Matt Steinglass responds

by Freddie

Matt Steinglass has responded at length to some of my thoughts on the circumcision debate, in the comments of my posts on the subject. If you’ve read any of my posts on this issue please take the time to digest Steinglass’s rebuttals.

Share and Enjoy

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

Random Posts...

• Day-um!
• Our Sins
• 12 Steps to a Healthy Republican Party

2 comments

1 James { 09.09.09 at 8:44 am }

Same old same old, basically. Summary: Matt backs parental choice, I back personal.

2 James { 09.09.09 at 8:51 am }

Actually, shit, I’m wrong:

Let me reassure this guy: no one is planning to do anything to his dick. Assuming, that is, that he is more than 8 days old. But with respect to the practice of circumcision, the important point is this: he’s my son. Not yours. Parents have the right to decide on medical treatment for their children, presuming such medical treatment is not actively harmful. And parents have the right to include their children in cultural rites and practices, again presuming no harm is done.

(empad)

Matt is under the misapprehension that circumcision is not harmful, most likely because he deems the foreskin as inherently of no worth, whereas in reality it removes erogenous tissue, thus impairing the function of pleasure provision. So this is an ”understanding of the world we live in”, not just a value judgement thing.