Permanently Deleted
The bigger question for me is why American Protestants and their colonial programs do it :amerikkka: :stalin-gun-1: :stalin-gun-2:
Kellogg (yes, the cereal guy) was a contributing factor. He was also a segregationist https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/sex-dawn/200902/time-boycott-kellogg
It’s easier to perform surgery on an infant than to tell a child they need to clean themselves lest they get an infection.
Also sex is bad and you’ll die if you do it a lot so it has to feel less good than it does.
The origin is probably multi-faceted, but I’ve read that the practice evolved in part as a more humane replacement for the Pagan practice of ritual sacrifice (which is forbidden in Judaism). Instead of sacrificing a whole human life to show your devotion to god, you’re giving up the most valuable and erogenous part of the male body.
It should be noted that the history of circumcision in the US has remarkably little to do with Judaism (or Islam, for that matter, which is also a circumcising religion), and everything to do with puritanical Protestants, so blaming Jews for the prevalence of circumcision today is extra idiotic. The historical Jewish circumcision also happens to remove a lot less tissue than the more destructive American version (hurray). The Statue of David is actually circumcised in this manner although it appears uncircumcised compared to American penises.
Those arguments from a health and hygiene standpoint have been used for at least a century to justify the circumcision of both sexes, and all of them were created after the practices were already well established and searching for new justifications in the face of changing norms on sex. The health benefits are also weakly supported and irrelevant because it’s fundamentally an issue of bodily autonomy. Cleaning intact penises is not at all difficult. Washing the foreskin in the shower is pleasurable even.
