among their post-nominal letters. That (along with their failure to publicly and energetically repudiate ACOG's endorsement of unnecessary genital surgery) not only makes their implicit support for ACOG's position a reasonable inference but makes criticism of them for it valid. More to the point, it makes their inconsistency - the double standard of criticizing <i>OMV!</i> while implicitly endorsing forced non-therapeutic circumcision - fair game.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The parallels between "feminine hygiene" products and non-therapeutic circumcision are several and striking, starting from the simple fact that both target genitals: female and male, respectively. (It goes without saying that, throughout this essay, when I refer to "feminine hygiene" products, I am not referring to menstrual products but only to unnecessary "cleansing" and deodorant products such as <i>OMV!</i>.) </span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Beyond this, one of the chief criticisms of <i>OMV!</i> and similar products is that they pathologize the vulva and the vagina. In order to sell a cure or a treatment, after all, one must first identify a problem that needs to be cured or treated. That is exactly what the medical profession (and others) did during the 19th century with the male prepuce (or foreskin). It is well known that male circumcision was introduced and popularized as a "cure" for masturbation (and its inevitable sequela, "masturbatory insanity") as well as for numerous other ailments that were attributed at the time to the presence of the male prepuce. The process by which the male foreskin became pathologized within the realms of medical practice and the culture at large (in England and in the United States) has been thoroughly documented. A concise summary was written by Jessica Wapner and published in 2015 in Mosaic. In <a href="https://mosaicscience.com/story/troubled-history-foreskin/" target="_blank">The Troubled History of the Foreskin</a>, Wapner writes, </span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">One day in 1870, a New York orthopaedic surgeon named Lewis Sayre was asked to examine a five-year-old boy suffering from parallysis of both legs. . . . </span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">After the boy's sore genitals were pointed out by his nanny, Sayre removed the foreskin. The boy recovered. Believing he was on to something big, Sayre conducted more procedures. His reputation was such that when he praised the benefits of circumcision . . . surgeons elsewhere followed suit. Among other ailments, Sayre discussed patients whose foreskins were tightened and could not retract, a condition known as phimosis. Sayre declared that the condition caused a general state of nervous irritation, and that circumcision was the cure.</span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">His ideas found a receptive audience. To Victorian minds, many health issues originated with the sexual organs and masturbation. . . .</span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The circumcised penis came be seen as more hygienic, and cleanliness was a sign of moral standards. An 1890 journal identified smegma as "infectious material." A few years later, a book for mothers . . . described the foreskin as a "mark of Satan." Another author described parents who did not circumcise their sons at an early age as "almost criminally negligent."</span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">By now, the circumcision torch had passed from Sayre to Peter Charles Remondino, a popular San Diego physician. . . . Remondino described the foreskin as a "malign influence" that could weaken a man "physically, mentally and morally; to land him, perchance, in jail or even in a lunatic asylum." Insurance companies, he advised, should classify uncircumcised men as "hazardous risks."</span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">By the turn of the 20th century the Victorian fear of masturbation had waned, but by then circumcision had become a prudent precaution, and one increasingly implemented soon after birth. . . . By 1940, around 70% of male babies in the United States were circumcised.</span></span></p></blockquote><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">. . . By the 1970s . . . more than 90% of U.S. men were circumcised. . . . The American foreskin had become a thing of the past.</span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Throughout its modern history, as one rationale after the other for neonatal circumcision has been discredited, one rationale after the other has arisen to take its place. Thus has neonatal circumcision - like vaginal douches and "feminine hygiene products" - become the quintessential "cure in search of a disease."<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">What makes the "feminine-hygiene-products" industry so particularly objectionable is that it not only <i>reflects</i> a culture of body-shaming of people with vulvas and vaginas (recall Gunter's comments, above) but that it <i>contributes to and perpetuates</i> that culture. But, here again, we see an identical phenomenon at work (except by proxy, because the social pressure is exerted on parents) with respect to non-therapeutic circumcision and penile anatomy. Non-therapeutic circumcision is performed primarily for cultural and "aesthetic" reasons. Social conformity - "so he will look like his father" and "so he won't be made fun of in the locker room" are among the most common rationalizations offered by parents for having their sons circumcised. "So his future sex partners [who, of course, are always assumed to be women] won't be turned off,'" is another. More broadly, because we live in a culture in which male genital cutting has been normalized, many if not a majority of Americans conceptualize a surgically-reduced penis as "normal." Thus, they tend to regard a healthy, intact penis as abnormal, ergo, deformed. It remains common, therefore, for intact boys and men to be mocked for the natural anatomical structure of their genitals (hence the concern about locker rooms). No one should pretend that this body-shaming doesn't adversely affect the body-image and self-esteem of intact boys and men. The problem, however, for such boys and men is not that their penises are intact but that their prepuces have been stigmatized by our society. It is the very <i>act </i>of routine circumcision - the normalization of circumcised penises - that <i>contributes to and perpetuates</i> this culture in which intact penises are stigmatized. As a result, every boy - whether circumcised or intact - grows up with the perception that he was born with a congenital deformity of his penis that either was "corrected" by circumcision or, if it wasn't, ought to have been. And every time an OB/GYN performs a medically-unnecessary circumcision, she or he perpetuates this body-shaming culture, just as ACOG perpetuates it with its endorsement of non-therapeutic circumcision.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">The similarities do not end there. It goes without saying that special "cleansers" for the vulva (and the vagina) are unnecessary. And when washing the vulva is appropriate, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OPDrtvIm9Fk" target="_blank">water and maybe a mild soap are more than sufficient</a>. But it turns out that soap and water work just as well on intact penises as they do on vulvas. Yet "improved hygiene" - "cleanliness of the penis"- is not only frequently offered by parents as a reason to have their child circumcised, this reason is cited specifically in the AAP Technical Report. To be sure, the AAP and ACOG do not themselves explicitly cite "hygiene" as a <i>justification</i> for circumcision. But both organizations <i>do </i>endorse the<i> </i>right of parents to impose circumcision on their children even when their reasons for doing so have no basis in rational thought or medical science. As noted, the AAP's Technical Report - endorsed by ACOG - asserts that it is perfectly "legitimate" for parents to take social, cultural and religious factors into consideration when deciding on whether to subject their male child to circumcision. But what is the concept of the vulva as something that is intrinsically unclean if not a social and cultural (and, to some extent, a religious) construct? What is the concept of the male foreskin as intrinsically unclean if not the same sort of social and cultural construct? By the same token, if a special "feminine wash" is unnecessary as a method for keeping the vulva clean, isn't surgery even <i>more</i> unnecessary, by orders of magnitude, as a method for keeping the penis clean?</span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Still another criticism of<i> OMV!</i> and similar products is that they are not just potentially but positively harmful to the vulva and the vagina. As the Times (which interviewed Dr. Tanouye and others for its coverage of this story) reports,</span></span></p><blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Any product that is scented can potentially damage the skin, Dr. Tanouye said. And while not everyone may experience a reaction, or react immediately, experts said that certain health issues can emerge after prolonged use. "Fragrance is the No. 1 cause of allergic contact dermatitis," Dr. Tanouye said, which is a condition in which the skin gets inflamed and becomes itchy, red and rashy after contact with an irritating substance.</span></span></p></blockquote><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">HuffPost reports that "people who used these ["feminine hygiene"] products were up to three times more likely to get a vaginal infection." <i>Of course</i> introducing an irritant to the vulva, let alone into the vagina, is likely to be harmful. But what amount of willful blindness is required not to recognize that cutting off part of someone's genitals is even more harmful? There is a cure, after all, for contact dermatitis. In contrast, there is no cure for circumcision. It's irreversible.