Dec 23, 2023
An aspect of circumcision that is often overlooked is the potential long-term consequences of surgically removing the foreskin from an infant’s or child’s penis. In this article, we will shed light on the physical, psychological, and sexual implications that may arise years after the procedure. We believe presenting personal testimonies, scientific studies, and societal narratives can make a difference in the ultimate health and well-being of babies, boys, and men and their partners. The choice to circumcise or to respect a baby, child, or man’s natural body is an irreversible decision that has lifelong effects.
Physical Complications Post-Circumcision
Although there is information about physical complications post-surgery on babies, there is very little documentation on the long-term physical complications of circumcision, as this requires the testimony of adults, and if their parents never discussed the potential long-term consequences of circumcision, adults may not understand the relationship between their disorder and circumcision. However, studies cite these long-term issues: “meatal stenosis, in addition to excess or inadequate excision of the foreskin, concealed penis, adhesions between penile skin and glans penis, penile deformities, secondary hypospadias, bad wound healing, granuloma, skin bridges, and psychological disorders.” 1 Intact America board member and author of Please Don’t Cut the Baby! A Nurse’s Memoir, Marilyn Milos, recalls hearing about the long-term consequences of circumcision from the gay community in the mid-1980s.
Besides the emotional damage, they talked to me about ugly scarring, especially from the Gomco clamp that allows blood to seep into the peripheral tissue of the penis, leaving large dark patches under the skin. They told me about tight cuts causing painful erections and loose cuts that helped prevent painful erections, at least somewhat. They told me about the curvature of the penis, something that occurs when more skin is taken from one side than the other. They told me about the skin bridges and the hunks and slices missing from the glans.
The worst long-term physical consequence is lifelong disfigurement, which involves the loss of part or all of the penis. Milos writes about two infants at an Atlanta hospital in 1985 “that suffered severe disfiguring electrical burns to the penis and adjacent areas when each of their physicians used an electric cauterizing needle as part of the circumcision procedure.” The burns to one of the infants were so severe that his parents opted to surgically alter the sex of their son to a girl. The other boy underwent continuous reconstructive surgeries but would never function sexually as a normal male and required lifelong urological care.2
Don’t think that these kinds of mistakes can no longer happen. A doctor in Palm Beach County, Florida, botched two circumcisions as recently as 2017, which resulted in the amputation of an infant’s penis, and in 2021 when another infant lost a third of his penis and his urethra was sliced—the same doctor, mind you, who had continued to practice.3
Psychological and Emotional Impacts of Circumcision
Circumcision can have deep psychological and emotional impacts. The normal response of a body to physical trauma is lingering psychological trauma. You might think babies would have no memory of the physical and psychological trauma of circumcision, but studies have shown that is not true.
In her book, Please Don’t Cut the Baby!, Milos talks about how the groundwork for the field of Birth Psychology changed thinking about babies and their experience of pain and trauma.
“Dr. David Chamberlain, a California psychologist, had been using hypnotherapy to discover and resolve traumas arising in the womb and at birth and had done research demonstrating that birth memories were reliable memories.”
While working on materials for the 2nd International Symposium on Circumcision, Milos was queried by a customer at the cafe where she had spread out her papers about what she was doing. When she revealed it was for a symposium on circumcision, the man, who was Jewish, told her that he had relived his circumcision during Primal Therapy to get to the root of his trust issues. She heard similarly disturbing stories from many circumcised men who had a sense of violation, loss, and self-esteem issues.
Sexual Ramifications of Circumcision
Circumcision significantly impacts sexual health and pleasure. Dryness due to the absence of natural lubrication provided by the foreskin is an issue for some circumcised men, leading to discomfort during intercourse. Moreover, some studies show that the removal of the foreskin reduces sensitivity, requiring more intense stimulation for arousal and pleasure. Some men may experience difficulties achieving or maintaining erections, stemming from both the physical and psychological consequences of circumcision.
Director of IA Georganne Chapin has a chapter called “What’s Sex Got to Do With It?” in her book This Penis Business. The answer is—everything.
“How could cutting off a sexual body part not affect the mechanics and quality of the victim’s sex life, sexual relationships, and psyche?” asks Chapin. “You’re missing blood vessels, muscle, specialized nerve endings, and other features unique to the foreskin designed for the optimal performance, protection, pleasure, and satisfaction of the man—and his partner.”
Milos and her colleagues conducted and published a study on the sensitivity of a circumcised penis versus an intact one.4 Not surprisingly, considering circumcised penises are missing 20,000 to 70,000 erogenous nerve endings, intact penises were more sensitive.
Chapin also points out in This Penis Business that “an intact penis is a bit longer and a bit chubbier than a circumcised penis” and that a circumcised male has been robbed of an index-card-size area of sensitive, mobile, protective tissue that was provided by nature.
Conclusion
Over the years, there has been a remarkable evolution in the medical community’s perspective on routine infant circumcision. This shift highlights the ever-evolving nature of medical knowledge and stresses the importance of reevaluating practices in light of new research and understanding. Once hailed as a normative and medically advantageous procedure, opinions have changed dramatically in recent decades as the truth about the dangers and consequences of circumcision has come to light. Many health organizations and professionals now recognize that circumcision is not medically necessary and that there are long-term consequences in addition to short-term risks.
Intact America believes that circumcision decisions should be based on the informed choice of the individual in question, emphasizing bodily autonomy. By staying informed, we can further the cause of informed decision-making and ensure that every choice regarding circumcision is made with careful consideration and respect for individuals, regardless of age. By fostering open dialogue without judgment or prejudice, we can pave the way for nuanced conversations that empower future generations to make choices aligned with their best interests and well-being. Let’s raise awareness, advocate for informed decision-making, and create a supportive environment for all.
- MK Atikeler et al., “Increased Morbidity After Cırcumcision From a Hidden Complication.” BJU Int. 2001;88:938–40, http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1464-4096.2001.02416.x; E. Benli, O. Koca, “Circumcision Research in Bingol Province.” The New J Urol. 2011;6:22–5.
