Every once in a while, you'll get someone writing about the "right" way to talk about circumcision.
The latest I've seen is in a blog post titled "How to Talk About Circumcision Without Being a Douchebag."
On the one hand, I could see what the author was getting at, but on the other, I feel that one side is being ignored.
A good point she makes is that intactivists could do a better job of delivering their message, and I agree.
But there are some points that I simply can't see eye to eye with.
To each their own, but I'm not sure I could continue being "best friends" with someone I knew agreed to have their children mutilated after having given them information.
Would you want to continue to be friends with someone you knew was OK with doing other abusive things to their children?
Beating them black and blue?
Sexually molesting them?
Yes, I see circumcision on par with sexual molestation.
Worse; sexual mutilation.
A child could heal from the wounds of sexual molestation through therapy, but a circumcision scar is permanent and can never be erased.
The author also seems to believe that circumcision is "just another choice," like bottle feeding or using disposable diapers vs. cloth diapers.
"We had a conversation about a subject that can be controversial without making it controversial because that is how adults interact.
And both of our children are thriving. Both of our children our loved, breastfed, well taken care of."
I've seen this "celebrate our parental choices" attitude before:
And I couldn't agree any less.
It is a mistake to attack and humiliate parents over something they honestly didn't know any better about, and who would take it all back if they knew what they were doing to their children.
I'm not advocating that.
But I also do not advocate corroberating with parents, rewarding willful ignorance, making them feel justified and entitled by calling circumcision a "choice" to be "celebrated."
This author seems willing to pander to her "best friend" at the expense of the basic human rights of that friend's children, because she is more interested in "staying friends" than the principle of basic human rights for all.
I can't agree with sacrificing principle for the sake of friendship.
I couldn't pretend like "nothing happened," just to stay friends with someone whom I gave information to, but decided to mutilate his/her child anyway.
Who is a douchebag?
Now, let's talk about just who the "douchebag" is.
Who is a douchebag?
Someone whom you don't like, or has done something you don't like.
I am ready to acknowledge that there are some intactivists out there who cross the line. There is much reason an intactivist does it though; we feel as passionate about male infant circumcision as people feel about say, female circumcision. It is a gross violation of basic human rights and not to be taken lightly.
People keep saying "you shouldn't judge."
But let's ask, how do you feel about female circumcision?
How do you feel about parents that circumcised their daughters?
And be honest.
Would you hold back and "not judge?"
Would you respect that "parental choice?"
Or would you say the first thing on your mind?
That said, there are also intactivists who have lots of time and patience, and who try to deliver their message in as a non-judgemental way as possible. They try to post facts, links to information, and just leave it a that; only to have it be called "bashing" and "harassment" by parents who simply want to hear nothing other than validation and encouragement, and have it promptly deleted, user blocked.
So who's the douchebag?
The answer is, someone whom you don't like, or has done something you don't like.
Intactivists could tone it down. I will admit.
But why is the first reaction from parents who are adamant about having their child circumcised defensiveness and hostility?
Why does it make someone who wants to post factual information automatically a "douchebag?"
Not all intactivists are extreme. Not all parents are close-minded and pawn off whomever they don't want to hear as "douchebags."
This is probably asking for the sun and the moon, but there needs to be acknowledgement on both sides.
Yes, intactivists can be extreme douchebags.
But if you're a parent who things you've got it all right, but then you openly post about your son's circumcision online, and then complain that you're being "harrassed" and "bullied" by people whom all they want to do is give you information to make a better choice for your children, and that they're "getting into your business," and then delete what they have to say and block them, because you care more about mutilating your son and being "right" than you actually do about his health and well-being, then you're a douchebag too.
The fact is, circumcision is a sensitive subject, and you're not going to get away with posting about it on the internet, and getting people like us roused up.
If you don't want people "getting in your business," then don't post it on the internet for the whole world to see.
The "Mommy Page" Wars
GRANOLA BABIES: BIG MISTAKE