<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;">Lastly, <i>OMV!</i>'s critics cite the "predatory" nature of this and similar products. They exist and are promoted for one reason: to make money. And that, I submit, is precisely the motivation behind ACOG's endorsement of the 2012 AAP Technical Report on infant circumcision. That hundreds of millions of dollars are spent annually on totally unnecessary "feminine hygiene" products is disgraceful. That companies like <i>Vagisil</i> and <i>Goop</i> profit to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars annually by selling these products is unconscionable. How is it any less disgraceful that hundreds of millions of healthcare dollars are misdirected annually into a medically-unnecessary genital surgery? (This is money that could be spent on early childhood nutrition programs or providing access to the full range of reproductive healthcare services for uninsured or under-insured women, to offer just two examples.) And how is it any less unconscionable that ACOG's members directly profit from the performance of this medically-unnecessary genital surgery?<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: times;"><i>Vagisil</i> exists only to make money. Its shareholders and most of its officers do not swear an oath of beneficence, nor are they obligated (even if we think they should be) to be guided by the precept <i>primum non nocere</i>. Every member of ACOG, in contrast, does swear such an oath and is under such an obligation. Subjecting unconsenting children (and the adults that they become) to a medically-unnecessary and irreversible genital surgery violates that oath and that obligation. Thus, while I salute Doctors Gunter, Irobunda, Lincoln and Tanouye for their criticism of <i>OMV!</i>, I respectfully suggest that they should also put their own house in order. Even though they, themselves, may not perform non-therapeutic circumcisions, they belong to an organization of OB/GYNs who do. <i>Vagisal</i> will probably never abandon its business model in order to do the right thing. Of ACOG, on the other hand, the public has a right to expect much, much more. </span></span><br /></p><p>* * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * *
* *<br /></p><span style="font-size: medium;"><i><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/s365/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="299" data-original-width="365" height="163" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/w200-h163/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" width="200" /></a></div><span style="font-family: times;">David
Balashinsky is originally from New York City and now lives near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. He writes about bodily autonomy and
human rights, gender, culture and politics</span></i></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-family: times;"></span><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i><span style="font-family: times;"><i>. He currently serves on the board of directors for the <a href="https://www.galdef.org/" target="_blank">Genital Autonomy Legal Defense & Education Fund</a>, (GALDEF),</i></span> the board of
directors and advisors for <a href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" target="_blank">Doctors Opposing Circumcision</a> and the leadership team for <a href="https://www.bruchim.online/" target="_blank">Bruchim</a>.</i></span></i></span></span></i></span><br /> <br /><p><br /><br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-82015280443620862212021-01-04T13:06:00.009-08:002021-01-31T10:09:26.667-08:00The Horseshoe<p><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: times;">by <b>David Balashinsky </b><br /></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span><span>Although the title of this story is <i>The Horseshoe</i>, it's really a story about cats. It's also a story about loss and consolation and about bad luck and good luck, which is why I call it <i>The Horseshoe</i>. <br /></span></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span><span>The horseshoe of the title is a rusty and corroded relic that I happened to dig up while preparing to lay some stones for a patio. It is so deeply pitted </span></span></span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span><span><span><span>that it has to date from the nineteenth- or even the eighteenth century. Undoubtedly, it was once worn by a horse whose bones
lay buried not far from the spot behind the barn where I found it.</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span><span>I live in a rural part of Central New York, just beyond the city limits of
Binghamton. Until a few decades ago, this property was a working farm, complete with a red wooden barn that stands just a few hundred feet
up the hill from the main house. Although still impressive, with three stories, a hayloft on top and a porch in back, the barn is now decrepit. Its foundation walls are caving in and it is ready to collapse at any moment. </span></span></span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span><span>The wood siding,
consisting of vertically hung planks, is so weathered that the
original red has turned several shades darker, in some sections blending
imperceptibly into long black streaks of arrowhead-shaped drip
patterns. All the knots in the siding have come out, providing easy access for squirrels, and the planks are all warped from long exposure
to the constant dampness of this climate.</span></span> </span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>The barn can no
longer be used for storage since it can't support any weight. It
serves only two purposes now. One is as a monument to the agricultural history of this region and the
other is as a shelter for wayfaring cats. Some of these cats stay for just a day or two but others have moved in with the obvious intention of staying permanently. When my wife and I bought the property, the deed included, at least informally, not just the house, the land and the
barn but a reclusive black cat whom the previous owner had named Zorro and who made the barn his home. </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span><span>(I believe that <i>adverse possession</i>, or squatter's
rights, would be the appropriate legal term to describe Zorro's status). </span></span>It was partly our promise to provide Zorro with food and water every day that convinced the seller that we were worthy of becoming the new owners. Although we were true to our word, eventually Zorro got tired of living in the barn and decided to move into the main house with us. Still, since Zorro
occupied it, the
barn has seldom been without an occupant. During the ten years or
so that we have lived here (after moving up from Brooklyn with
several New York City cats), one cat after the other has taken Zorro's place. And, like Zorro, each cat in its turn, with one exception, has ended up living in the main house with us.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>Our house, as I mentioned, is a few hundred feet down the hill from the barn. The main entrance is through a veranda. It is not a large veranda but it is large enough to accommodate a small round table for outdoor dining on those relatively rare occasions when the weather up here is pleasant. On one side of the veranda is the railing and opposite that is the exterior wall of the house. It was on this wall, just by the doorway through which one passes from the veranda into the kitchen, that I hung the horseshoe. Unfortunately, I made the mistake of hanging the horseshoe upside down. My error was pointed out to me by my now-late father-in-law, Joe. We were sitting at the table on the veranda drinking beers when Joe glanced up at the horseshoe. With a combination of disapproval and pity in his voice, and shaking his head from side to side, Joe made the following pronouncement: "All the good luck from that horseshoe is just running right into the ground." He explained to me that, by hanging the horseshoe with its prongs pointing down, all the good luck that might accrue to this household and its inhabitants was simply pouring out and that the horseshoe needed to be hung with its prongs pointing up. I had no idea about any of this. I had originally placed the horseshoe where it was simply because I thought it would be a quaint decoration: one in keeping with the rustic character of the property, not unlike the barn itself. I regarded both the barn and the horseshoe as paradigms of things that were once functional but now were just ornamental. As for its orientation, the internal concavity of the horseshoe - the arch of its "U" - had merely suggested itself as the obvious means by which to hang it on a screw that, conveniently, was already sticking out of the wall. I was completely ignorant of the horseshoe's present-day function as an actual catcher and repository of good luck. When Joe informed me of my mistake, I did, of course, exactly what I always do: I put his recommendation on my mental to-do list and then forgot all about it.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>From this same spot on the veranda, under the horseshoe, I could sit and look up the hill at the old red barn that had housed so many animals over the years and would house so many cats in the years to come. I was in this spot one August day not long after my in-laws' visit when, looking in the direction of the barn, something caught my eye. It was hard to make out because it was partly obscured by the goldenrod that blooms here in August - a harbinger of summer's soon coming to an end - but its movements were unmistakably feline: the characteristic undulation of his head and sweeping of his paw as he cleaned just above his left ear could belong only to a cat. Sure enough, it was a little black cat sitting on the back porch of the barn, grooming himself. I went up to investigate but he ran down the hill, stopping so he could turn and watch me. I got some cat food from the house and brought it up in a small bowl which I placed on the porch where I had seen him sitting and grooming himself. Although the food did not immediately induce him to return to the spot where he seemed so much at home, I left it where it was in the hope that, eventually - after I was gone - he would return. Whether feral or stray, he was probably already well on the way toward making himself at home in the barn, just as Zorro had done. In fact, this cat seemed to me to be a Zorro, Jr., partly because of his coloring, which was so similar - jet black, from nose to tail.