- https://www.nytimes.com/1985/10/08/science/a-circumcision-method-draws-new-concern.html.
- Holly Baltz, “5 Takeaways: Palm Beach Post Investigation into Florida OB-GYN and Babies, Moms Who Died Under His Care.” Palm Beach Post, September 23, 2021, https://www.palmbeachpost.com/story/news/2021/09/23/west-palm-ob-gyn-malpractice-lawsuits-moms-babies-died-circumcisions-botched-doctor-kept-practicing/5524867001/.
- Morris L. Sorrells, James L. Snyder, Mark D. Reiss, Christopher Eden, Marilyn F. Milos, Norma Wilcox, Robert S. Van Howe. “Fine-Touch Pressure Thresholds in the Adult Penis.” BJU International (99, 4:864-9), March 19, 2007.
Dec 21, 2023
The economics of circumcision are entirely unfamiliar to the average person. However, considering that this surgery is permanent and cannot be undone, wouldn’t you want to know who benefits from it? (Hint: it isn’t you or your child.)
Federal law prohibits the use of federal health care dollars for medically unnecessary services. Medicaid funding of routine infant circumcision clearly flies in the face of that prohibition, but the AAP has managed to obfuscate the practice’s purely cultural origins (I include religion in the broad category of culture) by its serial quest to find medical benefits. — Georganne Chapin, author of “This Penis Business” (Lucid House Publishing, 2024)
In this article, we’ll be diving deep into the financial side of circumcision, pulling back the curtain on its direct and indirect costs, its value within medical and cultural spheres, and the subtle economic currents that flow within this often controversial realm. Join us as we demystify the complex business of circumcision and who profits from it.
Medical Costs of Circumcision
The costs of circumcision go beyond the surgical procedure and include the use of anesthetics for pain management, post-surgical care, wound dressings, and follow-up appointments, all of which contribute significantly to the overall expenditure.
A prestigious obstetrician or urologist practicing in a fancy hospital in an affluent city can demand upwards of $2,500 to pry away, clamp, and cut off your baby’s foreskin. If you’re a middle-class parent in a middle-class town, you’ll probably find someone willing to do the same thing for $500 or less. In addition, hospitals add fees for the procedure room, nursing staff, supplies, and equipment (including single-use circumcision kits, gauze, and petroleum jelly for bandaging the baby’s fresh circumcision wound). These fees vary widely and are either hidden in a global bill or listed separately, the latter leaving a parent to wonder how on earth a travel-size tube of petroleum jelly and a small packet of gauze can cost more than a dinner out. I recently saw an online complaint from a mom who had been billed $600 by the doctor, $20 for “pharmacy,” $91 for supplies, and an additional fee of $2,200 by the hospital for her son’s circumcision.” — Georganne Chapin, author of This Penis Business (Lucid House Publishing, 2024)
However, it is crucial to consider the indirect costs as well. Complications from circumcision, which are vastly underreported, can necessitate further medical intervention, leading to additional expenses. Issues such as infections, excessive bleeding, or improper healing can inflate the overall financial burden. Therefore, although the upfront cost of circumcision may initially appear straightforward, it is important for individuals and families to be fully informed before making decisions.
Economic Incentives for Circumcision in Medical Institutions and Others
Circumcision has the potential to generate significant revenue for medical institutions, ranging from small clinics to large hospitals, even beyond the initial surgery and any post-surgery complications. Foreskin derivatives, often overlooked, play a profitable role in various industries, including cosmetics and medical research.
In 2013, television personality Oprah Winfrey began advertising the virtues of SkinMedica, an anti-wrinkle face cream made from human foreskin fibroblasts that promised to “rapidly restore the skin’s barrier and moisture balance.” SkinMedica claimed that it hasn’t bought a foreskin in twenty years—that just one “donated” foreskin is the gift that keeps on giving. — Georganne Chapin, author of “This Penis Business” (Lucid House Publishing, 2024)
Beyond the immediate financial benefits of circumcision, foreskin tissue has found its way into the world of high-end creams and treatments, thanks to its rich cellular content. However, there is a darker side to this story. Reports of illicit foreskin trafficking have surfaced, with the tissue being sold on black markets. Additionally, foreskin cells hold great value in medical research, particularly in regenerative studies, due to their unique properties.
Do parents know that they are agreeing to have their infant’s foreskin donated or sold for research or commercial benefit when they sign the informed consent in the hospital? Do we know what happens to the foreskins of infants who are circumcised as part of a religious ceremony?
Future Economic Predictions Around Circumcision
As societal norms, medical recommendations, and cultural values continue to evolve, the demand for circumcision stands at the precipice of potential shifts in the coming decades. Numerous factors, such as increased awareness about bodily autonomy, changing religious demographics, and a growing body of research on the long-term effects of the procedure, possess the power to exert influence and potentially save millions of children and men from this harmful surgery.
“In a 2015 survey from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 71% of U.S. adult men reported being circumcised, but younger generations showed a slight decrease in rates compared to older generations.”
A decline in routine circumcisions would, logically, mean reduced revenues for medical institutions and related industries that have long relied on the steady income from this surgery. Medical equipment manufacturers, post-operative care providers, and other stakeholders will find their fortunes intertwined with the fluctuations in circumcision rates, which means each of these groups has a vested interest in keeping this practice ongoing.
Personal Economics of Circumcision
Circumcision has far-reaching financial implications that extend beyond the initial procedure’s cost. Throughout a lifetime, there are various direct expenses to consider. Georganne Chapin, in “This Penis Business,” refers to Intact America board member Dan Bollinger’s estimate of the cost of circumcision in the United States. This included repairs—around 2.8 percent of cut boys require such surgery, referred to in the trade as “revisions,” some done for aesthetic reasons (“not enough skin taken off”), and some that attempt to correct serious medical errors—as well as other expenses over a lifetime. Bollinger estimated that the total money spent in 2020 as a direct result of “routine” infant circumcision was nearly six billion dollars.1 In cases where complications or dissatisfaction arise, therapeutic interventions may be necessary, both physically and psychologically, resulting in additional financial burdens.
