Male Infant Circumcision Is A Disability
And sexual assault.
Absent intent or authority as legal advice.
I’m circumcised, and it has affected me in many ways. First, I’m disturbed that part of my penis has been stolen without my consent. Then there is the deep psychological trauma that is visited upon a male infant for this ritualistic barbarism.
I regret to also admit that I have two sons. One of them is circumcised, and after I witnessed this happening, I was filled with guilt, rage, confusion, regret, and horror at this event. I swore off the practice, and I have one son that is intact.
I find it awkward to point out that the studies that affirm male infant circumcision (this one linked, for instance) avoid restricting their studies to adult males. Most circumcisions are done to infants, just days after birth, and there is no way to study the before and after psychological, post-traumatic, or other mental health frames of this practice. So these studies limit scope to things like performance, premature ejaculation, painful intercourse, erectile dysfunction and the like.
Ironically, an infant isn’t going to have a premature ejaculation, performance, or painful intercourse measurement, so these are adult frames, albeit with the glaring omission of mental health related with circumcision.
The trauma is so early in life, it is outside the scope of cognizant memory, but not subconscious memory.
The simple balance point for this argument is this- Would you strap down an adult male to a board, and cut off the foreskin of his penis without consent?
WHY IS THIS A DISABILITY?
The Americans with Disabilities Act defines a disability as a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities. This also includes regarding someone as disabled.
Male infant circumcision is a disability foisted upon the male subject, that substantially limits the major life activities, to wit:
Physical or mental impairment means:
(i) Any physiological disorder or condition, cosmetic disfigurement, or anatomical loss affecting one or more body systems, such as: neurological, musculoskeletal, special sense organs, respiratory (including speech organs), cardiovascular, reproductive, digestive, genitourinary, immune, circulatory, hemic, lymphatic, skin, and endocrine; or
(1) Major life activities include, but are not limited to:
(i) Caring for oneself, performing manual tasks, seeing, hearing, eating, sleeping, walking, standing, sitting, reaching, lifting, bending, speaking, breathing, learning, reading, concentrating, thinking, writing, communicating, interacting with others, and working; and
(ii) The operation of a major bodily function, such as the functions of the immune system, special sense organs and skin, normal cell growth, and digestive, genitourinary, bowel, bladder, neurological, brain, respiratory, circulatory, cardiovascular, endocrine, hemic, lymphatic, musculoskeletal, and reproductive systems. The operation of a major bodily function includes the operation of an individual organ within a body system.
I pulled this from Title III, Public Accommodations regulations of the ADA. It is linked above, if you want to study this further, but I assure you that the Purpose Statement of the ADA supports broad use and expansive interpretation of disability.
Any reasonable person would have to admit that a penis created with a foreskin cannot be considered “intact” once that foreskin, or even a part of it is removed. It is also reasonable to argue that this is a “substantial limitation” and can be both a physical and mental impairment.
It is definitely a “cosmetic disfigurement” and/or “anatomical loss” that affects one or more body systems.
The major life activities in bold, interaction with others, the operation of the major bodily function of the genitourinary, reproductive systems, and of the penis, which is an individual organ, are undisputedly in play here as well.
Circumcision creates a disability, as defined in the ADA.
Circumcision is Sexual Assault.
In addition to being a certified ADA Advocate, I’m also a certified DV/SV Survivor Rights Advocate. I’m also a survivor of domestic abuse and sexual assault.
From the National Institute of Justice:
Sexual assault covers a wide range of unwanted behaviors—up to but not including penetration—that are attempted or completed against a victim's will or when a victim cannot consent because of age, disability, or the influence of alcohol or drugs. Sexual assault may involve actual or threatened physical force, use of weapons, coercion, intimidation, or pressure and may include—
Intentional touching of the victim's genitals, anus, groin, or breasts.
It is awkward, but necessary to point out that a male infant child, having his foreskin removed through physical force, at an age which he CANNOT CONSENT, meets the definition above of sexual assault.
It’s time to end this. It’s time to sue doctors and their staff for discrimination, for causing disability in men, and for sexual assault.
P.D., JAY V SHORE, as Certified ADA Advocate
adarights [at] protonmail [dot] com.
I agree with you. Always thought it was a barbaric practice. Some cultures want to do it to little girls, too. People raise a bit of a fuss about that but are silent when it comes to boy babies.