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>Later that day, when I got home from work, the first thing I did, even before changing my clothes, was go up to the barn in order to see if the food that I left had been eaten. It had, but the little black cat was nowhere to be found. The next day, again following work, I changed my clothes and set about attending to the daily household chores that never seem to end. In addition to dealing with the kitty litter and feeding our Brooklyn cats (at the time, the only cats, besides Zorro, who were living with us), this included bringing our dogs up to a fenced-in dog-run that we created for them not far from the barn. It also included feeding Zorro, who always refused to eat with our Brooklyn cats. I should probably mention that Zorro was very standoffish with the others, and I could never decide whether this was because his ancestors came over on the Mayflower, in contrast to our own immigrant, Ellis Island cats - in which case Zorro might have harbored a sort of <i>nativist</i> contempt for them - or, quite the opposite, whether it was because Zorro considered himself "hardy country stock" in contrast to our Brooklyn cats whom he considered effete and pampered, and, thinking that it was <i>they</i> who looked down their noses on <i>him</i>, regarded them with churlish resentment. Then, again, I'm probably just projecting. Most likely, Zorro's aloofness was simply due to the fact that he was here first. I'm sure Zorro regarded our Brooklyn cats as interlopers.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>Its being summer, my daily chores also included any of a variety of outdoor projects to which I devoted as much time and energy as remained after working all day. And so after attending to the dogs and cats, I gathered my tools and got to work. At the time, I was immersed in the project of creating a drainage system. This involved digging an extensive channel that ran about a hundred feet from the back of the house (where the water pooled and seeped into the basement) around to the side, which would lead the water away from the house, altogether. Like most of the projects that I have taken on since buying this house, this proved to be much more involved, much more difficult and much more time-consuming than I anticipated. Obviously, this was a project for which I ought to have rented a backhoe. However, by the time I could admit this to myself, my work had progressed so far that I felt that changing strategies would be tantamount to admitting defeat. By now, the ditch, near its origin at the house, was about six feet deep. The digging of it was brutal and miserable work, the land here consisting of what is known as <i>hardpan</i>, which is what it sounds like. Besides this, the area where I was digging that day also consisted of pools of mud and tons of rocks. That day's labors, therefore, being no exception to the normal torture of this project, I found myself growing more and more exasperated, even cursing aloud with every swing of my pick-axe as it struck either rock, which sent painful shock waves through my body, or mud, which erupted in torrents that unerringly found their way into my hair, eyes and mouth. </span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>After not too much of this, as fatigue had already begun to set in, I paused in order to rest. I stood up to my full height for the first time in perhaps fifteen minutes (ditch-digging is such laborious work because one must spend so much time hunched over). I was within the trench so, although I was standing upright, my head and shoulders were just above ground level. Happening at that moment to turn my head slightly to the right, I noticed the little black cat, sitting on his haunches, just twenty feet or so away, with his head cocked to one side, watching me. I was both startled and touched that he took an interest in my work; he seemed to be wondering why I had been so angry about digging. I climbed out of the ditch so I could get some more food for him and, when I returned, found him sitting not far from where I had left him moments before. I tried to approach him with the food but he was not quite willing to take a chance on letting me get close. So I placed the food down at my feet and backed away, a gesture that was intended to convey to him that I acknowledged his apprehension. </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>In order to earn his trust, I would have to give him his space while also remaining more or less present. Bit by bit, a few steps at a time, he cautiously approached the dish of food. Yet there was always a point beyond which he dared not go, and then I would have to reposition myself, by degrees, farther and farther away from the food as, by the same degrees, the little black cat moved closer and closer to it. Eventually he reached the food and, once he had, I sat myself down on the ground about ten or fifteen feet away and watched him eat. Altogether, this whole process - his inching toward the food as I inched away from it - took a half hour or more. I realized that I had developed a great affection for this cat and began to hope that we could formally adopt him and welcome him into our home, just as we had done with Zorro.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>The little black cat became, if not an obsession, at least a preoccupation of mine. I found myself looking out of the window from my bedroom up toward the barn at every opportunity, awaiting his return. He was not only ever-present in my thoughts but became also a frequent subject of conversation between my wife and me. It was during one such conversation that I saw him making his way down the hill above the barn, where he had just emerged from the woods. I ran downstairs to get him some food and offered it to him in the usual manner. Once again, I stayed and watched him eat. Throughout this process - which, as previously, took a half hour or so - my wife watched from the bedroom window. When he finished eating, the little black cat began to move in stages closer and closer to the house, stopping to sit for a few minutes at a time. My wife has a way with animals that is positively preternatural, in comparison to which mine is that of the bumbling amateur. It was just a matter of minutes, therefore, before the little black cat was cradled in my wife's arms. </span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>We have a side porch - as dilapidated and rundown as the barn - that we seldom use. Its sole function is as a halfway house where we temporarily quarantine stray cats during their transition from feral cat to house cat. Although airy and cheerful in its way, the porch is entirely screened in, so that a cat might be confined there without risk of its getting loose. It was this porch that had served as Zorro's temporary quarters when he began the transition from barn cat to house cat. Our plan, then, was to shelter the little black cat here for the short period during which we could have him tested for FIV and FeLV and get him vaccinated. In order to access this porch, one has to walk through the house first, from one end to the other. Thus, as my wife carried the little black cat through the house and through a gauntlet of astonished dogs and cats, I prepared the way by opening doors before them as they approached and closing doors after them as they passed, and otherwise assisted by getting blankets and other necessities. But this cat was no Zorro, Jr. in one crucial respect. Unlike Zorro, who welcomed the change in his circumstances when we brought him indoors, the little black cat could not abide confinement, even in a fairly spacious, screened-in porch. He was truly feral. His sole preoccupation was to try every possible avenue of escape, including climbing the screens. He had not been in the porch ten minutes before he found a small opening in one of the segments of wire mesh that had been installed at some point to keep domestic animals in and raccoons out. He darted through the opening, then turned and paused for a few moments looking back at us, panting. He let out a long, mournful meow which cut me to the quick, sounding as it did like a reproach. I imagined that he was saying, "How could you betray my trust like that?" That was the only time he ever spoke to me - and off he ran.<br /></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>We were heartbroken. We were worried, of course, for his safety, but also stung by the frustration of having had him slip through our fingers. All we could do was hope that he would return. We were afraid that he would no longer trust us enough to allow for any possibility of rescuing him. I did see him again the next evening, but it was much farther away from the house, toward the far end of our property, an area of woods, shrubs, and tall grass that I refer to as the Eastern Provinces because it is so remote; it is the part of our property that is farthest from our house and we never go there. It might be an encouraging sign that I spotted him at all, but his new avoidance of us was equally discouraging, for he now seemed to harbor a fear of us born of experience, rather than of an innate cautiousness, and this would be even harder to overcome.