I can barely believe this actually needs to be stated or explained, but as that great man Einstein once said:
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe.
Believe it or not, recently some people claiming the mantle of objectivity and science for themselves have been claiming Circumcision Fetishist Sites as an "unbiased" "objective" source. Even more amazingly; When challenged on this, they refuse to look at the evidence, but rather prefer to engage in almost disingenuous claims of ignorance, ad hominim, and mockery.
Incredible, but true! Follow me below the fold for a case study, a most fascinating exposition, on this bizarre case....
In the beginning... Aaah, yes, where to begin? For although what we shall discuss here is drawn directly from life, and thus involves long chains of causity stretching back beyond the horizon and to the big bang. To keep this exposition within the confines of a Diary it will need to be a clear story with a clear narrative...
So let me begin this story where it began for me.
I first suspected that something was wrong when I saw this comment, by a user that had been stalking another user, in an attempt to get them banned.
wouldn't it be great (3+ / 0-)
if you stopped trolling this site, and left?
here's something to read, while you're searching for another group to spam.
8.38, 7.74 what's wrong with Conservatism?
by **** on Tue Apr 24, 2007 at 08:19:29 AM PDT
"here's something to read, while you're searching for another group to spam." was linked to this page:
\http://www(dot)circumcisioninfo(dot)com/circ_record.html
(All links to circumcision fetishist sites will be bogofied to avoid raising their google ranking)
The page begins:
DEBUNKING THE MYTHS AND LIES MADE BY THE ANTI-CIRCUMCISION CULT
This section addresses some of the inaccuracies that can frequently be found on the websites and in the books opposing circumcision. Medical references and links to more online information are provided for the interested reader where available.
Vague alarm bells began to ring in the back of my mind. "Debunk" is a term that has lost its meaning from overuse by shills and other scam artists trying to sell people a load of horseshit.
Further, whatever else you'd think of them, I would hardly characterize "intactivists" as a cult. And the rest of the page continued showing a blatent pro-circumcision bias. Most claims were barely within the bounds of sanity, but Allegations 9 struck me as being quite bit odd.
Allegation 9: An uncircumcised penis can be kept sufficiently clean by proper washing.
As "cleanliness" is very often mentioned in conjunction with circumcision, this subject has been a favorite target of the opponents of circumcision, who proclaim that the implication that men cannot be entrusted with maintaining their own penile hygiene is an insult to them.
If humans only needed to use the bathroom once a day, there might at least be some truth in the statement that proper cleaning of the genital area once a day with soap and water is enough. However, since this is not the case, and most men moreover either don´t have the opportunity, inclination or time to clean themselves every time after urinating - as is needed to ensure proper penile hygiene - the statement is clearly false.
Most parents know how difficult it is to get their children to take a bath or shower every day. Even if they do get them to bathe regularly, parents often fail to instruct their children about proper personal hygiene or see to it that it is also carried out in practice. In uncircumcised boys the foreskin usually cannot be retracted until the age of around six. Cleaning the penis in this instance not only requires extra attention and effort, but becomes absolutely necessary since the non-retractable foreskin can very easily trap dirt, bacteria and germs which can lead to a variety of infections, which in infants and young boys can have serious consequences [22], [26].
From the facts outlined above it is clear that personal hygiene in uncircumcised boys often leaves a lot to be desired. What is more, this situation does not improve in adolescent boys: a recent study of boys in Germany [8] has shown that penile hygiene actually worsens as boys grow older. The reason for this might lie in cultural attitudes towards personal hygiene: in many European societies bathing on a daily basis is not the norm. A recent article in Time Magazine [9] for example mentioned that only 47% of all French men and women bathe on a daily basis. Taking into account the fact that most males in Europe are uncircumcised, the scenario discussed above paints a pretty dire picture of (especially) male personal hygiene in those societies. Most people will probably agree that this is hardly an ideal to strive for. Most heterosexual women also have a preference for circumcised sexual partners (see discussion below).
Filthy Europeans don't circumcise? What the fuck kinda debunking is that?
'Curiouser and curiouser!' cried Alice.
My bullshittometer was pegging off the scale...
So I asked myself... What kind of person would actively promote circumcision to the point of twisting the facts to that extent?
It was an odd question, and one I couldn't answer. So I took a gander at the front page of the site:
\http://www(dot)circumcisioninfo(dot)com/
Welcome to
CIRCUMCISIONINFO.COM
circumcision
The aim of this site is to provide information on all aspects involving male and infant circumcision that is based on recent scientific studies and general medical experience. Both the benefits and risks involving circumcision are discussed.