It’s important to acknowledge that the costs go beyond the tangible. The psychological and emotional toll can be profound, leading to feelings of loss, violation, or struggles with body image. Seeking counseling or therapy becomes crucial in addressing these issues, as they can impact personal and professional aspects of one’s life, potentially affecting opportunities and productivity. It is evident that while the economic aspect of circumcision may appear straightforward initially, the long-term implications, both tangible and intangible, are complex and significant, and complicit parties continue to profit from the pain they have caused.
The economics of circumcision are purposefully obscured. As you have seen throughout this article, many people profit from the bloody business of circumcision. The commodification of this practice demands transparent discussions. These dialogues should include the major risks and irreversible harms of circumcision, along with the financial and societal consequences of allowing parents to consent and medical professionals to perform circumcision on children who cannot give consent. As societies evolve, it is crucial to approach the topic of circumcision with an open mind, informed by both medical and economic insights. This ensures that the choices we make are holistic, compassionate, and well-informed.
I await the day, long overdue, when insurance companies and the government in this country stop paying for the “benefit” of circumcision—which has already happened in other Westernized countries that corrected their course based on scientific evidence that circumcision was extremely invasive, conferred no benefit to boys’ health, and imposed considerable risk and unjustifiable costs upon children and their families. — Georganne Chapin, author of “This Penis Business” (Lucid House Publishing, 2024)
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350709776_High_Cost_of_Circumcision_57_Billion_Annually
Dec 21, 2023
A convergence of history, religion, medical misinformation, and perceived cultural norms has transformed the foreskin, a natural anatomical feature, into a battleground of controversy. In this article, we will look into the narrative of how the intact penis—meaning a penis with a foreskin versus a cut or circumcised penis—has been systematically subjected to shame and the profound implications that hold for generations of men.
Prepare to be enlightened as we shed light on this important issue and advocate for a cause that deserves our attention and understanding: ending circumcision in this country and others.
The Function of the Foreskin
The first step in eliminating foreskin phobia is understanding the importance and function of the foreskin—a natural feature of male babies since the dawn of human life. Georganne Chapin, CEO and director of Intact America discusses this in her book This Penis Business.
The foreskin functions throughout a male’s life to protect the glans (head of the penis) from abrasion and other damage. Once the foreskin becomes retractable, its loose skin provides mobility and stretches to accommodate a full erection. Furthermore, the foreskin keeps the glans soft, pink, and moist, while the glans of a circumcised man develop a gray tinge and become keratinized, and toughened, over time due to abrasion and chafing. — Georganne Chapin, “This Penis Business” (Lucid House Publishing, 2024)
Marilyn Milos, IA board member and author of “Please Don’t Cut the Baby! A Nurse’s Memoir” (Lucid House Publishing, 2024) writes in her book that when Ed Wallerstein, author of “Circumcision: An American Fallacy,” one of the earliest books on the subject (1980), provided a requested copy on the function of the foreskin for a 1984 American Academy of Pediatrics brochure on care of the uncircumcised penis, the passage was deleted from the AAP’s 1986 brochure. When Milos questioned AAP about the omission, she was told via letter by the doctor, who revised that “there was no information available about the function of the foreskin.” Patently false, as anyone who read the 1984 brochure would know.
From Wallerstein’s 1984 “The Function of the Foreskin” article in the AAP brochure:
The glans at birth is delicate and easily irritated by urine and feces. The foreskin shields the glans; with circumcision, this protection is lost. In such cases, the glans and especially the urinary opening (meatus) may become irritated or infected, causing ulcers, meatitis (inflammation of the meatus), and meatal stenosis (a narrowing of the urinary opening). Such problems virtually never occur in uncircumcised penises. The foreskin protects the glans throughout life.
Does foreskin phobia stem from the unknown nature of the foreskin? There may be some part of the human body for which there is no function, for which no physician or medical researcher has found a reason to be, but it is not the foreskin.
The Systematic Shaming of Intact Men
Historical Prejudices Against Foreskin
Throughout history, the foreskin has been the subject of profound biases, influenced by a blend of societal, religious, and pseudoscientific beliefs. Ancient civilizations, such as the Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans, held contrasting perspectives on circumcision. While the Egyptians considered it a rite of passage into adulthood, the Greeks revered the intact penis, viewing circumcision as a disfigurement of the male body. Religious doctrines further complicated perceptions: Abrahamic faiths, particularly Judaism and later Islam, regarded circumcision as a divine decree, symbolizing a covenant with God (although there are doctrine-based counter-perspectives opposing circumcision even within these religious communities).
Later, but prior to what we think of as modern science, various medical justifications emerged from misconceptions. From the misguided notion that circumcision could curb masturbation and its perceived negative effects during the Victorian era to unfounded associations with hygiene and disease prevention, the foreskin has been unjustly stigmatized for centuries due to inaccurate perceptions of how the body functions and what causes disease and illness and deeply-rooted cultural values.
Societal Stigmas Against Foreskin in Modern Times
In our modern era, there are still prevailing stigmas surrounding the intact penis. While circumcision was widely practiced in English-speaking cultures, especially in the United States, in the 20th century, all but the U.S. significantly reduced circumcision post-WWII when research showed there was no medical reason to justify circumcision, or in the case of the UK, circumcision was no longer covered by health insurance. European and South American cultures never embrace circumcision to the same extent, resulting in a more neutral or positive view of the intact penis.
The media has played a significant role in perpetuating stereotypes and narratives about the foreskin. Television shows, movies, and magazines often promote certain ideals of “normalcy,” which can contribute to feelings of inadequacy or embarrassment among intact men. The personal testimonies of men from different parts of the world highlight the weight of these societal pressures. Many share stories of feeling compelled to undergo circumcision due to the fear of being ostracized or the desire to conform to perceived norms, rather than any medical necessity. These narratives underscore the profound psychological impact that societal expectations can have, influencing deeply personal decisions and shaping individual experiences of body image and self-esteem.