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>It now became a race against time. We live on a busy road and, in spite of the fact that this area is rural - or because of it - people tend to speed on the two-lane artery that leads from the City of Binghamton to Pennsylvania and that passes right in front of our house. With every day that passed with this cat living on his own outdoors, the odds of his meeting an untimely and violent end would increase. We resigned ourselves to hoping for the best and, in the meantime, decided to name him Blackberry. Curiously, my wife and I had come up with that name independently of one another. The name did seem to fit him but we also foolishly indulged the notion that our both having thought of it augured well for Blackberry's eventual adoption into our family.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>It was not to be. The very next morning, as my wife was driving to work, she found poor Blackberry dead in the road down by the Eastern Provinces. He had been run over the night before. Our grief was immense. We felt his loss and the tragedy of his death so much more keenly, having had him within our grasp for a few brief moments. I had been planning on doing some planting that day; I wanted to transplant a large shrub from one location on our property to another. It occurred to me that I could best honor Blackberry by giving him a proper burial and a decent final resting place on our property, so I dug a deep grave for him and buried him below the spot where I then planted the shrub. My wife observed that ever after we would refer to that shrub as our Blackberry Bush, and she later placed a single flower on his grave, resting it on the cedar mulch that I had scattered over the ground beneath which Blackberry lay.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>We went about our daily routines that day but a pall had settled over our home. Our grief was not just immense - we staggered under its weight. And it was just then, </span></span><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><span><span>when we were newly mourning the loss of that unhappy little black cat,</span></span> when our grief was at its most acute because of its newness, that an astonishing thing happened. It was early the next morning - a Sunday. I was outside watering some grass that I had planted recently. I don't know why but I turned to look behind me. From where I was standing, I could see the rear wall of the garage. This wall has a door in it with windows in its upper half. The door opens onto a paved walkway which is bordered by a stone wall that is about three feet high. Above this wall, the land banks so sharply that the wall could not be seen from where I was standing but could be seen reflected in the windows of the garage door that faces it. Something concentrated my attention on those windows, and I realized then that I was seeing, ghostly and pale, the reflection of a little white cat, sitting on his haunches upon the stone wall, licking one of his paws. Not wishing to scare him away, I waved to my wife through the kitchen window, and, in pantomime, directed her attention to the little white cat, still sitting on the stone wall. As my wife took him in her arms, he welcomed her with overt signs of affection. He was, in every respect, Blackberry's opposite; above all, trusting and anxious to be taken in. It should be unnecessary to add that I patched the hole in the wire mesh on the side porch before we left him alone, but he only stayed there for a short time anyway. His tests were all negative, we quickly got him his vaccines, and he was so comfortable indoors and in our company that he rapidly made the transition to full-fledged house cat. We named him Vanilla Bean. My wife and I are not spiritual people, but it really did seem to us that Vanilla Bean had been sent to console us in our grief. A great void had opened in our hearts when we lost Blackberry, and Vanilla Bean came along almost exactly twenty-four hours later to fill it. I shudder to think what might have happened had we not rescued him but, of course, it was not we who rescued him but the other way around.</span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>I mentioned just now that my wife and I are not spiritual people. Neither are we particularly superstitious. And yet there is a curious epilogue to this story, something that made me wonder whether Joe had been right, after all, about that horseshoe. It was just after I had finished burying poor Blackberry and honoring his short sojourn in our lives with the planting of the Blackberry Bush. As I trudged back toward the house, dejected and oppressed by grief, my gaze chanced to fall upon the horseshoe, pointing down. Now, instead of rustic charm, it bore a look of stern reproach. Instead of a quaint decoration, it seemed to be the gnarled hand of Death pointing triumphantly down to the ground where both good luck and Blackberry lay buried. My grief then melded with regret and guilt as I wondered whether, in failing to heed Joe's advice, I had inadvertently courted the misfortune that had befallen Blackberry. Though it was now too late to do Blackberry any good, I made a penance of correcting my mistake and immediately strung a wire from one prong of the horseshoe to the other and remounted it on the wall, correctly this time, with its prongs pointing up, so that our luck might not continue to run out into the ground. Within a few hours, Vanilla Bean had arrived.<br /><br /></span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span>The End</span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span> </span></span></span></p><p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span></span></span></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jhIYaY4u_wI/X_Nwk4-o9KI/AAAAAAAAAQ4/ZP5VAGlYBeIqGTTSHzyBRKTRJ_PPIOybQCLcBGAsYHQ/s597/Screen%2BShot%2B2021-01-04%2Bat%2B2.45.17%2BPM.png" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="460" data-original-width="597" height="222" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-jhIYaY4u_wI/X_Nwk4-o9KI/AAAAAAAAAQ4/ZP5VAGlYBeIqGTTSHzyBRKTRJ_PPIOybQCLcBGAsYHQ/w288-h222/Screen%2BShot%2B2021-01-04%2Bat%2B2.45.17%2BPM.png" width="288" /></a></span></span></span></div><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><br /> </span></span></span><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span> </span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span></span></span></span></p><span style="font-size: medium;"><span><br /> </span></span><p></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-30941525479304432662020-10-12T04:58:00.686-07:002022-08-29T02:43:48.741-07:00An Open Letter to Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen in Support of the Citizen Initiative to Establish 18 as the Minimum Age for Non-therapeutic Circumcision in Denmark<p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;">Dear Prime Minister Frederiksen,<br /><br />Two years ago, in Denmark - a nation with strong democratic and progressive traditions and a proud history of defending Jewish Danes during the darkest days of the Holocaust - a Citizen Initiative passed the 50,000-signature threshold to impel the <i>Folketing</i> (parliament) to consider legislation that would establish 18 as the minimum age at which an individual could undergo non-therapeutic circumcision. Such legislation, if passed, would provide all Danish boys (not just Jewish ones) with the same legal protection against genital cutting that girls in Denmark have had since 2003 and that girls in my own country, the U.S.A., have had since 1996.<br /><br />In reference to this proposed legislation, you recently issued a <a href="https://www.facebook.com/mettefrederiksen.dk/posts/10158495089357719?__cft__[0]=AZVWBY0JdC-iU0dN6qxdpQMuk20Kg2Qppw8VyapPyiAYwb_sxKiOULbIcx-YyCYy1sjnPFkM67xoNfHTMqb_Fytgk0XgxbytranOwj9tmzcXWoJHQPlHRrf2KVjDIOR5ryPivgcf_YG5fcEM87hQzDnx&__tn__=%2CO%2CP-R" target="_blank">statement</a> in which you declared your opposition but in which you also reaffirmed Denmark's solemn promise not to permit persecution of its Jewish citizens ever again. As for that reaffirmation, I welcome it, not only because I oppose antisemitism on principle but because I, myself, am Jewish. Being a member, by birth, of this widely-dispersed ethnic group - one that has had to contend with more than its share of persecution - I have a profound sense of kinship with all other Jews. Accordingly</span></span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;">, </span></span>I look upon an attack against Jews anywhere as an attack against me, personally. <br /> <br />At the same time, that essential part of me that identifies as Jewish also believes that, as Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. declared, "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." As I understand him, what King meant by this is that, if society permits injustice in any one case, it forfeits its moral authority to oppose injustice in every other case. Injustice then achieves a kind of legitimacy and, once it has established this beachhead, we are all threatened by its inevitable encroachment. Every human being, therefore, has a personal stake in the existence of a single, universal standard of justice. Likewise, every human being has a personal stake in combating injustice, wherever it occurs and to whomever it occurs.