It is not the aim of this site to tell parents to circumcise their infant sons, or to tell men that they need to be circumcised. These decisions can only be made by those directly involved. We therefore hope that everyone who is looking for unbiased information on the subject of circumcision, including prospective parents, will find the information presented on this site useful in making an informed decision.
Click here to enter
(Complete BTW with, of all the things, a flashing blink tagged "Welcome".)
I was still happily ignorant of the existence these perverted circumcision fetishists, but having just gone through an obviously and blatantly biased page on this site, upon reading these words my bullshittometer broke.
Skeptical... I entered the site and browsed until I ran into this page:
\http://www(dot)circumcisioninfo(dot)com/circ_cult1.html
The Anti-Circumcision Phenomenon: the Origin of a Cult
This section is still work in progress, but in the meantime have a look at the section "Anti-Circumcision Lobby Groups" on the Circinfo.Net site
Which linked to this page:
\http://www(dot)circinfo(dot)net/anti_circ.html
Another pro-circumcision page? I thought... How odd that so many people care so very very much...
(For some strange reason the site appears to have gone down between when I first discovered it and now but the page is still available via google cache)
Particularly interesting was this section of the page:
The foreskin is an absolute requirement for a mutual masturbation practice amongst homosexual men known as "docking", in which the penis is placed under the foreskin of the male partner. As mentioned in the section on AIDS, this practice, in contrast to common belief amongst many gay men, represents unsafe sex, exposing as it does the vulnerable inner lining of the foreskin to infected semen. If HIV is present in such semen it can then infect the partner via this route. An academic college at another university sent me booklet advertising X-rated videos in which he circled one in the gay section entitled "Craving Foreskin"!
There are other homosexual men who are pro-circ, no doubt in part because of the superior esthetics of the circumcised penis.
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot!?!?
Homosexuals want foreskins in order to practice their perverted foreskin craving "mutual masturbation" ways? But there are some non-pervert pro-circ homosexuals who value the "superior esthetics [sic] of the circumcised penis"?
I was already skeptical of the fear-mongering sexualized tone of the rest of the page, but upon reading these words smoke and flames started pouring out of my already broken bullshittometer.
These were most definitely not websites for people "looking for unbiased information on the subject of circumcision, including prospective parents".
Klaxons going off in my head, my bullshittometer roaring in flame, I decided to examine who else this crank considered useful sources...
Going to the links page:
\http://www(dot)circumcisioninfo(dot)com/con_link_sites.html
I found many more sites promoting circumcision:
One in particular was particularly disgusting:
CIRCLIST
Discussion groups, medical, sexual and personal information regarding every aspect of circumcision.
Note to parents: this site also contains information and pictures of an explicit nature that may not be suitable to minors.
http://www(dot)circlist(dot)com/
The CIRCLIST site even promotes Female Genital Mutilation:
(WARNING! The following page is graphic and not work safe)
\http://www(dot)circlist(dot)com/femalecirc/anatfemale.html
Let me repeat that; CIRCLIST promotes Female Genital Mutilation!
Utterly suspicious, my bullshittometer spinning in its fiery grave, I decided to do some investigating.
WHOIS quickly established that www(dot)circumcisioninfo(dot)com was registered to a one "Mike Cormier"
Registrant:
Cormier, Mike
ATTN: CIRCUMCISIONINFO.COM
c/o Network Solutions
P.O. Box 447
Herndon, VA. 20172-0447
Domain Name: CIRCUMCISIONINFO.COM
Administrative Contact:
Cormier, Mike wf23d4na2w7@networksolutionsprivateregistration.com
Mike Cormier
ATTN: CIRCUMCISIONINFO.COM
c/o Network Solutions
P.O. Box 447
Herndon, VA 20172-0447
570-708-8780
Technical Contact:
Hostmaster, Icom DNS sj5zs54u7zg@networksolutionsprivateregistration.com
ATTN: CIRCUMCISIONINFO.COM
c/o Network Solutions
P.O. Box 447
Herndon, VA 20172-0447
570-708-8780
Record expires on 16-Oct-2009.
Record created on 16-Oct-1999.
Database last updated on 27-Apr-2007 17:26:52 EDT.
Domain servers in listed order:
A.NS.INTERLAND.NET
B.NS.INTERLAND.NET
C.NS.INTERLAND.NET
This listing is a Network Solutions Private Registration. Mail
correspondence to this address must be sent via USPS Express Mail(TM) or
USPS Certified Mail(R); all other mail will not be processed. Be sure to
include the registrant's domain name in the address.
