Previously, there was a post with this title written by the old Paper Airplane. That post is well intentioned, but slightly off, in my opinion. Not necessarily the reasons given but the why. Perhaps it’s because the new Paper Airplane is less against circumcision than the old.
In any case, I’ve decided to visit the issue, and list the reasons I find compelling not to circumcise.
Parental Choice – I’m a firm believer in this concept over any other. I’m not pro-circumcision, though I’ve obviously been painted as such by the intactivists here. I am seriously pro – parent, however. It’s interesting that this may be accepted as a reason not to circumcise, but not as a reason to circumcise. The fact is, children can’t consent. To anything. That’s why parents can. Parents consent to any number of things that may permanently alter or even end their child’s life. Homebirth, not vaccinating, driving in a car or even having children at all, if you have a harmful genetic condition. You may not agree with that as a reason to circumcise, but it is a fact that it is a legal choice with potential health benefits and cultural and religious benefits.
Culture – if your culture doesn’t circumcise, this is a perfectly valid reason not to.
Religion – if you’re a Christian, for example, it is unnecessary to circumcise your child.
Philosophical Reasons – if you’re philosophically opposed to circumcision, this is a perfectly valid reason not to circumcise your child.
Aesthetic Preference – if you prefer an uncircumcised penis aesthetically, that’s a compelling personal reason not to.
Health Reasons – obviously if your child has hypospadius or other health reasons that contraindicated circumcision, that’s a very compelling reason not to.
I find those reasons compelling reasons. Very much. However, none of those are compelling reasons to harass, belittle, threaten, stalk or harm another person. No matter how little you believe the health reasons are valid reasons to circumcise, or how much of an atheist you are, or how firmly you believe it’s a human rights violation…those are not good reasons to behave so inappropriately.
I take no issue with being anti-circ. That and intactivism are different things. One view compels the belief that you have the right to make a decision for someone else’s family. One view compels the embrace of people making violent threats or pederasty or pedophilia. One view disregards boundaries completely. And one view totally obliterates any chance to meaningfully change the conversation around this topic.
If your intent is to create an us versus them environment and discard dialogue in favor of monologue, then intactivism is for you.