<br /><br />I do not regard my Jewish identity and my commitment to the ideal of universal justice as being in any way in conflict. On the contrary, each is intrinsic to the other. I cannot separate the ethics and values that are the core of my Jewishness from my belief in universal justice. Thus, it is not in spite of the fact that I am Jewish but because of it that I believe that every child - no matter who that child is - has a fundamental human right to bodily integrity. That is why I am strongly in favor of legislation that would prohibit non-therapeutic circumcision of anyone below the age of 18. <br /><br />This brings me to your statement. Though the sentiments expressed in it are noble, they are predicated on several false assumptions. Chief among these is that all Jews practice infant circumcision. That, simply, is not so. Jews around the world - <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/even-in-israel-more-and-more-parents-choose-not-to-circumcise-1.5178506">including in Israel</a> - are rejecting forced circumcision in ever-increasing numbers. In 2016, the cultural anthropologist, Leonard B. Glick, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QkpFi64QO8&t=162s">estimated</a> that one out of every six Jewish boys born in the United States was being left intact. If anything, this fraction has only increased since then. While the absolute number of Jewish American parents who have rejected this practice may not seem large, when one considers that, at 5.7 million, there are nearly as many Jews living in the United Sates as there are in Israel (6.15 million), Glick's estimate, if even remotely accurate, is highly significant. <br /><br />Nor is this development attributable merely to the phenomenon of lapsed religious observance. Jews are consciously - and conscientiously - repudiating the practice of inflicting severe pain on their infant sons and irreparably damaging and scarring their penises. But don't take my word for it. Visit <i><a href="http://www.beyondthebris.com/">Beyond the Bris</a> </i>in order to read, in their own words, the statements of Jews who oppose forced circumcision. <br /><br />This underscores an even more basic, mistaken assumption on your part; namely, that, whatever the current rate of Jewish circumcision and whatever form it may take in practice, there is something quintessentially Jewish about circumcision - as though Jewishness and circumcision are inseparable. Yet Jews have opposed forced circumcision since it was imposed upon us by fanatical priests during the sixth century BCE (following the Babylonian exile and the Jews' return, 60 years later, from that exile), it was opposed by Hellenistic Jews who desperately tried to undo the damage that had been done to them by resorting to what is now known as "foreskin restoration," it was vigorously debated during the Jewish Enlightenment of the 19th century, and it has been a topic of controversy among Jews throughout the history of our diaspora. As long as Jews have practiced ritual circumcision, there has been intense Jewish opposition to this practice. <br /><br />You seem to take it for granted, however, that Jewish thought on the practice of male genital cutting is monolithic. By perpetuating this myth in your statement, no matter how honorable your intentions were, you appear to have inadvertently engaged in a bit of Jewish stereotyping of your own: all Jews must think one way because they are Jews. <br /> <br />At the same time, by failing to acknowledge the existence of a vibrant Jewish opposition to male genital cutting, your statement marginalizes and effectively silences those Jewish voices that have been and continue to be raised against the perpetuation of this harmful, inhumane and anachronistic human-rights violation. <br /><br />It would not be fair, of course, to blame you for your mistaken assumptions. They are understandable given the statements in opposition to this and similar proposed circumcision age-requirements by Jews themselves. The Jewish Press, for example, <a href="https://www.jewishpress.com/news/jewish-news/antisemitism-news/netanyahu-thanks-danish-pm-for-stance-against-ban-on-circumcision/2020/09/13/">reports</a> that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel spoke directly with you in order to thank you for your "steadfast position in defense of the Jewish community and the ancient tradition of circumcision." The Times of Israel <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/danish-lawmakers-to-mull-circumcision-ban-sparking-protest/">quotes</a> Henri Goldstein (president of the Jewish Community in Denmark) as describing the proposed age-requirement as "the worst threat [to Denmark's Jewish citizens] since World War II." When an identical age-requirement was being considered by a committee of the Icelandic Alþingi two years ago, Jonathan A. Greenblatt, CEO and National Director of the ADL, submitted a <a href="https://www.althingi.is/altext/erindi/148/148-787.pdf">letter</a> to the committee in opposition to the proposed legislation. (The ADL, or Anti-Defamation League, is an organization that I admire and support but which, unfortunately, has a moral blind spot with respect to male genital cutting.) After falsely (and preposterously) claiming that ritual infant circumcision "is universally practiced by all families who identify as Jewish," Mr. Greenblatt asserted that "Such a ban would mean that no Jewish family could be raised in Iceland, and it is inconceivable that a Jewish community could remain in any country that prohibited brit milah." (<i>Brit milah</i> - literally, the “covenant of circumcision” - is the religious circumcision ceremony.) <br /><br />What Jewish opponents of the forced circumcision of unconsenting children want you to recognize, Prime Minister, is that Mr. Netanyahu, Mr. Goldstein and Mr. Greenblatt do not speak for all Jews and they certainly do not speak for us. As I have noted, there is a burgeoning movement within Jewry itself to bring about an end to the harmful and profoundly unethical practice of forced, infant circumcision. The purpose of this open letter is to acquaint you with that movement and to explain why Jewish opposition to forced circumcision is every bit as authentically Jewish, every bit as fundamental to Jewish ethics and every bit as fundamental to the values, principles and meaning of Judaism itself as its defenders claim of <i>brit milah</i>.<br /><br />This is who Jewish opponents of forced circumcision are and what we believe in: We are men and women who come from different walks of life and different parts of the world but who have two things in common: We identify as Jewish and we are unwavering in our opposition to forced genital cutting. Some of us are secular Jews, identifying as Jewish ethnically and culturally, while some of us are religious Jews for whom Judaism is central to our beliefs and values. Some of us have been subjected to genital cutting and others have not. Some of us were subjected to genital cutting within the context of the <i>brit milah</i> while some of us - primarily those of us who are from the United States - were subjected to it merely because we happen to have been born into a time and place in which male genital cutting had become a medicalized, routine part of childbirth. Those of us who have been subjected to genital cutting maintain not only that we were physically harmed by it but that, in being denied a choice regarding the very configuration of our own bodies, we were deprived of the fundamental human right of bodily autonomy. We emphatically do not reject our Jewishness and those of us who are religious do not reject Judaism. We reject one thing and one thing only: forced circumcision. <br /><br />Jewish opposition to forced circumcision rests on a variety of ethical and religious bases: <br /><br />First and foremost is the simple fact that subjecting any child to any form of medically-unnecessary genital-modification surgery violates that child’s fundamental right of bodily integrity. Every child - whether male, female or intersex - has an inalienable right to grow up with the genitals that he, she or they were born with. <br /><br />Jewish opponents of genital cutting reject the implicit notion that forced circumcision is what makes one Jewish. A Jewish girl is no less Jewish than her brother. And a Jewish boy born to Jewish parents is no less Jewish by virtue of not having had the most sensitive part of his penis cut off. Jewishness is a product of one's genes, one's heritage, one's family life and upbringing, one's values, one's traditions and one's culture. </span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;">Jewish
opponents of genital cutting also reject the claim that ritual
circumcision is essential to the practice of Judaism. </span></span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;">More and more religious Jews are replacing the <i>brit milah</i> with the <i>brit shalom</i> (literally, “covenant of peace”), a religious ceremony that serves exactly the same spiritual and communal purposes as the <i>brit milah</i> but
without the pain, without the harm, without the blood, without the
trauma, without the permanent loss of erotogenic tissue and without the
human rights violation.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;">Nor is genital cutting essential to the survival of Judaism as a cohesive religion. </span></span>Jewish
women are not subjected to forced circumcision and they are no less
spiritual - nor do they regard themselves as any less beloved by Him (or
Her) whom they believe to be the Creator of the universe - than their
Jewish fathers, brothers, husbands and sons who were. There are also
countless intact Jewish boys and men in the world today. They, too, are neither less spiritual nor
less devout than their Jewish brethren who were</span></span></span></span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;"> subjected
to forced circumcision as neonates.</span></span></span></span> Judaism is the sublime
manifestation of one's spirituality and religious beliefs. To claim that
it is ultimately reducible to nothing more than the size and shape of a penis is not just an affront to Judaism but an utter debasement