Medical Misinformation on Circumcision
Throughout history, the medical justification for circumcision has been plagued with myths and half-truths. One of the most prevalent misconceptions is the belief that an intact penis is inherently unhygienic. However, the truth is that proper cleaning is simple and effective.
Over the years, the medical community’s perspective on circumcision has undergone significant change. In the past, unsupported claims ranging from circumcision being a cure for epilepsy to it being a deterrent for masturbation were made. However, today, leading medical organizations worldwide, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, concur that it is not medically ethical to advocate for the procedure as routine for all newborns. This shift emphasizes the importance of distinguishing longstanding cultural practices from genuine medical necessities.
Psychological Impacts of Foreskin Shame
The societal biases surrounding the intact penis have had a profound impact on the psychological well-being of many men, leading to struggles with self-esteem and body image. In cultures where circumcision has unfortunately been normalized, being uncircumcised can cause embarrassment and feelings of being ‘different’ or ‘inferior.’ These negative emotions often extend to the bedroom, where anxieties about cleanliness, attractiveness, and partner preference can arise. Some individuals, burdened by societal expectations, may even choose to undergo circumcision in adulthood, not out of personal choice but due to societal pressure. Such decisions made under duress can have long-lasting mental health consequences, including regret, loss, and resentment.
Circumcision as a Cultural Norm
We know—because results from Intact America’s surveys of parents who were solicited in the hospital or by their pediatricians to circumcise their babies show this to be true—that narratives crafted by the medical establishment and other complicit parties have shaped parental decisions to circumcise their babies more than the distribution of accurate medical knowledge about circumcision., Thus, the choice to circumcise transcends personal preference based on knowledge of the value of the foreskin and the pain and trauma of surgery, especially for an infant.
The Push for Foreskin Acceptance and Education
In recent years, there has been a remarkable movement towards embracing bodily autonomy and challenging deep-seated biases surrounding circumcision. Grassroots organizations and advocacy groups like Intact America have taken the lead in driving this change, emphasizing the importance of personal choice, questioning cultural and societal norms that may impede it, and taking the lead in educating the public about the lack of medical necessity for circumcision and the benefits of an intact penis Simultaneously, the medical and psychological communities are increasingly advocating for a more balanced perspective, highlighting the significance of informed consent and recognizing both the potential benefits and drawbacks of circumcision. These professionals are shifting from outdated, one-sided viewpoints to a more nuanced approach that considers the physical, psychological, and cultural implications across the spectrum. Consequently, an array of resources, including literature and workshops, is now available to parents and individuals, providing comprehensive information. These collective efforts signify a transformative shift towards a world where decisions about circumcision are based on knowledge, understanding, and personal conviction rather than societal pressure or unquestioned tradition.
Dec 17, 2023
In mental health and therapy settings, the lifelong and life-altering impact of trauma—especially in babies and children, called adverse childhood experiences (ACE)—is becoming far more recognized. More and more therapists and psychologists are specializing in trauma-informed care. One area where there is great need, however, stands out for its neglect: Male circumcision trauma is treated as if it does not fall under the umbrella of general trauma, nor is it currently included on the ACE list. This unnecessary surgery’s enormous impact on men and society is largely obscured in the United States, because open discussion about the trauma it causes is taboo.
“Men circumcised as infants have reported experiencing anger, sadness, shame, and denial over having their genitals altered without their consent. Some men have experienced symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, anger, and intimacy problems, which they directly associate with their feelings about being circumcised.” — PsychologyToday.com
Many factors play into the lack of recognition and awareness around circumcision trauma, including:
- Medical Perspective: Historically, the medical community in the United States—where this pay-for-fee cosmetic surgery is now the most common pediatric surgery—has been promoted as a “routine procedure” with minimal risks. Moreover, there has been limited attention given to the psychological effects of medical procedures performed during infancy, and virtually no studies have been done on the impact of male genital cutting on adult men and teens.
- Lack of Awareness: The psychological impact of circumcision is frequently overlooked due to a lack of widespread public awareness or open discussion. Many men and women in the U.S. have never seen an intact, natural penis with its glans protected by its foreskin. Even most medical books in the U.S. fail to show the natural penis. Some men aren’t even aware that they’ve been circumcised until well into adulthood.
- Normalization of Procedure: After World War II, the birth process increasingly took place in a hospital setting, and circumcision became more and more commonly performed on male infants within hours or the first few days of birth. Now the majority of men in the U.S. have been circumcised, a surgery that is uncommon in most other parts of the world. Consequently, the experiences of those who suffer trauma as a result of male genital cutting may be trivialized or disregarded.
- Limited Research: The scarcity of comprehensive research on the long-term psychological effects of circumcision has led to most men suffering in silence, unaware that others have experienced problems as a result of surgery done without their consent. Without substantial scientific data to support claims of trauma from circumcision, these experiences may not be given the weight they deserve.
- Gender Norms and Expectations: In certain cultures, including the U.S., males are shamed for expressing pain or trauma, leading to hesitancy in acknowledging or discussing the negative experiences associated with circumcision.
- Cultural and Religious Norms: Circumcision holds cultural and religious significance in some societies and is regarded as a longstanding tradition rather than a source of immense trauma. In those cultures, the ceremony and cultural acceptance overshadows individual experiences of pain, grief, or distress.
How Circumcision Trauma Affects Males
Circumcision trauma can have a wide range of negative effects on males, encompassing both physical and psychological impacts, from immediate pain and discomfort to potential long-term complications.
