MEDICAL FRAUD and the criminal assault of boys
Is The Circumcised Penis REALLY "Normal?"
CJ Louis
A common, but erroneous, rationale used to justify and promote circumcision is that “it’s normal.” “Normal” is a term that can be subjective, as different societies have conformed to different norms. We live in a society where being circumcised is the norm, but this is changing. To people from this society, especially circumcised men or people who have never seen an intact penis before, it could seem "abnormal" to have a foreskin. Likewise, people from an intact population, or a population that do not circumcise their males, may see an exposed glans as abnormal, or unnatural. Objectively, however, it is the intact penis which is normal and natural, and being circumcised is an illusive “norm” to which American society conforms.
An uncovered and exposed glans is NOT normal. Unless they undergo circumcision, all human males are born with a foreskin covering their glans. Males born without a foreskin are the rare exception, and not the rule. It is only after a male has undergone the circumcision procedure that his penis looks like what some societies may view as “normal.” Societies that are used to seeing circumcised penises may see the foreskin as “extra skin,” but this is erroneous. Given the fact that males are born with intact foreskins to begin with, it can only be concluded that it is the circumcised penis which is abnormal, and that the intact penis is standard equipment. An intact penis doesn’t have “extra skin.” The circumcised penis is missing parts it would normally have were it not for circumcision.
A normal penis has a retractable foreskin covering the head or glans. Normally, the glans and surrounding areas are moist mucous membrane. The foreskin helps keep this area smooth and moist, and it protects the glans of the penis from every day abrasion. Furthermore, the foreskin is sensitive to touch, with an estimated 240 feet of nerves, and up to 20,000 specialized nerve endings. The foreskin is often minimized by people promoting circumcision, but it’s quite a large amount of sensitive skin tissue in the adult male, at about 15 square inches. In a circumcised penis, the skin of the glans, normally thin and moist, becomes tough and dry. Furthermore, the skin of the shaft becomes stationary and immobile, due to the removal of the retractable foreskin. Circumcised males may find masturbation and/or intercourse proves to be uncomfortable without the aid of lubrication. Furthermore circumcision removes much of the nerves and nerve endings that provide sexual stimulation. Having developed a tough outer layer of skin, and having much of the nerves and nerve endings removed, the circumcised penis is irrefutably desensitized. Devastating to the normal functions of the penis, circumcision deprives a man of his full and normal sexual experience.
Pro-circumcisionists, often neonate circumcised males themselves, like to use statements such as "normal is relative," or "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" to rationalize neonatal circumcision, especially their own; a feeble attempt that fails. Pretty or not, neonatal circumcision is wrong. Just because a person might think a circumcised penis is "prettier" doesn’t change the fact that a male is forced to conform to a desired norm, and that he is deprived of his birthright, that of a normal and complete body. It can’t hide the fact that neonatal circumcision abuses a baby’s inability to fend for himself. It also deprives a man of what would be a normal sexual experience. Circumcision, a euphemism for genital mutilation, and someone else’s subjective ideas of "beauty" and "normality" can’t be used to legitimize such a radically image-altering procedure.
Post Script
Few people know how a normal penis works because quite frankly, a normal penis is never discussed. Advocates of circumcision withhold this information, or they simply don’t know. Penises depicted in textbooks are shown to be circumcised, and the only time the foreskin is mentioned is when explaining circumcision. Textbooks in biology, sexology and human anatomy rarely discuss the foreskin, and when it is, it’s always described as "extra skin." From the point of view of circumcised males, the foreskin may be thought of "extra." From nature’s point of view, and from the view of intact males, however, it’s standard equipment. In light of the fact that the foreskin and its functions are rarely taught, I have included links to educational videos. It’s a shame the foreskin is ignored in textbooks, but this shouldn’t keep the truth from being known.
"Truth suppressed will find an avenue to be told."
Keep in mind these videos contain graphic images.
Most American textbooks include little or no information on the foreskin, otherwise known as the prepuce. Doctors Opposing Circumcision have created a video on its anatomy and physiology.
http://www.doctorsopposingcircumcision.org/video/prepuce.html
Viafin-Atlas has developed a synthetic foreskin for circumcised males who wish to recover their sensitivity. They provide an informative video on the functions of the foreskin.
http://www.viafin-atlas.com/wmv/Viafin-Atlas_senslipvideoNEW.wmv
Further reading: