I was born, and grew up, in Southern Africa, and was circumcised at birth, as was my brother a few years later. Amongst the White population of the region, routine circumcision is not very common (the circumcision rate is often quoted at around 10%). Although both my parents wanted my brother and me circumcised, my father was probably the driving force behind the decision. He told me as much one day when we happened to discuss the subject. His main reason was for us to be free of the constant hassles of trying to keep our genitals clean. My father, being uncircumcised himself, knew only too well how hard it is to achieve this, and since cleanliness and personal hygiene have always been very important to him, he wanted to provide us with the benefits associated with circumcision that he never had.
Those opposed to circumcision often state that regular daily washing (i.e. once a day) is enough to ensure an acceptable standard of personal hygiene. The truth of the matter is, however, that in reality proper penile hygiene can only be maintained by cleaning under the foreskin every time after urinating. In practice, this is something most men would find impossible to do, even if they wanted to. I have often noticed that my father needs more time to go to the bathroom, because afterwards he always has to clean himself. Having to do this at home is a hassle from a time and effort point of view, but at the workplace it certainly becomes a far greater inconvenience. In most cases it would be more or less impossible (or inappropriate) for anyone to indulge in this cleaning ritual in a bathroom shared by other co-workers.
On the other hand, I have frequently noticed that many men don't even wash their hands after having used the facilities in public restrooms. This kind of behavior certainly suggests that for many individuals proper washing of the genitals more than once a day would be very unlikely. In children the problem of maintaining an acceptable standard of penile hygiene is exacerbated by two factors. Firstly, most young boys don't like to shower or bathe regularly if they can avoid it (and therefore very often don't), and secondly, many parents fail to either instruct their children about proper personal hygiene, or see to it that it is actually carried out on a daily basis. Under these conditions it is very hard to maintain proper penile hygiene. Circumcision is clearly a much more effective way to deal with this, and what's more, the benefits last a lifetime!
According to my father, my parents had a very difficult time to convince our family doctor to do my circumcision - they had to more or less force him to do it. The only reason why he probably agreed to do it was that he saw that my parents were serious about it (and not likely to change their minds) and that he had been a family friend for many years. As to why he was so against the procedure (at least initially) I can only speculate, but thinking back, it most probably had to do with ignorance, both cultural and medical. As a medical procedure, routine circumcision is almost totally unknown, and as far as I am aware, not even part of the basic training of medical personal. Added to this comes cultural ignorance: most of the White population in Southern Africa are of Dutch-French-English extraction. Except maybe amongst the English, circumcision as a rule, and routine circumcision in particular, are almost unheard of. I will come back to why this might be the case below. What is interesting, however, is that by the time my brother was born a few years later, our family physician no longer needed convincing! My circumcision was very likely the first one he ever performed, and it is therefore possible that he only became aware of the benefits after having had the opportunity to observe me during the follow-up visits (e.g. to get my shots etc.) in the period before my brother was born.
I am convinced, however, that if the many benefits of circumcision (improved penile hygiene as well as a long list of medical ones) were more generally known, the procedure would gain a lot of support instead of merely being a religious concept. North Americans should be very thankful that their societies are aware of these benefits. Ignorance in this instance certainly is not bliss! I should add that, although where I was born circumcision amongst Whites is not common, most of the local African tribes have practised for as long as people can remember. In this context, however, circumcision has always been regarded as a rite of passage, an initiation into manhood: a man is only considered to be one after being circumcised, otherwise he is still a "boy", regardless of his age (and treated as such). In his autobiography, Nelson Mandela gives a vivid description of his own circumcision, and also writes that he considers it a very important part of his people's cultural heritage.
The circumstances surrounding my circumcision made me think about an argument often used by those opposed to it, namely that many parents' decision regarding circumcision is based on inadequate information/knowledge or a lack of personal experience. My parents had to go great lengths in the face of much opposition and ignorance to have me circumcised, and knowing them it certainly was not a decision that was made lightly or on the spur of the moment. Surely one of the most important aspects of being a parent is being responsible for your child's well-being. Infants and young children cannot be expected to act in their own best interests - that is the role and responsibility of the parents. Since my father had first hand experience of what life with a foreskin is like, he was convinced that I would be better off without one, and because I was unable to make the decision at the time myself, they made it for me. Furthermore, because my parents were acting in my best interest, they did not need my consent in this matter. To my mind this is what parental responsibility is all about! How some people can even go as far as to allege that my parents had violated my "human rights" by having me circumcised as an infant is totally beyond me.
I personally consider my own circumcision as a gift - one of the most precious my parents could have given me, and something for which I'm thankful for every day of my life. Considering the difficulties my parents had to overcome in order to have me circumcised, I feel that I owe them an even greater debt of gratitude. My brother, furthermore, totally shares my view on this. Even though I shudder to think what life with a foreskin must be like, I have often wondered if I would have had the courage to have myself circumcised as an adult had I not been at birth. As an adult one is faced with many factors which might have a negative influence on one's decision: embarrassment to bring up a subject dealing with such a private matter involving a sexual organ with outsiders, taking time off from work and having to explain one's decision to friends and colleagues who might not be supportive or understanding, and also the costs involved, which might be as high as $2000-$3000, compared to around $100-$200 for infant circumcision. Any one of these factors would be enough to prevent someone from having the operation done an adult: my father is certainly a very good case in point.
On the other hand, there are of course many men who had themselves circumcised as adults for either personal or medical reasons, and I certainly admire them for their courage. One only has to read the contributions to this site, "ICIRC" or "circlist" to realize this. Knowing personally what life is like without the drawbacks of having a foreskin, and reading how totally satisfied those people are who were circumcised as adults, I really am sorry that my father never had the operation done himself. If he were younger (he is in his mid-seventies now), I certainly would have encouraged him to have it done. This has also convinced me that it is far better to have the operation done as an infant - preferably just after birth - than as an adult.
I would like to make a few personal observations here about some of the stuff that I've read on many of the anti-circumcision sites. A claim that is frequently made is that circumcision is "barbaric" - some even go as far as to equate it with "genital mutilation". In the light of the discussion above, I'm convinced that my parents would consider this allegation as a personal insult, as would probably most other parents. I have also noticed that many of these websites often revert to scare tactics in order to drive home their message. One that is frequently used is to frighten prospective parents by emphasizing the (very few) cases where problems did occur during circumcision. The truth of the matter is that the procedure is totally safe (or as safe as any minor surgical procedure can be) if performed by an experienced and qualified person. The statistics reported in the medical literature provide ample proof of this. Moreover, if one considers the large number of circumcisions performed annually in North America, which probably exceeds 1.5 million, the number of serious incidents reported is incredibly small statistically speaking. This fact is, of course, hardly ever mentioned by the anti-circumcision lobby.
Another popular scare tactic is to show pictures of babies crying during or after circumcision, which can have a very unnerving effect on especially those parents who are facing this subject for the first time. It very likely, however, that the crying often has little to do with the actual operation, which in any case does not take very long, but instead may be due to a whole bunch of other reasons related to the whole birth process. The latter is certainly not an easy experience for either the mother or infant. Do people actually expect babies to smile and be happy a few hours after they are born? Reading some of the stuff on these sites, one certainly gets this impression. By taking this quite normal behavior observed in most infants totally out of context and misusing it to make a point just shows how far these people are prepared to go in order to make their point. Furthermore, although it is quite likely that newborns are able experience some level of pain or discomfort during circumcision if some kind of anesthesia and/or analgesia is not used, the claim that people can remember the pain for many years afterwards (or even as adults) to my mind is totally preposterous. I was circumcised without any pain control - it wasn't done in those days - and certainly have no recollection of the procedure.
Many other even more unbelievable claims concerning the alleged drawbacks of circumcision can be found on many of these anti-circumcision sites, and even in some books on the subject. Most of these claims are so outrageous that it would be an exercise in futility (not to mention a waste of time) to comment on them. What bothers me, however, is the fact that many of these websites and books have the potential to cause a lot of psychological harm to those individuals who are insecure or vulnerable due to personal problems by exploiting the circumcision issue and using it as a convenient scapegoat for all their problems. I find such behavior to be totally irresponsible and also morally reprehensible.
Before moving to the US at the end of last year for work-related reasons, I spent the past nine years living in Western Europe, which has given me the opportunity to experience and observe many of the various cultures there first hand. One thing they all have in common is the absence of routine circumcision - much like the society I was born into. Based on my own observations and experiences, I'm convinced that the reasons for this are not as straightforward as those opposed to circumcision would want people to believe.
It is a well known fact that the State-run National Health Service (NHS) in Britain is greatly underfunded (as are probably most of the socialized Health Care Services in other countries). During the years I lived there, I heard of, and read about, numerous cases where, even in emergencies, patients had to be turned away from hospitals because no bed was available. Although my own experience of the NHS was not that bad, I certainly got the impression that money is tight. This has been the case ever since the founding of the NHS after the Second World War (in the late forties). It is therefore hardly surprising that under these conditions all but the most necessary life-saving measures will be actively discouraged. Routine infant circumcision, being by nature a prophylactic procedure, would certainly not fall into this category.
It is also interesting to note that, according to the published statistics in the medical literature, the founding of the NHS coincided with the decline in the neonatal circumcision in Britain. Some articles, and incidentally those most widely quoted by the anti-circumcision groups, on the other hand instead ascribe this decline to the influence of a medical paper which appeared in 1949 (Gairdner). I guess there is some truth in it: this paper very likely served as a convenient excuse to do away with a surgical procedure that consumes financial recourses already in short supply. In the USA on the other hand circumcision of newborns is covered by most health insurance plans.
To my mind the almost total absence of circumcision on the European Continent is due mainly to ignorance, similar in many ways to the situation that I grew up in. Contrary to the claim that Europeans do not practise routine circumcision because they are "more civilized" or "better informed" (and therefore know better), in practice just the opposite is the case: most people in Europe are completely unaware of the existence of circumcision outside of its religious association with being Jewish or Muslim, much less the benefits thereof! The fact that most North American men are circumcised is, for example, almost totally unknown to most Europeans. This general lack of information about circumcision was also discussed separately in a recent contribution by Daniel from Sweden to this site, who wrote that had very little knowledge about circumcision before he went to the USA as an exchange student.