The pain experienced during circumcision can be particularly distressing for newborns and infants, who are strapped to a circumstraint and typically cut with no pain relief beyond a topical anesthetic. (Newborns and children under six months old cannot tolerate anesthesia. Many medical practitioners may perform the surgery ranging from a first-year medical student to a pediatric urologist. When the foreskin is amputated, it permanently reduces the size of the penis and removes the protective covering of the head of the penis along with some of the most sensitive parts of the sexual organ.
Complications may result in severe issues, such as excessive bleeding, which can be life-threatening; infection; or in rare instances, surgical errors that so damaged the penis that most of it had to be removed. For adult men, altered sensitivity and changes in sexual function are serious concerns. These physical complications can lead to prolonged discomfort from being “cut too tight,” which can make it impossible to experience an erection without pain and sometimes bleeding.
“Circumcision meets the clinical definition of trauma as it involves a violation of physical integrity. Research indicates that medical traumas in childhood and adolescence share psychological elements with childhood abuse, such as physical pain, fear, loss of control, and perception of the event as a form of punishment. Procedures involving children’s genitals have been found to produce negative psychological effects similar to those of childhood sexual abuse, including dissociation and the development of a negative body image.” — PsychologyToday.com
The psychological impact of circumcision is a complex and multifaceted matter. For some men, especially those circumcised later in life or those who have faced complications, there can be a deep sense of loss or violation. It’s as if their autonomy was taken away, leaving them with a feeling of incompleteness or anger towards their circumcised state. These emotions can even manifest as a form of bodily dysmorphia or dissatisfaction.
In cultures where circumcision is not the norm, circumcised males may also experience a sense of being different or abnormal. This can have a profound effect on their self-esteem and body image. The negative experiences of some men are further amplified by societal and cultural norms. In societies where circumcision is widely practiced, those who have negative feelings towards their circumcision may feel isolated, shunned, shamed, or afraid of being shut out of the community.
In cultures where circumcision is less common, circumcised males may feel a sense of otherness. They may struggle to fully identify with cultural norms surrounding the body. This dichotomy can be particularly difficult for individuals who navigate between different cultural contexts. Their circumcision status may be viewed as either the norm or an anomaly, depending on the situation.
This wall of silence surrounding circumcision exacerbates feelings of isolation for those who have been negatively affected by the procedure. We have a responsibility to create a space where individuals can share their stories, find support, and work toward healing.
“A comprehensive study involving 1072 pre-adolescent and adolescent boys who underwent circumcision in a hospital setting found that 51 percent of these boys met the full diagnostic criteria for PTSD. This rate is significantly higher than the PTSD rate among veterans of the Iraq war, which is approximately 20 percent.” — PsychologyToday.com
A common refrain I’ve heard, even from intactivists, is that intactivism should be focused on helping people who can still be kept intact or who feel victimized by the irreversible surgery—not those who do not feel that they have been affected. The reasoning I’ve been given for this lack of focus is that we don’t want to stir up shame, exacerbate body dysmorphia and dissatisfaction, or make anyone feel incomplete. However, I’d liken this way of thinking to the same mindset that would tell someone to use mind over matter to overcome the lingering long-term effects of an old injury or wound. Circumcision is often referred to as a kind of amputation. Once the damage is done, it’s done. However, in my personal opinion, in the case of male genital cutting, someone who has been mutilated deserves to know that they are not alone in their experiences.
For example, my father and I have discussed circumcision at length. Neither of us relates to the idea that we are “victims” simply because of the strength of that word. However, we have learned how being circumcised has affected us throughout our lives—perhaps even more so in our adult lives. For instance, keratinization, the biological process that occurs in the glans (the head) of the penis following circumcision, leaves it exposed. In turn, the penis begins to lose sensitivity and often changes color, going from more of a pink to a gray tone. The absence of the foreskin causes the glans to become less and less sensitive from the day-to-day friction of clothing and the missing natural lubrication that the foreskin would have provided.
So if men like my dad and I could spend a large part of our lives unaware of how our circumcision affected us, does it still count as trauma? We lacked the context to know the difference because, of course, we were cut almost the moment we left the womb. I can say that only after reading more about what circumcision does could I understand why I do not feel as sexually sensitive as I once did. Being less sensitive has often also made me feel disconnected from sexual partners because I have to work to experience any sort of deep pleasure. I still enjoy sex, but the decreased sensitivity means that it often takes me a considerable amount of time to climax. What I didn’t know for the majority of my adult life is that I wasn’t feeling this way because of some flaw in my romantic partners. I was feeling this way because one of the most sensitive parts of my body was missing.
The problem is that I wouldn’t have known this fact if I hadn’t begun to learn more about the role of the foreskin and the long-term consequences of circumcision. Having this information has allowed me to stop blaming anyone else for my feelings of disconnectedness and to understand that what was done to my dad, me, and countless other boys and men is not natural. We are supposed to be intact. I believe that making people aware of how circumcision affects them could save marriages and relationships and improve intimacy and communication.
“It astonishes me that in talking about sex, pretty much nobody mentions that most adult men in the United States today have been deprived of the most pleasurable, sensitive part of their penises. Without a foreskin and its sensory feedback, a man has difficulty controlling the timing of his orgasm. Also, because he’s missing the very organ that serves a gliding and lubricating function—and because he has a scar where his foreskin used to be—his penis is calloused and dry when compared to that of an intact man; this creates friction during intercourse and compromises the pleasure of both sexual partners. Don’t believe me? Then explain the uniquely American proliferation of lubricants and masturbation creams, the existence of which many Europeans—most of whom are intact—find strange. CIRCUMserum is available for those who want to combat what it calls “Dullness Syndrome” by restoring “natural feeling for more intense sex”; Stroke 29, Wicked Cream, and others are designed to help circumcised men seeking solitary pleasure who find the after-effects of circumcision to stand in the way of sensory pleasure.” (read the full article here.)
— Georganne Chapin, author of “This Penis Business” (Lucid House Publishing, 2024)
How Circumcision Trauma Affects Society
Circumcision trauma carries far-reaching implications, impacting not only individuals but also cultural and healthcare practices. It gives rise to a significant societal effect—an intense cultural and ethical debate. In many societies, circumcision is deeply ingrained and intertwined with religious and cultural traditions. When individuals begin to express their traumatic experiences or negative consequences associated with circumcision, it sparks a polarizing discourse. This divide emerges between those who perceive circumcision as an essential cultural or religious practice and those who consider it an unnecessary or even detrimental intervention. These debates strain community relationships and impede the constructive dialogue necessary for understanding and empathy among different groups.
Furthermore, circumcision trauma raises ethical dilemmas concerning bodily autonomy and informed consent, particularly in the context of infant circumcision. The practice of circumcising infants who cannot provide consent raises concerns about the right to bodily integrity and individual autonomy. Such concerns foster introspection within society, questioning medical ethics and the role of parental decision-making in pediatric medical procedures. As awareness grows and circumcision trauma gains recognition, a broader societal discussion on children’s rights, medical consent, and the balance between cultural practices and individual rights has been ignited. In most hospital settings, a parent or guardian isn’t given a chance to preview the so-called consent form. Nowadays, it’s often simply presented on a tablet or iPad shortly after the baby’s birth, usually only in English and occasionally in Spanish by request.
From a healthcare perspective, acknowledging and addressing circumcision trauma is vital for the well-being of affected individuals. Failing to recognize or take this trauma seriously creates a gap in healthcare provision, leaving those suffering from the physical or psychological effects of circumcision feeling marginalized and unable to seek appropriate care. This situation strains healthcare resources and hampers healthcare professionals’ ability to deliver comprehensive and patient-centered care. Moreover, it breeds distrust in medical professionals and institutions among those whose experiences and suffering remain unvalidated. As society becomes increasingly aware of the potential negative impacts of circumcision, the healthcare system must adapt, providing support and resources to those affected. Only when more medical professionals educate themselves on this reality will we have a more inclusive and empathetic approach to patient care.
If you’re moved by the disturbing reality of circumcision trauma and believe in the fundamental right to bodily autonomy, we invite you to join us in taking a stand. Today, we urge you to make a difference by spreading awareness, actively supporting intactivist causes, and participating in open and compassionate dialogues about the crucial significance of protecting the genitals of all children. Together, as a community of dedicated advocates, we can protect individual rights and empower individuals to make informed choices when they come of age and are capable of making conscious decisions about their bodies. Discover more about our cause and become part of our passionate community by clicking here.
Article authored by Connor Judson Garrett
Nov 19, 2023
According to the World Health Organization, approximately one-third of males around the world are circumcised, primarily for cultural reasons. Despite the commonality of circumcision in the United States—and other countries around the globe—this surgery comes with enormous, downplayed, and outright hidden risks. The purported benefits have been continually debunked and disproven, while the dangers of circumcision are becoming increasingly apparent as victims speak out and new studies prove the consequences are sadly all too real. Whether you’re a parent pondering the decision for your newborn, a medical professional seeking to broaden your understanding, or simply someone curious about this often-debated practice, these statistics about circumcision offer an eye-opening perspective on the risks associated with this age-old practice.
Statistics About The Dangers of Circumcision
1) Higher Pain Response
Circumcision Statistic: “According to one study, circumcised infants have a slightly higher pain response to vaccination 4 to 6 months after circumcision.” — ScienceDirect
The researchers who conducted the study postulate that circumcision may induce long-lasting changes in infant pain behavior because of alterations in the infant’s central neural processing of painful stimuli.
But what does this mean? Essentially, they are suggesting that the experience of circumcision could potentially alter the infant’s neurological development, specifically in terms of how the brain processes painful stimuli. In other words, this early experience of significant pain could rewire the brain’s pain-processing circuits in a way that changes how the child experiences pain in the future.
2) Infant Death
Circumcision Statistic: “Long-time intactivist Dan Bollinger published an estimate that in the year 2010, 117 U.S. infant deaths were attributable to the circumcisions of baby boys — all of which were entirely preventable.” — This Penis Business (Lucid House Publishing, 2024)
While male circumcision affects more than just newborns, when babies first enter the world, they are in an extremely fragile state. Newborns simply cannot afford to lose even a minuscule amount of blood during this cosmetic surgery, or it puts their lives in jeopardy. If circumcision were indeed medically necessary, as the mainstream medical institutions claim, the surgery could be justified; however, it is no secret that circumcision is not medically necessary. Doctors and other medical professionals know this. The vast majority of the world does not circumcise their baby boys and finds it abhorrent that we continue to practice male circumcision in the United States. So if circumcision is not medically necessary, then the risks it poses—including excessive bleeding, which can lead to death—are obviously not worth it.
3) Permanently Cut
Circumcision Stat: Approximately 1.4 million American baby boys lose their foreskins at the hands of medical professionals every year. — This Penis Business
Considering that doctors swear to a Hippocratic Oath that holds them accountable for looking out for their patients to the best of their abilities, it makes the practice of routine male circumcision even more heinous and doubly hypocritical. With the pretense of medical necessity stripped away, millions of boys are put at risk to ensure the profitability of “this penis business” and its various offshoot industries, such as foreskin trafficking.
4) A Disproportionately American Problem
Circumcision Statistic: “Circumcision rates have been decreasing in the United States, falling from 64.5% in 1979 to 58.3% in 2010.” – via Centers for Disease Control
It should be noted that the CDC has not updated the statistics above since 2010, largely because many more circumcisions occur in private offices and other settings, making the precise numbers extremely difficult to track. In comparison to other countries, circumcision is more prevalent in the United States. This is due to various reasons, such as medical advice and social customs. The practice of circumcision has been widespread in the U.S. for many years, which has led to a societal desensitization to the severity and barbarism of the procedure. As a result, some parents may decide to have their sons circumcised so that they can look like other circumcised individuals in their family or peer group.