Digging around I soon stumbled across this:
http://talk.sheknows.com/...
Important: Please Read!
This is a post from the host of another Circumcision Discussion board, which needs to be shared here, as I have seen information being posted which is taken from circum-fetish sites.
There is some information that I think anyone who is reading on the internet about circumcision should be aware of. This is something that I think EVERYONE would want to avoid whether they support circumcision or not.
This is a news article from November, from the BBC world news:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/...
"Child porn images 'worst ever'...
...Police who had to sift through the images described it as the worst material they had ever seen. ...
...One of the most appalling images showed the non-medical circumcision of a boy estimated at six to seven years old."
You can follow the link to see the entire article.
This may be surprising to some but there are sexual predators who "get off" on circumcision.
There are web pages and groups dedicated to this sexual fetish.
A while back when I first started visiting the debate board I heard mention of these types, but didn't think much of it. Over time though, I heard them being brought up more often by parents and people disbelieving when other said they were really fetish sites. So, a few months ago, I checked it out for myself to see if it was true and if so, how could we prove that this is what is going on in order to warn others.
I went looking to see if what was being said was true or not. I admit that at first I wasn't sure, they are pretty crafty about how they present things.
Think about it. If a pedophile moved into the neighborhood would they put a sign out in their front yard announcing what they were up to? Of coruse not. They would probably put up appearances and make their house seem like an inviting place and try to gain children's trust. However, if someone knew what to watch for, inevitably evidence of what was really up could be found.
These types operate the same way. Pretty soon it was all too clear what was going on. They all link back and forth to each other and follow similar MOs.
Notice the name in the URL of this web site (you'll have to copy and paste it in to your browser if you are going to go there to verify for yourselves, I don't want to provide a hot link because I don't want them to be able to trace any volume of traffic coming from Babycenter):
(link removed but contains keywords "vernon and acorn")
That vernon is Vernon Quaintance.
From the intro at that page: "THE ACORN SOCIETY is a U.K. based, non-profit-making group whose members have traumas, fetishes or fascinated interest in their own or others' penises...."
The same man also has these two sites about circumcision registered on the web.
ICIRC
Which he calls the "International Circumcision Information Resource Center" (and can also be reached through the URL circinfo site)
and
GILGAL
He calls the gilgal society a "not-for-profit publisher of medical educational material for the general public."
Can we truly believe that?
At his ICIRC pages (that he's made to appear to be general information pages about circumcision) there is "one man's account of his own circumcision" taken from the Acorn society and a video offer of an adult circumcision from the Gilgal Society.
Why would a man who runs a group that has a fascination with their own and other's penises have "not for profit" groups about circumcision? Why would a member of a group that has a sexual fascination in traumas to the penis be producing videos of circumcision and offering to sell them?
Remember the guy we just read about in the news article that was arrested, and the material they found that he had? Obviously, there are people out there who are getting their "thrills" off of stuff like this.
These fetishists don't announce at the top of their web pages "I'm really writing this becuase I have a penis fetish." Why would he announce himself like that??
Sarah described recently quite well what they are up to:
"In and of itself- there is nothing at all erotic
about the lie... they don't believe the lies they spread, they know they are lies- but they know that
certain people are vulnerable to believing those
lies... and when they do- they cut the penises of
their own babies... and having a hand in the sale
that results in a circumcision is the fetishist's
erotic thrill. It's a game to them, a kinky game that
results in the agony of infants. It's just twisted
mind f-ing games."
Now, I am not saying that all sites that are out there with information about circumcision are like this. There are plenty that are not, mainly from well known doctors and/or medical groups that discuss both the alleged benefits and risks. I d on't always agree with the way they present things, but at least they are not coming at it from the angle of sexual fantasy.
I think it would be in everyone's best interest if they knew how to avoid these types.
The dead giveaway is usually the list of links to other sites they provide. Vernon Quaintance mentions Mike Cormier by name at his site and links to Mike Cormier's two sites. Mike Cormier in turn links to Circlist and Vernon's other sites. One of his sites links to ICIRC and another site that is a front for a fantasty about circumcision a teenager against his will (ACTnow).
They also associate themselves with Brian Morris, and Mike Cormier and Vernon Quaintance are mentioned by name at Brian Morris' web site and his own list of links is of course saturated with the same old fetish web sites already mentioned.
So, please, everyone, be aware of what is out there. These guys are not putting things in perspective, they are running a sexual fantasy game.
