Male circumcision has been a subject of controversy for a number of reasons including religious, ethical, sexual, legal and medical.
During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, in a rapidly changing medical and surgical world, circumcision rose in popularity as a means of prophylaxis in the Anglosphere. Its primary justification was to promote cleanliness, as well as reducing and preventing the incidence of disease. Many medical professionals and advocates of the procedure also believed that it would reduce pleasure and the urge to masturbate, which was considered a social ill of the era, although their belief is considered false in modern times.The American Academy of Pediatrics Task Force on Circumcision "Technical Report" (2012) addresses sexual function, sensitivity and satisfaction without qualification by age of circumcision. Sadeghi-Nejad et al. "Sexually transmitted diseases and sexual function" (2010) addresses adult circumcision and sexual function. Doyle et al. "The Impact of Male Circumcision on HIV Transmission" (2010) addresses adult circumcision and sexual function. Perera et al. "Safety and efficacy of nontherapeutic male circumcision: a systematic review" (2010) addresses adult circumcision and sexual function and satisfaction.
Dave S, Afshar K, Braga LH, Anderson P (February 2018). "Canadian Urological Association guideline on the care of the normal foreskin and neonatal circumcision in Canadian infants (full version)". Canadian Urological Association Journal. 12 (2): E76–E99. doi:10.5489/cuaj.5033. PMC 5937400. PMID 29381458. There is lack of any convincing evidence that neonatal circumcision will impact sexual function or cause a perceptible change in penile sensation in adulthood.
Shabanzadeh DM, Düring S, Frimodt-Møller C (July 2016). "Male circumcision does not result in inferior perceived male sexual function - a systematic review". Danish Medical Journal (Systematic review). 63 (7). PMID 27399981.
Friedman B, Khoury J, Petersiel N, Yahalomi T, Paul M, Neuberger A (September 2016). "Pros and cons of circumcision: an evidence-based overview". Clinical Microbiology and Infection. 22 (9): 768–774. doi:10.1016/j.cmi.2016.07.030. PMID 27497811.
Bañuelos Marco B, García Heil JL (March 2021). "Circumcision in childhood and male sexual function: a blessing or a curse?". International Journal of Impotence Research. 33 (2): 139–148. doi:10.1038/s41443-020-00354-y. PMC 7985026. PMID 32994555.
Staff. "Statement on Newborn Male Circumcision". American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists. Archived from the original on 21 March 2023. Retrieved 21 March 2023. Some parents also may worry that circumcision harms a man's sexual function, sensitivity, or satisfaction. However, current evidence shows that it does not.
Shezi MH, Tlou B, Naidoo S (February 2023). "Knowledge, attitudes and acceptance of voluntary medical male circumcision among males attending high school in Shiselweni region, Eswatini: a cross sectional study". BMC Public Health. 23 (1): 349. doi:10.1186/s12889-023-15228-3. PMC 9933013. PMID 36797696. It was interesting to note that the young males in this study had misconceptionsn about sexual pleasure post male circumcision...
Sorokan ST, Finlay JC, Jefferies AL (8 September 2015). "Newborn male circumcision". Paediatrics & Child Health. 20 (6): 311–320. doi:10.1093/pch/20.6.311. PMC 4578472. PMID 26435672. ...medical studies do not support circumcision as having a negative impact on sexual function or satisfaction in males or their partners.
World Health Organization, UNAIDS, Jhpiego (December 2009). "Manual for Male Circumcision Under Local Anaesthesia" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 15 January 2012. ...there are many myths about male circumcision that circulate. For example, some people think that circumcision can cause impotence (failure of erection) or reduce sexual pleasure. Others think that circumcision will cure impotence. Let me assure you that none of these is true. Alt URL Archived 30 March 2023 at the Wayback Machine^
Circumcision proponents say that circumcision reduces the risks of a range of infections and diseases and confers sexual benefits. By contrast, the majority of modern opponents, particularly of routine neonatal circumcision, question its preventive efficacy and object to subjecting non-consenting newborn males to a procedure that is potentially harmful with little to no benefit, as well as violating their human rights and possibly negatively impacting their sex life.
In Classical and Hellenistic civilization, Ancient Greeks and Romans posed great value on the beauty of nature, physical integrity, aesthetics, harmonious bodies and nudity, including the foreskin (see also Ancient Greek art), and were opposed to circumcision, an opposition inherited by the canon and secular legal systems of the Christian West and East that lasted at least through to the Middle Ages, according to Frederick Hodges.
Judaism, Islam, Coptic Christianity, and the Eritrean Orthodox Church still advocate male circumcision as a religious obligation. It is common in the Ethiopian Orthodox Church as a cultural practice despite the liturgy recommending against it.
Religious and cultural conflicts
Ancient Levant
The Book of Genesis explains circumcision as a covenant with God given to Abraham, In Judaism it "symbolizes the promise of lineage and fruitfulness of a great nation," the "seal of ownership and the guarantee of relationship between peoples and their god." Some scholars look elsewhere for the origin of Jewish circumcision. One explanation, dating from Herodotus, is that the custom was acquired from the Egyptians, possibly during the period of enslavement. An additional hypothesis, based on linguistic/ethnographic work begun in the 19th century, suggests circumcision was a common tribal custom among Semitic-speaking peoples (Jews, Arabs, and Phoenicians).
