The Rite of False Passage into Manhood

John the Anesthesiologist

2003

The season for the traditional male circumcision is here and as usual the howling can be heard all over – in the remotest barangays and in high tech medical facilities. Occasionally such howling is muted by general anesthesia.

But have we ever stopped to ponder the rationale for this surgical procedure? It’s often been said that time-honored traditions be followed and respected. I believe this is to be true only if such traditions have a useful purpose and are non-traumatic. Let me cite examples of traumatic tradition (already banned by concerned governments): tight binding of the feet, stacking rigid neck rings, female circumcision, to name a few.

Some quarters will definitely disagree with me on certain aspects (this is their prerogative) and cite that male circumcision does not fall under such traditions but rather based more on personal hygiene and other medical considerations. Some might even say “Why the big fuss over such small foreskin?”

I believe that male circumcision should be based on clear-cut (no pun intended) indications and not solely on tradition, and in this light salient points would inevitably emerge:

1. Circumcision as a rite of passage into manhood – Is the uncircumcised less of a man?

2. To avoid ridicule or ostracism by peers – a passe outdated mentality unkindly propagated by some.

3. To reduce the risk of cancer-causing smegma – a concept negated by simple personal hygiene.

4. An uncircumcised male may become infertile – a belief with no real scientific basis.

The realities of male circumcision are best illustrated:

1. A physically painful and emotionally traumatic procedure with possible complications.

2. Removes the protective foreskin over the sensitive glans penis.

3. May predispose to chordee or a deviated penis.

4. Can lead to dysfunctional penile erection.

5. Even simple voiding could be difficult because of penile deviation and/or urethral kinking.

6. May necessitate surgery to correct penile deformity.

7. Anecdotally may make the sexual act less satisfying, i.e., the circumcised vis-à-vis the uncircumcised (? More sensitive glans).

8. Some persons may even unnecessarily resort to penile paraphernalia for erectile purpose.

9. The indication for circumcision becomes purely monetary for some quarters.

10. On the risk-benefit aspect – does the benefit (if any) really outweigh the risk and long term effects of circumcision?

We are appalled by the initiation rites imposed by certain groups on their neophytes for acceptance into their elite societies, is circumcision much less appalling (in fact more encouraging) because it is traditional?

A divorced couple (the wife was pregnant) appeared before a judge with the husband insisting that the judge grant his petition: that their yet unborn child (sex undetermined by ultrasound) be circumcised not later than eight days after delivery. The husband cited some vague belief as the basis for his petition. The wife vehemently objected to this on several grounds:

1. That they are divorced.

2. That the sex of the child was as yet undetermined.

3. That even if the child came out to be a boy, the mother insisted that he would not undergo such a painful procedure.

How would you judge this case?

A friend once came to me about his pubescent son’s circumcision. His son had an undescended testicle but the parents were more concerned about the ridicule their son would suffer from peers in his uncircumcised state and less concern over the undescended state of his testicle. Apparently their pediatrician had assured them that the undescended testicle would eventually descend. A surgeon friend strongly advised them to attend to the testicular condition first and the circumcision can be attended to later. The circumcision was done by another surgeon. The reader, I presume, can come to his/her own conclusion on this small tale.

I may have stirred up a hornet’s nest with my observations, and my apologies to people whose sensitivities I may have unintentionally offended, but I would like to end with a quote form a namesake, John Milton, on controversy:

“There is no learned man who will confess he hath much profited by reading controversies; his senses awakened, his judgment sharpened, and the truth he holds more firmly established. In logic, they teach that controversies laid together more evidently appear; and controversy being permitted, falsehood will appear more false, and truth more true.”