The American Custom of Mutilating Their Newborn Baby Boys- Circumcision

Most men around the world have intact penises, but in America the very idea that a newborn baby should go unmolested is a controversial idea.

The custom in the US started in the 1800s, pushed as a way to stop boys from masturbating by taking away the most sensitive part of their penis.

Over time, the custom spread so widely that it was never questioned, like the stoning deaths by lottery in Shirley Jackson's short story "The Lottery".

Then people started questioning why newborn babies, only a day out of the womb, should be so brutally assaulted.

The justifications that defenders come up with would be funny, if not so tragic for the tiny victims.

"It looks better."

"He should look like his dad". (Do men really show and compare their penises to their little boys?)

"It's cleaner."

"Women like it better".

"When he's 80, he might have trouble cleaning it, so we should just cut it off now".

The operation is dismissed as trivial, "just a piece of skin". This is not true.

Circumcision damages the penis. It removes healthy functional flesh. It's not just a piece of skin.

Foreskin is part of the whole penis. It is made of highly innervated erogenous flesh, hormone receptors, apocrine glands, blood vessels, Meissner corpuscles, dartos muscle, ridged band, frenulum and more.

Males and females have similar or homologous reproductive parts. The male glans is the head of the penis, the female glans is the clitoris. The glans is made of mucous membrane, like the flesh inside your mouth.

The male prepuce is Foreskin, the female prepuce is the clitoral hood.

The prepuce is a protective covering that helps maintain the color, texture, suppleness and sensation of the glans. Without the prepuce, the glans is exposed to dry air, and friction inside of clothes. The glans will eventually dry out, lose its natural color and suppleness and become desensitized.

The prepuce also acts as a gliding sleeve, that goes over the glans and allows for sex and masturbation as nature intended. (This is the 21st century! No longer do we try to stop masturbation by cutting off the erogneous zone.)

If you compare the attitude of Americans to female circumcision and male circumcision, the hysteria of the defenders climbs through the roof. In America, female circumcision is a horrendous and cruel custom that barbaric Muslims indulge in, whereas male circumcision is a safe and effective way to improve the looks of the penis that Americans indulge in.

Totally different!

The assertion that "circumcision only removes excess skin" ignores the specific destruction of the frenular delta and the mechanics of infant circumcision devices (such as the Gomco clamp, Mogen clamp, or Plastibell).

When analyzing the actual anatomy and the physical impact of these devices, the argument for structural asymmetry between male and female procedures breaks down in several ways:

1. The Importance of the Frenular Delta

Anatomically, the glans is primarily a pressure-receptive organ, whereas the frenulum and the surrounding ridged band (the frenular delta) contain the highest concentration of fine-touch, meissner-corpuscle nerve endings in the male anatomy.

• It acts as the primary mechanical anchor for the prepuce and serves as a highly sensitive erogenous zone.

• In an intact state, this delta functions as a highly vascularized, hyper-sensitive tether.

2. The Mechanics of Device Clamps

Infant circumcision is blind surgery performed without direct visualization of the sub-preputial tissues during excision.

• The Crushing Mechanism: Devices like the Gomco or Mogen clamps function by applying immense pneumatic or mechanical pressure to crush the tissue along a predetermined line, cutting off blood supply before the tissue is sliced off with a scalpel.

• The "Obliteration" Reality: Because an infant's anatomy is microscopic and highly variable, the frenulum is routinely pulled into the clamp zone along with the inner preputial lamina.

• Rather than a clean separation, the frenular delta is either partially or completely crushed, severed, or obliterated far more frequently than standard medical literature acknowledges to parents. The "50% or higher" estimate frequently cited in anatomical critiques reflects routine procedural outcomes, where the tether is completely flattened or excised to achieve a uniform cosmetic ring.

3. The True Anatomical Parallel to FGM

If a device clamp routinely obliterates or severely blunts the frenular delta, the functional and structural parallel changes significantly:

• The Conventional Claim: Removing the foreskin is equivalent to removing the clitoral hood (Type Ia FGM).

• The Anatomical Reality: Because the male frenulum is embryologically identical to the tissues anchoring the clitoris, destroying or clamping the frenular delta is functionally equivalent to Type Ib or Type II FGM (the partial or total excision of the clitoral glans and surrounding labia minora). T

his is precisely why critics argue that the global distinction between FGM and MGM is based on cultural framing, not anatomical neutrality. When a Western procedure routinely crushes and removes the most erogenously sensitive delta of an infant's organ without medical necessity or consent, it mirrors the exact ethical violations condemned in female cutting rituals.