of it.</span></span><br /><br />My perspective on all this is that of a secular Jew, but I would also like to share with you with the perspective of a deeply religious Jewish woman who has written and lectured extensively on this topic. In her essay, <a href="http://nebula.wsimg.com/95fab054f6ef7eeba250e6da3f7133f6?AccessKeyId=9ED65BBF6F63130E489A&disposition=0&alloworigin=1&fbclid=IwAR3BhKvrWnPl9ppXN0-YL_OePvtz02bNQa7BkvqjQFOT3sTVqqINglWSWkM">Circumcision: A Jewish Inquiry</a> (Midstream; January 1992), Lisa Braver Moss articulates the many ways in which the <i>brit milah</i> is, in fact, in conflict with fundamental principles of Judaism itself. Ms. Braver Moss notes that all of the arguments against forced circumcision “stem from Jewish principles.”<br /></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"></span></p><blockquote><i><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;">Concern about . . . babies’ pain echoes the Jewish prohibition against the causing of pain to living things. Opposition to bodily mutilation is based on the Torah’s denunciation of pagan practices such as tattooing and cutting the flesh. Concern for medical risk, too, has roots in halacha (Jewish law): Any medical procedure that involves even the possibility of risk to life is halachically forbidden. And the idea of protecting children’s rights brings to mind the Jewish principle that the poor and weak should be treated equally with the rich and mighty. </span></span></i><br /><span style="font-family: times;"></span></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;">It goes without saying that Jewish opponents of forced circumcision reject the assertion that this practice is essential to the continued existence of the Jews as a people. The Jewish people existed long before the advent of neonatal circumcision as a religious mandate, we existed longer still before forced circumcision was expanded into the radical prepucectomy (<i>peri'ah</i>) that is practiced today, and we will continue to exist long after forced circumcision has gone the way of other religious mandates that are no longer followed by the vast majority of Jews (such as post-menstrual ritual bathing), just as we have managed to exist without other now long-discarded and repudiated practices such as polygyny, death by stoning, and slavery.<br /><br />Still, a recurring alarm sounded by Jewish opponents of this and similar proposed legislation reflects their anxiety that establishing a minimum age of 18 for non-therapeutic circumcision constitutes an existential threat to Judaism and to the Jewish people as a people. Thus, we have hyperbolic statements by Mr. Goldstein that the proposed legislation amounts to “the worst threat since WWII.” Yet, in contrast to this view, many Jewish opponents of genital cutting regard the continued practice of forced circumcision itself as constituting an even greater threat. In my activities as an advocate of the right of bodily autonomy, more than once I have received comments from self-described "former Jews" who, owing entirely to their resentment about what was done to their genitals as infants without their consent, have rejected not just the <i>brit milah</i> but Judaism and even their own Jewishness. Forced circumcision, far from binding these men to their religion and to their people, resulted ultimately in driving them away. <br /><br />There is every reason to believe that this trend will not only continue but increase. Forced circumcision has, for a long time, been on a collision course with modernity, especially as the world has progressed toward a more universal recognition of fundamental human rights. We are now witnessing that collision and its unfortunate results unfolding in real time. It is no longer possible to reconcile the <i>brit milah</i> with contemporary notions of autonomy and the inviolability of each person's physical boundaries. It is inevitable, therefore, that more and more Jews will be driven away from Judaism and from Jewishness altogether if they are made to feel that their acceptance of forced genital cutting is a non-negotiable condition of remaining within the fold.<br /><br />In the modern world, then, the risk is growing that the continued subjection of infant Jewish boys to genital cutting will function as a wedge, alienating the Jewish men that these infants become from their families and their communities. At the same time, the social pressure on Jewish parents to subject their infant sons to genital cutting will increasingly function as a wedge between their duty as parents to protect their sons from harm and their sense of loyalty to their fellow Jews. </span></span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;">Time
and again we learn of the extent to which
it is the social pressure on behalf of forced circumcision that is
brought to bear on new parents by <i>their</i> parents, relatives or
others in their community that is chiefly and ultimately responsible for
the perpetuation of this odious practice. </span></span></span></span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;">One
can only guess how many new Jewish parents have been pressured -
against their natural maternal and paternal instincts, against their
inmost beliefs, and against their better judgment - into subjecting
their sons to circumcision. </span></span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;"> </span></span>Ms. Braver Moss describes this conflict in recounting her own experience of reluctantly agreeing to having her two sons circumcised.</span></span><br /></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"></span></p><blockquote><i><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;">I had profound doubts about my decision. But because open discussion of Brit Milah seems to be discouraged in the Jewish community, I experienced my doubts privately and without comfort. (I had not yet begun a dialogue with other Jews who question Brit Milah.) Thus, a rite intended to inspire feelings of Jewish unity evoked in me a sense of loss and alienation. In my heart, I don’t believe God wanted me to feel this aloneness, and I don’t believe God wanted me to cause my babies pain.</span></span></i></blockquote><p></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;">The personal testimony of Ms. Braver Moss and of Jewish men who object to what was done to their bodies undermines the claims of our fellow Jews, such as Mr. Greenblatt of the ADL, that the effect of an 18-year age-requirement for non-therapeutic circumcision would be to make Jews <i>personae non gratae</i> in any nation that instituted such a reasonable restriction. As I have noted above, when Iceland was considering similar legislation, Mr. Greenblatt claimed that “it is inconceivable that a Jewish community could remain in any country that prohibited brit milah." Yet this assertion completely discounts the thousands upon thousands of Jews who abhor the <i>brit milah</i> and who would gladly raise their families - and would raise them as proudly Jewish - in a country where the forced circumcision of any minor is prohibited by law. The paradox is that, contrary to the supposition that an 18-year age-requirement for non-therapeutic circumcision must necessarily result in an exodus of Jews from Denmark (or from any other forward-thinking nation that institutes a similar restriction), such an age-requirement could just as likely have the opposite effect: an influx of Jews who would be only too happy to raise their families in a country where they are legally fortified in their rejection of any social pressure to subject their children to genital cutting.<br /><br />If several of the arguments that I have just brought forward are <i>negative</i> arguments - explanations of how an age-requirement of 18 for non-therapeutic circumcision would not constitute the existential threat to Judaism and to the Jewish people that some would have you believe - there is also a powerful <i>affirmative</i> argument against forced circumcision that is intrinsic to Jewish ethics. Jewish efforts to bring about the end of ritual circumcision and all non-therapeutic genital cutting are guided by the concept of <i>tikkun olam</i> (literally, “repairing the world”). This concept, which goes back at least to the third century CE and appears in the <i>Mishnah</i> (a compendium of rabbinic teaching, law and other Jewish oral traditions that began to be set down in writing following the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE) means, in essence, that Jews have an obligation to work for social- and universal justice. </span></span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;">That means that we are obligated to defend fundamental human rights. And because there is no right that is more fundamental than the rights of bodily integrity and bodily autonomy, Jews who take seriously the moral imperative of <i>tikkun olam</i> must oppose any practice that entails the ritual or customary cutting, partial excision or scarring of any child's genitals. </span></span>That is why we oppose all forms of genital cutting, no matter who is subjected to it, and why we feel obligated to speak for those who cannot speak for themselves. This, of course, includes infant Jewish boys. After all, how can we </span></span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;">claim to support universal human
