[ExI] Circumcision

[Keith Henson]

On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 6:17 AM,  William Flynn Wallace
<foozler83 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Unlike circumcision, my upbringing could not be reversed.

I read this as saying circumcision can be reversed.

Though there seems to be claims to that effect, I don't see it
actually being successful.  Do you have pointers to support this
information?  There are a *lot* of men who resent what was done to
them without consent and would reverse it if it could be done.

> If this scenario
> obtained I might be a neurotic or a drug addict or alcoholic, always
> getting treatment but never getting well.
>
> The Eagles had a song:  Get Over It, which was a satire on all the troubles
> country songs harped on.  This is one of my theme songs.  What good does it
> do to berate parents, who are long dead in my case, for the way they raised
> me?  It just produces stress and the thousands of unfortunate things it can
> cause.  Of what use is outrage?

I was outraged at the scientology cult.  They are now, some 20 years
later, coming to an end, with even the father of the cult's leader
writing a best seller "Ruthless," and more impressive, the no longer
fearful media covering it.  I recognize I was only one of a cast of
thousands, but I think that answers your question.

BTW, in _The Nurture Assumption_ by Judith Rich Harris she makes a
case that the influence of parents beyond their genes and providing
environment isn't large enough to measure.  It's much less important
than the children's social group.

> My person opinion is that the physician is correct:  the baby will not form
> any long term memories of pain and trauma occurring in early infancy, and
> thus no psychological damage will ensue, unless he becomes resentful of
> what was  done to him.  As you know, when dealing with a minor, all that is
> needed is implied consent, which is provided by the parents' requesting the
> procedure.

How is it that female genital mutilation is a crime, but males get no
such protection?  I am with Anders and Spike on this issue.  Is this
exception written into the law?  Or is it outright discrimination?

> No one's childhood is perfect.  No one's parents always did the right
> things, and sometimes they didn't even know what the right thing was, and
> so tradition held.

As I mentioned before, Canada decided there was no medical benefit and
quit paying for this bronze age mutilation tradition.  It's now rare
there, a Canadian friend says there is only one doctor in a 100 km
range of Sudbury who will do it.

> Now I do think that pertinent studies should be done, though I very much
> doubt if anything definitive will come of it.  Even if something does and
> it's negative, I suspect that tradition will overwhelm it.  Many traumas
> happen in infancy and childhood and I think it's impossible to point at one
> of them and say that it is a cause of some adult characteristic.

It depends.  In my case, there is no question.  I am not  sure exactly
how early it first developed, but I remember it being a serious
problem, interfering with riding a bicycle, by the time I was 60.

> The trauma itself is not important in any case.  It is the person's
> recovery from it that matters.

A woman gets drunk or is dosed with Rohypnol and raped.  She has no
memory of the rape and (other than a bad hangover) does not remember
being raped, recovers just fine.  Are you making a case that the
trauma is not important?

> In a very real sense, having an easy life
> does not prepare one for the capricious indignities and vicissitudes that
> make up a normal life.  Learning to cope with frustration is essential.  If
> a child has no frustration we must provide him with some!

I have never seen or even heard of a child who lacked frustration.

Keith