Comment Reply

Let's look at this rationale for keeping circumcision victims ignorant of what was done to them:

Another obvious and pathetic attempt to maintain circumcision in a shroud of ignorance and denial under the guise of "protecting" the victims?

We are not supposed to let circumcision victims' know that they were physically damaged because they might be further damaged mentally? If concern for the victims was indeed important to them; they would not do it, not promote it, not try to justify it, nor accept it. The damage they are really concerned about is to their credibility and their ethics.

The need to keep their victims in ignorance and denial is fundamental to circumcision.

But circumcisers are worried not about their victims, but themselves. IF their victims find out that they were indeed damaged, they might ask for an accounting from the perpetrators--and what valid justification can they offer??

So whenever you hear this argument, you are safe in assuming that the ones they want to protect are the perpetrators, not their victims! Don't fall for these crocodile tears--they are merely shed to protect the perpetrator's butts. Ignorance and denial are all they have left for their own defense.

Luckily, facts, evidence and reality are not dependent on someone's beliefs in them to exist.
Beliefs are germane to the subject of circumcision ONLY in the following way;

Pro-intacts usually do NOT believe in circumcision BECAUSE of the facts, evidence and reality.

Circumcisers usually DO believe in circumcision IN SPITE OF the facts, evidence and reality..

Thus is the nature of beliefs--the real and the fantasies.