The Jewish and Islamic traditions both see circumcision as a way to distinguish a group from its neighbours.See the story of Dina & Shechem in Genesis. Also the mass circumcision during the exodus from Egypt. The Bible records "uncircumcised" being used as a derogatory reference for opponents and Jewish victory in battle that culminated in mass post-mortem circumcision, to provide an account of the number of enemy casualties. Jews were also required to circumcise all household members, including slaves – a practice that would later put them into collision with Roman and Christian law (see below).
Classical civilization In 167 BCE Judea was part of the Seleucid Empire. Its ruler, Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–165 BCE), smarting from a defeat in a war against Ptolemaic Egypt, banned traditional Jewish religious practices, and attempted to forcibly let the Jews accept Hellenistic culture. Throughout the country Jews were ordered, with the threat of execution, to sacrifice pigs to Greek gods (the normal practice in the Ancient Greek religion), desecrate the Shabbat, eat unkosher animals (especially pork), and relinquish their Jewish scriptures. Antiochus' decree also outlawed Jewish circumcision, and parents who violated his order were hanged along with their infants. According to Tacitus, as quoted by Hodges, Antiochus "endeavoured to abolish Jewish superstition and to introduce Greek civilization."
According to rabbinical accounts, he desecrated the Second Temple of Jerusalem by placing a statue of Olympian Zeus on the altar of the Temple; this incident is also reported by the biblical Book of Daniel, where the author refers to the statue of the Greek god inside the Temple as "abomination of desolation". Antiochus' decrees and vituperation of Judaism motivated the Maccabean Revolt; the Maccabees reacted violently against the forced Hellenization of Judea, destroyed pagan altars in the villages, circumcised boys, and forced Hellenized Jews into outlawry.Nicholas de Lange (ed.), The Illustrated History of the Jewish People, London, Aurum Press, 1997, . The revolt ended in the re-establishment of an independent Jewish kingdom under the Hasmoneans, until it turned into a client state of the Roman Republic under the reign of Herod the Great (374 BCE).
Classical, Hellenistic, and Roman culture found circumcision to be cruel and repulsive. In the Roman Empire, circumcision was regarded as a barbaric and disgusting custom. The consul Titus Flavius Clemens was condemned to death by the Roman Senate in 95 CE for, according to the Talmud, circumcising himself and converting to Judaism. The Emperor Hadrian (117138) forbade circumcision. Overall, the rite of circumcision was especially execrable in Classical civilization, also because it was the custom to spend an hour a day or so exercising nude in the gymnasium and in Roman baths, therefore Jewish men did not want to be seen in public deprived of their foreskins.
As for the anti-circumcision law passed by Hadrian, it is considered by many to be, together with his decision to build a Roman temple upon the ruins of the Second Temple and dedicate it to Jupiter, one of the main causes of the Bar Kokhba revolt (132135 CE), which was brutally crushed;Cassius Dio, Roman History, book 69, 12.1-14.3. Loeb Classical Library, 9 volumes, Greek texts and facing English translation by Earnest Cary (1914-1927), Harvard University Press. Online in LacusCurtius: and livius.org: . Book scan in Internet Archive:. according to Cassius Dio, 580,000 Jews were killed and 50 fortified towns and 985 villages razed.Mosaic or mosaic?—The Genesis of the Israeli Language by Zuckermann, Gilad He claimed that "Many Romans, moreover, perished in this war. Therefore, Hadrian, in writing to the Senate, did not employ the opening phrase commonly affected by the Emperors: 'If you and your children are in health, it is well; I and the army are in health.'" Because of the great loss of life in the war, even though Hadrian was victorious, he refused a triumph.
Hadrian's policy after the rebellion reflected an attempt to root out Judaism: he enacted a ban on circumcision, all Jews were forbidden to enter Jerusalem upon pain of death, and the city was renamed Aelia Capitolina, while Judea was renamed Syria Palaestina. Around 140, his successor Antoninus Pius (138-161 CE) exempted Jews from the decree against circumcision, allowing them to circumcise their sons, although they were forbidden to do the same on their slaves and proselytes. Jewish nationalists' (Pharisees and Zealots) response to the decrees also took a more moderate form: circumcisions were secretly performed, even on dead Jews.
However, there were also many Jews, known as "Hellenizers", who viewed Hellenization and social integration of the Jewish people in the Greco-Roman world favourably, and pursued a completely different approach: accepting the Emperor's decree and even making efforts to restore their foreskins to better assimilate into Hellenistic society. The latter approach was common during the reign of Antiochus, and again under Roman rule. The foreskin was restored by one of two methods, that were later revived in the late 20th century; both were described in detail by the Greek physician Aulus Cornelius Celsus in his comprehensive encyclopedic work De Medicina, written during the reign of Tiberius (14-37 CE). The surgical method involved freeing the skin covering the penis by dissection, and then pulling it forward over the glans; he also described a simpler surgical technique used on men whose prepuce is naturally insufficient to cover their glans. The second approach, known as "epispasm", was non-surgical: a restoration device which consisted of a special weight made of bronze, copper, or leather (sometimes called Pondus Judaeus, i.e. "Jewish burden"), was affixed to the penis, pulling its skin downward. Over time, a new foreskin was generated, or a short prepuce was lengthened, by means of tissue expansion. Martial also mentioned the instrument in Epigrammaton (Book 7:35).