So far on this board, I have seen pro-circs use false information from Circlist, as well as the Circlist Gallery, which you can find by Googling 'Circlist Gallery' (which is the most vile and perverted part, since it contains stories and pictures of circumcision which are meant to sexually arouse these sick people).
Please, EVERYONE, no matter whether you are pro or anti circumcision - BE CAREFUL!
-Kira
Circumcision Fetishists. I could barely believe it. But further digging confirmed that although these people had been covering their tracks since then, information on the net leaves behind an indelible trail of people talking about it even after it's deleted.
"Vernon Quaintance" Circlist - Google Search
"Brian Morris" Circlist - Google Search
"Mike+Cormier" Circlist - Google Search
And just in case after following those links you really believe that Circlist isn't about fetishism I present to you the Circlist Gallery:
(WARNING! The following link is most definitely not worksafe!)
\http://www(dot)icon(dot)co(dot)za/~hugot/circum/circum.htm
If you have the stomach, read the "Short Circumcision Stories" and view the pictures.
Here's where it gets interesting:
When I first brought this up.
See here's the thing.... (4+ / 0-)
... about this argument that really gets to me.
Any doctor against circumcision is automatically a biased shill...
Whereas known pro-circumcision fetishists are uncritically linked to as if they're unbiased sources.
I find it quite creepy actually.
Ever get the feeling you're being used?
Leaders Lead By Example
Leaders Are Servants
ps. X-Post To NION!
by kraant on Thu Apr 26, 2007 at 07:58:32 AM PDT
I received a diversionary reply:
kraant (6+ / 0-)
If you agree with ** substantively, please just say so.
But ** is in no way a victim of anything here. Please try reading his circ diaries in order. For the longest time, he received not only the benefit of the doubt, but a lot of support in his diaries, including from the people who he now paints as part of some small cabal.
Unfortunately for him, he was a total asshole in those diaries, and people turned on him.
McCain luvs W
by **** on Thu Apr 26, 2007 at 08:15:19 AM PDT
Hoping to get a substantive response to my point, I addressed his:
Fine, I'll let you drag me into your... (5+ / 0-)
... whiney little witch-hunt.
And yes, I've read the diaries. I reject your characterization, and I advise anyone who actually wants an informed opinion of the subject to read the primary sources (ie the Diaries) themselves.
I further submit, that it's fundamentally impossible, no matter what tone he takes, for ** to avoid offending someone who thinks that circumcising babies is a good thing. So I suggest people going back and reading those diaries read them with that in mind.
I agree that bodily integrity is an important underlying human right. People own their own bodies.
People have a right to control their own body.
Abortion is an absolute right because it's her body her choice.
Torture is absolutely wrong because lopping bits off people, shoving sharp objects into them, subjecting them to insanely loud music, preventing them from sleeping is an absolute violation. Even if it were scientifically proven that torture is "effective" it would still be an absolute violation. This is a moral issue not scientific.
Female Genital Mutilation is disgusting and barbaric, a horrible health risk. But even if in the unlikely event it where to be proven that there were health benefits for the less severe forms. It would still be wrong because people have no right to lop of parts of the female genitalia of un-consenting minors.
They just don't, this isn't a scientific issue. It's an ethical and moral one. If anyone ever tries to prove that FGM has benefits and uses that to argue in favor of mandatory FGM, the quality of the science doesn't matter. They're immoral creepy cranks with an axe to grind.
Similarly, lopping of bits of an intersex infants genitalia to make parents feel more comfortable, or chelating and subjecting to electro-shock autistic children. Is just plain wrong. It's immoral.
Slavery is wrong and immoral. It's not about science and the race based "scientific" arguments in favor of it back when it was popular where not only wrong. They were irrelevant. You have no right to own another human being.
For that matter, you don't have any right to beat and rape your children or your wife. Or for that matter prevent women from having abortions. Because you see. You don't own their bodies. Not yours. (and no you can't have that pony)
Because?
Say it with me brother!
They own their own bodies!
That's right brother!
People have a right to control their own bodies, and other people have no right to control other peoples bodies!
Preach it brother!
Now I don't think, to bring up that old canard, that continual strawman, that Female Genital Mutilation is exactly the same, equivalent, or just like circumcision. etc etc.
But, when actual activists against Female Genital Mutilation draw comparisons (and yes you'll find it leads me to suspect that the desperate outraged cries that there is no comparison at all between Female Genital Mutilation and circumcision are all about a deep and abiding underlying racism.
A deep and abiding racism... After all those dirty immoral brown people over there practice that dirty barbaric of mutilating un-consenting little girls genitals. And it's all about controlling their sexuality.