I mentioned that for most people in Europe circumcision has a religious connotation. It is a sad fact of life that anti-Semitism is still present in many European countries even today - albeit often in a very subtle form. It is therefore hardly surprising that in such an environment, where ignorance is reinforced by negative religious associations, circumcision would not be common practice. I got a similar impression in the society that I grew up in, which is not surprising since it has its roots in Western European culture. I'm not suggesting that anti-Semitism is confined only to Europe (it certainly is not), but the difference to the situation in North America is that most people there regard circumcision as a purely medical procedure (American Jews and Muslims excepted of course). In Europe the situation regarding anti-Semitism is made worse by the additional burden of history: its horrific consequences during the Second World War are still a vivid memory for many. One should not forget that a mere 50 odd years ago the absence of a foreskin in Nazi-occupied Europe could have been akin to a death sentence. In the light of the above it is more than ironic that many of the most vociferous opponents of circumcision nowadays in the US, where the majority of the anti-circumcision groups and activists are based, are of Jewish background. These groups and individuals are doing their utmost to pressure especially Jewish parents not to circumcise their infant sons, thereby not only denying them the health and medical benefits, but also breaking a religious tradition (and covenant) which has lasted for thousands of years and for which many millions had died
What is encouraging, however, is that these attitudes are now starting to change as more and more European men (and their partners) are becoming aware of the benefits of not having a foreskin - thanks in no small measure to information provided by internet sites like this one. People are becoming better informed and, as a result, the subject is no longer taboo. Due to the growing interest in this subject, articles discussing circumcision - and its benefits - have appeared in many newspapers and magazines, something that was almost unheard of only a few years ago. I am also aware of at least two internet sites devoted to informing and discussing the benefits of circumcision, and providing a forum for Europeans to exchange experiences ("infocirc" and "eurocirc" - available in German only). This availability of information will hopefully contribute to a more open discussion of circumcision and serve to educate a public that has been more or less oblivious to the procedure up till now. What is more, those who were circumcised, usually as adults, are all very happy with the results - as the testimonies on the websites mentioned above will atest. I should also mention here that both France and Germany have large Muslim immigrant communities, where circumcision is routinely performed on all young boys according to Muslim custom. The assimilation of these cultures into the mainstream ones will, I think, also help to lift the profile of circumcision in these countries.
A few afterthoughts. It has taken me a while to scrape up enough courage to write this testimonial, because getting involved in public issues is not normally in my nature. However, I strongly feel that the deluge of misinformation that is being spread by a handful - but fanatical and extremely active - anti-circumcision activists should not be allowed to go unchallenged. To my mind, the only way to remedy this situation is to give people unbiased information based on solid scientific and medical facts, and to provide testimonies of those who have actually undergone the procedure - as infants or as adults. Considering the fact that over the past 50 years or so at least 70-90 million men in North America have been circumcised (not to mention the countless other millions around the world), it is to be expected that there will be some individuals amongst them who are unhappy about it. It would be very surprising if this were not the case. The fact of the matter is, however, that the vast (but unfortunately, silent) majority of circumcised men are perfectly happy with their status, and most likely never even give it a second thought. These men don't have to, since they have been guaranteed a care-free and hassle-free life when it comes to matters of penile care.
Reading some of the stuff that can be found on the anti-circumcision websites, and and especially the manner in which it is presented, it is sometimes hard for me not to get the impression that quite a few of these activists have personal issues completely unrelated to the subject that they haven't dealt with or resolved yet, and that the anti-circumcision platform merely acts as an opportunity to vent these issues. By hijacking the whole circumcision issue to serve their own personal purposes and by exploiting other people's insecurities, these people are acting in nobody's interests but their own.
But probably the main reason for me writing this testimony was the thought that future generations might be denied the benefits (and to my mind privilege) of being circumcised if the anti-circumcision fanatics are allowed to have their way. The unfortunate truth of the matter is that lies, especially those repeated many times over, have a tendency to become "facts". Those of us who have had the good fortune of being circumcised, and therefore have first hand experience of what it's like, should not allow this to happen by not speaking out and telling others about our experiences. Reading about other people's experiences have helped me to realize that I'm not alone in being thankful for being circumcised.
My personal belief that circumcision is something uniquely worthwhile stems from my own experience, as well as the overwhelming scientific evidence of the benefits associated with it that can be found in the medical literature. As a research scientist by training and occupation (though not in the medical field) I like to think that I'm able to distinguish fact from fiction (or should I say propaganda). If I ever have a son, I would not hesitate for a moment to have him circumcised, and what's more, it would form a special bond between us. It goes without saying that I would recommend the same to all parents who are considering circumcision for their sons. I sincerely hope that my attempt to inform others of my own experience will encourage those, who like me have hesitated to put pen to paper (so to speak), to do likewise.
Finally, I would like to thank Mike, and also Vernon Quaintance (of ICIRC) for all their efforts in providing unbiased information and resources, and for giving people like myself the opportunity availed upon here.
Comments and questions can be sent to me by email .
Pierre