rights while denying those rights to our own sons? </span></span>This is also why</span></span>, as I observed about myself at the beginning of this letter, our active opposition to forced circumcision exists not <i>in spite</i> of our Jewish beliefs and values but <i>because</i> of them.</span></span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br /><br />It is inevitable, of course, that proposals to establish a minimum age of 18 for non-therapeutic circumcision are met with the argument that such a restriction would constitute an intolerable abridgment of the freedom of individuals and minority communities to practice their religion. However, the right to subject an infant or child to ritual genital cutting is most emphatically <i>not</i> a right that is encompassed by the right to practice one’s religion. While the freedom to <i>believe</i> (or not to believe, for that matter) is fundamental and illimitable, it does not follow that the freedom to <i>act </i>is likewise illimitable. It should be obvious that the freedom to practice one's religion does not include acts that harm others. Even if the right to <i>practice</i> one's religion may be regarded as fundamental, that right is still circumscribed by every other person’s <i>even-more-fundamental</i> right not to be physically harmed. Exceptions to this bedrock foundation of human rights should not be made for any religion, including ours. Nor, in this day and age, should this be considered a radical or even a controversial position, let alone an antisemitic one. On the contrary, this view of the balance between the religious freedom of one person and the bodily autonomy of another simply reflects contemporary norms regarding fundamental human rights and human dignity. No one has a right to cut, maim, scar or mutilate any part of any child’s body for religious or cultural reasons. The only person who has a right to cause his genitals to be permanently altered is the individual himself.<br /><br />I understand the social context (and appreciate the good intentions) in which your opposition to the proposed legislation is engendered. I assure you, Jews do not need to be reminded of the history of antisemitism and the persecution of our ancestors throughout so much of European history. It is well known that that persecution manifested itself in circumcision prohibitions in generations past and that, when these earlier prohibitions were enacted, they were part of explicitly antisemitic government programs. It is perfectly understandable, therefore, that one may hear - or think one hears - ominous echoes of Europe's dark antisemitic past in the current effort to prohibit the forced circumcision of minors. This is especially the case given the alarming resurgence of nationalism, xenophobia and antisemitism that has occurred on both sides of the Atlantic during the past several years. <br /><br />But circumcision prohibitions from past centuries that were explicitly anti-Jewish in design are fundamentally different from the current worldwide effort to ban all involuntary genital cutting which, it cannot be emphasized </span></span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;">too strongly,</span></span> includes not only Jewish children but <i>all</i> children, and not only boys but also girls and intersex children. The proposed 18-year circumcision age-requirement, therefore, should not be seen as an attack on Jews but simply as the inevitable and logical conclusion of increasingly universal standards regarding human rights and children's rights, particularly as articulated in the <i>Universal Declaration of Human Rights</i> (ratified by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948) and in the <i>Convention on the Rights of the Child</i> (adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1989 and ratified by Denmark in 1991) - and specifically as articulated in <i>Article 37, part a</i> of the latter which states that "No child shall be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment </span></span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;">or punishment." </span></span><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;">An 18-year non-therapeutic-circumcision age-restriction would merely constitute the long-overdue inclusion of boys - including Jewish ones - within the protective ambit of the already-existing legal framework under which female genital cutting has been banned in Denmark and throughout much of the world. <br /><br />It should also be remembered that the object of the proposed legislation is not to prohibit circumcision. It is to prohibit <i>forced</i> circumcision. There is nothing in the proposed text of the legislation that would prevent anyone, once he is of an age at which he can make well-considered, volitional decisions about his own body, from choosing circumcision for himself for whatever reason he may have. Any adult capable of exercising informed consent has a right, consistent with the principle of autonomy and self-determination, to have his body altered in accordance with his own beliefs and values, whether these beliefs have their origin in religion or anything else. And this is exactly as it should be: it is <i>his</i> body and that is why it must be <i>his</i> choice.<br /><br />I began this open letter by stating that one of my objectives was to acquaint you with the fact that there is a sizable and growing movement of Jews (and, thankfully, plenty of others) that seeks to end all forced genital cutting. Another of my objectives was, of course, to add my own voice - as a Jewish man and as someone who was subjected to genital cutting without his consent - to the swell of opposition to the practice of forced circumcision. <br /><br />Above all, my purpose in this letter is to admonish you, with all due respect, that, no matter how noble your intentions were, because your statement was issued ostensibly to express your opposition to the eminently reasonable and commonsense 18-year age-requirement for non-therapeutic circumcision that the <i>Folketing</i> has now been charged with considering, it is not so much a statement of solidarity with the Jewish people as it is a statement in support of an anachronistic and harmful practice that is opposed by many Jews themselves. By aligning yourself exclusively with those Jews who support forced circumcision, you are, at the same time, aligning yourself <i>against</i> the many Jews who oppose it. And, it goes without saying, you are aligning yourself against those children - Jewish and non-Jewish, alike - who are victimized by it.</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;">Sincerely,</span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;">David Balashinsky </span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: times;"><span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></span></p><p>* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *<br /></p><p></p><span style="font-size: medium;"><i><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/s365/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="299" data-original-width="365" height="163" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/w200-h163/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" width="200" /></a></div></i></span><span style="font-family: times;"><i>David
Balashinsky is originally from New York City and now lives near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. He is a licensed physical therapist
and writes about bodily autonomy and
human rights, gender, culture, and politics. He currently serves on the
board of directors and as Director of Outreach for the Genital Autonomy
Legal Defense & Education Fund, (GALDEF), he serves on the board of
directors and advisors for <a href="https://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/" target="_blank">Doctors Opposing Circumcision</a> and serves on the leadership team for <a href="https://www.bruchim.online/" target="_blank">Bruchim</a>.</i></span><p></p> <br /><p><br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2992779773316073242.post-89141636903066834722020-05-11T04:11:00.002-07:002020-12-07T05:54:08.168-08:00Statement on Behalf of Jews Against Circumcision in Observance of the Worldwide Day of Genital Autonomy, 2020 <span style="font-family: "times" , "times new roman" , serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><span class="_mh6 _wsc" id="cch_f253d3184435bfe"><span class="_3oh- _58nk"><span style="font-size: small;">by <b>David Balashinsky</b></span> </span></span></span></span><br />
<br />
<div style="font-family: Tinos; font-size: medium; margin: 0px;">
<span face=""arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif"><span style="font-size: x-large;"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">Grüß dich, and greetings from Binghamton, New York.</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><br />
</span></span></div>
<div style="font-family: Tinos; font-size: medium; margin: 0px;">
<span face=""arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif"><span style="font-size: x-large;"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"><br />
</span></span></span></div>
<div style="font-family: Tinos; font-size: medium; margin: 0px;">
<span face=""arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif"><span style="font-size: x-large;"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">My name is David Balashinsky and I'm proud to be speaking to you
today on behalf of <i>Jews Against Circumcision</i> in observance of the Worldwide Day of Genital Autonomy, 2020.</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">I'd
like to begin by clarifying what we're for and what we're against,
since the name "Jews Against Circumcision" is actually a misnomer. It
would be more accurate to call ourselves
<i>"Jews Against</i></span><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"><b>Forced</b></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span></i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"><i>Circumcision</i>."
While it's fair to say that we don't approve of</span><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">any</span></i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">medically-unnecessary
genital surgery, we recognize that the same principle that gives people the right</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">not</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">to
have their genitals cut or surgically altered without their consent also gives them the right to</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">choose</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">elective
genital surgery for any reason they might have, provided they're adults and capable of exercising informed consent.</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">There
could be any number of reasons why people might willingly undergo
cosmetic genital surgery. One of them is undoubtedly nothing more than
internalized self-hatred, because the natural
anatomy of human genitalia - whether female, male or intersex - is so
often stigmatized. In the case of women, at least in the United States,
this phenomenon, known as labiaplasty, actually seems to be
increasing. Another reason closely related to this is
the pressure to conform to cultural norms. Again, in the United
States, several of the rationalizations for male genital cutting that
are most frequently given fall into this category. "So he won't be made
fun of in the locker room," we are often told.
A man who has escaped forced circumcision at birth could still succumb
to pressure like this in adulthood</span></span></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">. </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span face=""arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif"><span style="font-size: x-large;"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">It's
even possible that, after serious and mature reflection, an adult might
want to undergo circumcision as an expression of his deeply-felt religious
convictions. What matters in all of these cases, though, is that in a
society that respects fundamental, universal
human rights, the decision to have part a person's genitals removed is a
decision that belongs to that individual himself and no one else.
It's</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"><i>his</i></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">body
-</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"><i>his</i></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">choice.</span></span></span></div>
<div style="font-family: Tinos; font-size: medium; margin: 0px;">
<br />
</div>
<div style="font-family: Tinos; font-size: medium; margin: 0px;">
<span face=""arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif"><span style="font-size: x-large;"><span face=""arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif"><span style="font-size: x-large;"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">What
matters equally is that performing any medical treatment when there is
nothing to treat is considered malpractice and unethical. And when the
"treatment" is a surgery that permanently removes a functional part of a
person's body, the harm is immeasurably
greater because it is irreversible. Amputating a perfectly healthy
body part is a harm in and of itself. It is not a "cure" but an
assault. And when infants and children are deprived of their right to
refuse the permanent removal of a part of their genitals,</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">that</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">is
when genital cutting, by any name you want to call it, is a human-rights violation.</span></span></span></span></span></div><p>
<span face=""arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif"><span style="font-size: x-large;"><span face=""arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif"><span style="font-size: x-large;"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">So it is not genital surgery that
<i>Jews Against Circumcision</i> is against but</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">forced</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span></i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">genital
surgery. It is not</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"><i>circumcision</i></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">that
we're against but</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"><i>forced</i></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">circumcision.
We're against it because, as Jews, we believe that every human being
has a right to grow up with his genitals whole, intact, un-scarred and
unharmed</span></span></span>. <span face=""arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif"><span style="font-size: x-large;"><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"><span style="font-family: Times, "Times New Roman", serif;">W</span>hat</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"></span><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> we're</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span></i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">against
is the genital cutting that is imposed on those unable to exercise
informed consent and unable to defend themselves from it: infants and
children. We oppose any and all medically-unnecessary genital surgery
for</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"><i>all</i></span><b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">children,
whether female, intersex or male. </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">We</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">believe
that the right of bodily self-ownership - which necessarily includes
the right of genital autonomy - is a universal and fundamental human
right that transcends every conceivable group identification. The right
not to have part of one's genitals cut off without
consent is a right that belongs to every infant and every child,
regardless of sex, race, ethnicity and nationality, and no matter what
religion that child is born into: whether Judaism, Christianity, Islam
or any other religion. As Jews, we believe that
the right of bodily self-ownership is the most basic and important
human right there is.</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">What's more, we're not just</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">supporters</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">of
the right of genital autonomy but believe that we have a moral obligation to</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">defend</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span></i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">that
right on behalf of those who can't defend it themselves. As</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">we</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">see
it, the moral obligation to</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">actively</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">oppose
genital cutting is intrinsic to our self-concept of who we are as Jews. This obligation comes from the principle of
<i>tikkun olam</i>, which is typically translated as "repairing the world." Although
<i>tikkun olam</i> is originally a religious concept, it is also deeply
ingrained in secular Jewish thought, philosophy, ethics and culture. It
is a moral imperative that impels followers of Judaism and secular Jews,
alike, to strive to leave the world better
than we found it. That is why the brit milah is increasingly being
replaced by the brit shalom among religious Jews. It is why so many
secular Jews are actively working to end all forced genital cutting.
Jews Against Circumcision is against all forced genital
cutting not</span><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">in spite</span></i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">of
our being Jewish but</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"><i>because</i></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">we
are Jewish.</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">As
many of you know, the Worldwide Day of Genital Autonomy commemorates
the 2012 Cologne court ruling that recognized that forced circumcision
constitutes a grievous bodily harm to the
child who is subjected to it. The notion that Genital Autonomy is a
universal right is reflected in the fact that this commemoration is
observed all over the world by those who value human rights and human
dignity above all else. It reflects the powerful
idea that every child - no matter where that child is born, no matter
who that child's parents are, no matter who or what that child's parents
worship or pray to, no matter what tribe, ethno-linguistic group, clan,
ethnicity, race, people, religion or nationality
that child is born into - that child is first and foremost a human
being: a member of the</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"><i>human</i></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">race.
The fundamental rights that we recognize as</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"><i>human</i></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">rights
aren't</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"><i>adjuncts</i></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">to
being human but</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"><i>intrinsic</i></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">to
being human. They aren't severable and they aren't conditional. They
don't belong to some but not to others. They don't belong to infants
and children of</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">one</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">sex
but not to infants and children of</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">another</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">or</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">indeterminate</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">sex.
They belong to</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"><i>every</i></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">infant,</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"><i>every</i></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">child,</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"><i>every</i></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">human
being the world over.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">Unfortunately,
as history all too often demonstrates, the existence of a right is no
guarantee that that right will be respected. At this moment, hundreds of
millions of girls and women
and a billion boys and men around the world are living with the scars
and the damage of forced genital cutting. Who knows how many intersex
individuals around the world are living with the trauma of having had
binary sexual-assignment-surgery imposed on them
without any need for it and without their wanting it.</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">That</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">is
why the Worldwide Day of Genital Autonomy exists. Not to encourage
parents, religious leaders, medical professionals and legislatures to</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"><i>grant</i></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">the
right of genital autonomy to every child - for how can one grant to children a right they're born with? Rather, it's to demand</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"><i>respect</i></span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">for
the right of genital autonomy that, by virtue of being human, every child already has.</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">Here, again, in the worldwide campaign for genital autonomy, we see the same impulse as that of
<i>tikkun olam</i> - "repairing the world." This impulse, of course, isn't unique to Jews. It motivates people of</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"><i>all</i></span><b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">cultures
and religions and, of course, free-thinkers who recognize that freedom, dignity and
self-determination are universal values and who feel themselves called
to fight for universal human rights. The right of bodily self-ownership
and genital autonomy lies at the very heart of the ongoing
struggle for basic human rights the world over.</span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">The worldwide effort to</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">secure</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span></i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">the
right of genital autonomy for every male, female and intersex
individual, no matter how old or how young, is what the Worldwide Day of
Genital Autonomy is all about. That is why
<i>Jews Against Circumcision</i> is proud to join our brothers, sisters
and non-binary siblings of all faiths, all ethnicities and all
nationalities in participating in this international event. And that is
why we encourage you, on this day - and
<i>every</i> day - to defend that most basic and essential human right: the right of Genital Autonomy.</span><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;"> </span><br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman",Times,serif; font-size: 16pt;">Thank you.</span></span></span></p><p>* * * * * * * * * * *
* * * * * * * * * * * *
* *<br /></p><span style="font-size: medium;"><i><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/s365/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="299" data-original-width="365" height="163" src="https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-JyQSFntHtbs/X8thEPc4yiI/AAAAAAAAAP8/2wuXmUwybv8DfLXTOSN-f7AtyqZcQ-q2ACLcBGAsYHQ/w200-h163/Screen%2BShot%2B2020-12-05%2Bat%2B5.28.01%2BAM.png" width="200" /></a></div></i></span><i><span style="font-family: times;">David
Balashinsky is originally from New York City and now lives near the
Finger Lakes region of New York. He writes about bodily autonomy and
human rights, gender, culture and politics.</span></i><br /> <br /><br /><br /><p><span face=""arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif"><span style="font-size: x-large;">
</span></span>
</p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0