Additionally, during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, circumcision was wrongly advertised as a way to prevent different diseases and conditions and to discourage masturbation, which was considered harmful back then. Though these ideas have been proven incorrect, they may have played a part in the increase in circumcision rates, which made the practice even more prevalent.
5) Loss of Sexual Sensitivity
Circumcision Statistic: “Circumcised men are 4.5 times more likely to be diagnosed with erectile dysfunction (ED).” – via International Journal of Men’s Health
Circumcision results in the loss of sexual sensitivity for several reasons, starting with the removal of nerve endings. The foreskin contains a high concentration of specialized nerve endings that sense fine touch, temperature, and positional changes. When the foreskin is removed during circumcision, these nerve endings are lost. Additionally, the glans (or head) of the penis is normally a mucous membrane, similar to the inside of the mouth or eyelid. In a circumcised penis, the glans are exposed to the air and constant friction from clothing. This can lead to keratinization, where a thicker layer of keratin (a protein found in the skin) forms on the surface of the glans. Keratinization can reduce sensitivity because the thicker skin layer can lessen the impact of sensory stimuli. Lastly, male circumcision can cause the loss of the gliding mechanism the penis is intended to have. The foreskin serves a purpose during sexual activity, providing a ‘gliding’ mechanism that reduces friction and enhances sexual sensation for both partners. After circumcision, this gliding mechanism is lost, which can affect sensitivity.
6) Increased Meatitis
Circumcision Statistic: “The rate of meatitis, inflammation of the meatus (the opening of the urethra), is increased in circumcised boys, due to increased exposure of the meatus in the absence of the foreskin.” – via ScienceDirect
Meatitis is inflammation of the meatus, which is the opening at the tip of the penis where urine and semen exit the body. It can cause symptoms such as redness, swelling, discomfort or pain, itching, and sometimes discharge from the penis. Meatitis is more common in circumcised males. After circumcision, the newly exposed glans (or head of the penis) and urinary meatus can become irritated, leading to inflammation and meatitis. This is particularly true in infants, as their diapers can lead to constant exposure to urine and feces, which can irritate the meatus.
7) No Significant Decrease in Penile Cancer
Circumcision Statistic: “There is insufficient data to establish a consistent relationship between circumcision status and the risk of penile cancer.” – via National Institutes of Health
This circumcision statistic is significant when you factor in how often the medical establishment has continuously spread misinformation around this point. For decades, doctors and medical institutions have erroneously claimed that circumcision drastically decreases penile cancer, when the reality is that there is no connection between circumcision and the risk of penile cancer. Additionally, penile cancer is already extraordinarily rare. According to the American Cancer Society, only 1 in 100,000 men in North America and Europe with cancer are affected by penile cancer.
8) Psychological Trauma
Circumcision Statistic: “Approximately 10% of circumcised males may later in life experience psychological trauma related to their circumcision.” – via ScienceDirect
Infants can display behavioral changes such as altered sleep patterns, feeding difficulties, and increased irritability following circumcision. This early traumatic experience can have long-term psychological effects, potentially influencing responses to pain or stress later in life. Furthermore, some men circumcised as infants or children report feelings of anger, sadness, or distress about the procedure when they are older, particularly because it was performed without their informed consent.
9) Emotional Impairment
Circumcision Statistic: “Research has shown that circumcised men suffer from alexithymia (impaired ability to identify and describe one’s emotions) at rates 20 percent higher than intact men and are up to 4.5 times more likely to be diagnosed with erectile dysfunction than their intact peers.” – This Penis Business
Some studies suggest that undergoing such a traumatic experience early in life can influence the brain’s development and response to stress, which may have long-term effects on behavior and emotion. Other research suggests that painful experiences in the early postnatal period can interfere with mother-infant bonding and feeding. This could potentially have downstream effects on emotional development.
10) Complicated Procedures
Circumcision Statistic: “The overall complication rate from circumcision is estimated to be between 2 and 20%.” – via Guttmacher Institute
Part of the reason why the complication rate is so varied in estimates is because of the wide range of what might be considered a complication. But given how frequently the medical establishment downplays circumcision trauma and its consequences, we tend to consider the higher end of the range to be likely closer to the truth.
Nov 19, 2023
Even though the intactivist movement has shifted routine infant circumcision from a fringe movement to a mainstream cause, conversations about the downside of male genital mutilation and the upside of retaining the foreskin are still relatively taboo. One positive shift is that numerous intact (uncircumcised) celebrities are beginning to use their platforms to inform and educate the public and end male genital cutting.
“Most of the world does not circumcise. And why would they? Circumcision removes the most pleasure-receptive part of the penis.” – Mario Lopez
The impact of these famous intact men and celebrity intactivists on shaping a more informed society that protects boys and men from the short- and long-term consequences of circumcision cannot be overstated. But how much more quickly would change come if all men were willing to use their influence to challenge the status quo of routine infant circumcision and the medical establishment? With social media, everyone has a platform to motivate change. Check out the contributions of the uncircumcised celebrities below and start encouraging conversations about circumcision, using their quotes as a jumping-off point.
Uncircumcised Celebrities and Famous Intact Men
1) Mario Lopez
Intact, intactivist, or both: Both
Mario Lopez, an American actor and television host, is famous for his role as A.C. Slater in the popular 90s teen sitcom Saved by the Bell and as a television host on Access Hollywood. Born on October 10, 1973, in San Diego, California, he started his career in the entertainment industry as a child. Lopez is well-known in American pop culture for his infectious charisma and diverse talents in acting, dancing, and hosting, and as a proponent of health and fitness. Lopez shared his perspective as a father who would never challenge nature.
Mario Lopez: “So, I said if we were having a boy I didn’t want him to be circumcised. Because I don’t think that God makes mistakes and it’s not an optional part. And I know some of the women are probably like “Oh!” but believe it or not that’s the way a man is naturally born.” – via Babygaga
2) Gerard Butler
Intact, intactivist, or both: Both
Born on November 13, 1969, in Paisley, Scotland, actor Gerard Butler has achieved great success in Hollywood through his impressive performances in dramatic and action films. Some of his famous roles include his role as King Leonidas of Sparta in 300, the Phantom in the 2004 movie version of The Phantom of the Opera, a man bent on revenge (or justice) in Law Abiding Citizen, and most recently as a CIA operative in Kandahar. He is recognized for his physique and Scottish accent, and he has become one of the few Scottish actors to become a leading man in Hollywood. Butler shares his perspective on circumcision as a Scot.
Gerard Butler: “No, we don’t circumcise!” He went on to describe himself as “very sensitive” and to say that being uncircumcised is “an amazing thing.” – via Howard Stern Show
3) Joe Rogan
Intact, intactivist, or both: Intactivist
Joe Rogan is an American who works as a comedian, podcast host, and mixed martial arts commentator. He was born on August 11, 1967, and began his career as a stand-up comedian. He then acted in a successful sitcom called NewsRadio in the 1990s. One of his most famous jobs was hosting the reality game show Fear Factor in the early 2000s. He has also had a big impact as a color commentator for the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC).
In recent years, Joe Rogan has become widely known for hosting and producing “The Joe Rogan Experience,” a highly popular and influential podcast that covers a diverse range of topics. The podcast features in-depth conversations and discussions on themes such as comedy, MMA, psychedelic experiences, and various social and political issues, including circumcision. As a victim of circumcision himself, his perspective reflects his raw authenticity.
Joe Rogan: “It’s one of those things where it was done to us, and women say, ‘It looks gross, so cut it.’ It’s a really f*cked up situation that we still have to deal with this.” And “It’s a dick; it’s not a Jack O’ Lantern. You don’t have to chop parts off of it to make it look better. That’s stupid.” – via Babygaga
4) Russell Crowe
Intact, intactivist, or both: Both
Russell Crowe, a New Zealand-born actor (April 7, 1964, in Wellington), film producer, and musician, became popular in Hollywood and the global film industry after his role in L.A. Confidential (1997). His remarkable performance as Maximus Decimus Meridius in Ridley Scott’s Gladiator (2000) won the Academy Award for Best Actor and established his position in the film industry. Famous for his riveting performances and commitment to his characters in movies such as A Beautiful Mind, Master and Commander: The Far Side of the World, and Cinderella Man, he has also been in the news for owning a rugby team and is currently touring Europe with his rock band Indoor Garden Party. His perspective on circumcision is blunt and to the point.
Russell Crowe: “Circumcision is barbaric and stupid. Who are you to correct nature? Is it real that GOD requires a donation of foreskin? Babies are perfect.” – via Babygaga
5) Howard Stern
Intact, intactivist, or both: Intactivist
Howard Stern is an American media figure known for his long-running radio show The Howard Stern Show. He was born on January 12, 1954, in Queens, New York, and began his career in radio during the 1970s. His show gained national attention in the 1980s and 1990s due to its provocative content and Stern’s direct interviewing style. Called the “shock jock,” he has often received criticism for pushing boundaries. Stern, who refers to himself as the “King of All Media,” has expanded his career beyond radio and now works in television, films, and books. His books Private Parts and Miss America were both on the New York Times bestseller list.
Circumcised himself, Stern’s perspective on circumcision is that it should be illegal and is mutilation.
Howard Stern: “Most men want their sons to look like themselves. So, this keeps going. It is so barbaric…if I had a son, I would never allow him to be circumcised. Never!” – via Babygaga
6) John Leguizamo
Intact, intactivist, or both: Both
Actor, comedian, producer, and screenwriter John Leguizamo was born July 22, 1960, in Bogota, Columbia. He has appeared in more than 100 films, on TV shows, and on Broadway, and is known as a passionate activist in many arenas.
His perspective on circumcision reflects his background as an uncut Latin man.
John Leguizamo: “Actually, from what I’ve read, guys lose feeling by doing that. I want my son to have all the feeling he can have. Growing up in New York City, a lot of my friends weren’t circumcised, and my dad’s not circumcised and none of my family members are circumcised, so to me that was normal. When I saw some white kids circumcised, it looked like a mutilated monster. I thought someone had done a Frankensteinian surgery. It was weird to me…it was really bizarre.” – Playboy interview.
7) Ben Affleck
Intact, intactivist, or both: Intact
Ben Affleck is an accomplished American actor, director, producer, and screenwriter who has been a well-known figure in Hollywood since the mid-1990s. Born on August 15, 1972, in Berkeley, California, he rose to fame alongside his friend Matt Damon for Good Will Hunting, which earned them the Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay in 1997. Affleck’s acting career includes dramas like Gone Girl and the superhero movie Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, in which he played Batman. In addition to acting, Affleck has demonstrated his talent as a filmmaker, earning an Academy Award for Best Picture for Argo.
Affleck may not be an intactivist, but his perspective on circumcision was made clear in an interview with Jon Stewart, on September 19, 2006, when he responded to a New York Post headline, “Frappuccino Fueled Ben Affleck Goes on Anti-Circumcision Rant.”
Ben Affleck: “I hate circumcisions! Get enough in me, and I’ll tell you how much I hate them.”
https://www.cc.com/video/qp9oou/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-ben-affleck @ 5:17
8) Colin Farrell
Intact, intactivist, or both: Both
Irish actor Colin Farrell was born on May 31, 1976, in Dublin. Besides excelling as an actor in international, Hollywood, and independent films for the last three decades—starring as Alexander the Great, and most recently in Banshees of Inisherin—he was named one of Time Magazine’s 100 most influential people in the world in its April 13, 2023 issue.
We know he is intact because, in a Playboy interview from March 2003, he tells the story of how, when an agent joined about 20 people discussing circumcision with him at a party, she said, “I just don’t understand a foreskin. I’ve never seen one,” he whipped out and showed her what it was all about.
Colin Farrell: “People say it’s much cleaner to have no foreskin. What, have you never heard of a f-ing shower?” – Mothering