Whereas us clean white-folk... Us clean white-folk practice an aesthetically pleasing operation, that isn't mutilating at all nono, absolutely not, it isn't about any kind of fetish or controlling of sexuality. No of course not, we're clean civilized white-folk... Snipping off a teensy weensy bit of a baby boys genitals has absolutely nothing to do with controlling sexuality it's all about cleanliness yes. After all it has to be right, because us clean civilized white-folk do it.
Can I get an Amen brother!
So this is my stance:
Circumcision isn't one of the biggest issues out there. Compared to all the others and many more I've brought up it's minor, and personally I'm not particularly interested in fighting against it, and I deeply resent having to waste my time with the penis obsessed.
But, if it comes down to choosing between; Articulating a system of rights that protects a womans right to choose, the right to be free from FGM, the right to be free of torture, the right of an intersex person to make their own decision for their gender, the right of an autistic child to not be electrocuted on a regular basis, the right to not be a slave and to own your own body, etc etc ad-infinitum. Or avoiding acknowledging that a twee little custom of chopping off bits of an un-consenting babies penis might be just a little bit wrong.
Guess which side I choose.
For me, this issue isn't about petty little personality conflicts. And I stayed out of it until some people decided to try and get ** banned. Mock him all you want, insult him, whatever, but I'll be damned if I'll sit back and watch someone who presents pro-circumcission fetish sites as an unbiased source stalk him and try and get him banned.
Got that?
Leaders Lead By Example
Leaders Are Servants
ps. X-Post To NION!
by kraant on Thu Apr 26, 2007 at 09:50:09 AM PDT
In response I received an evasion of my point and a misrepresentation of my stance that could almost be considered a clumsy attempt at character assassination:
At least you're honest (4+ / 0-)
Male circumcision is like:
(1) torture;
(2) slavery;
(3) racism;
(4) female genital mutilation;
(5) beating your children;
(6) subjecting children to insanely loud music;
(7) preventing children from sleeping;
(8) electroshocking autistic kids;
(9) rape.
I await your diary calling for the imprisonment and trial of each and every person who would engage in such behavior.
McCain luvs W
by **** on Thu Apr 26, 2007 at 10:02:32 AM PDT
Later, I spotted one of the more penile obsessed who was beating their chest claiming scientific and medical expertise:
Oh, bite me so hard for that (4+ / 0-)
As the saying goes, "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing." You obviously don't know the first fucking thing about medicine or science, yet you want to wrap yourself and your preputial paraphilia in a pseudo-scientific cloak that gives you license to continue abusing people who disagree with you. I, for one, am not buying it. And I actually do know a little something about both medicine and science, unlike you, so I'll be able to tell when you're BS'ing.
****
**** ****
by **** on Thu Apr 26, 2007 at 11:40:36 AM PDT
Being the sort that likes to bash my head against a brick walls, and given that they'd recommended the original circumcision promoting fetishist site (which would appear to put lie to any claims on their part to scientific or medical expertise). I decided to challenge them on it:
**** (0 / 0)
I just noticed that you recced a comment
http://www.dailykos.com/...
Recommended by:
****, ****, ****
if you stopped trolling this site, and left?
here's something to read, while you're searching for another group to spam.
8.38, 7.74 what's wrong with Conservatism?
by **** on Tue Apr 24, 2007 at 08:19:29 AM PDT
Linking to a circumcision fetish site.
Care to retract your claims of expertise?
Leaders Lead By Example
Leaders Are Servants
ps. X-Post To NION!
by kraant on Thu Apr 26, 2007 at 08:01:47 PM PDT
I received such an amazing demonstration of scientific and medical knowledge In a diagram I unfortunately can't reproduce for you here due to claims of copyright.
Now far be it for me to suggest deliberate disingenuity, cupidity or malice here. After all one should never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by stupidity.
But what this interesting case should teach us...
Is the dangers of unquestioningly accepting sources that confirm our bias.
The dangers of claiming objectivity in a subjective world.
The dangers of in-group out-group dynamics drowning out the actual truth. (Just because a particular in-group are loud, obnoxious, persistent, and insistent in their truth claims does not make them correct.)
The dangers of trusting claims of objectivity, expertise, and lack of bias from a source. (All sources are biased. Get used to it.)
How incredibly committed and driven people are to not actually being or proving that they are correct, but rather to convince others that their preconceived notions are correct, by any means fair or foul.
To not turn into a slack-jawed gaping-eyed drooling moron the moment you see that word "debunk".
That it's important not just to read, but to also interrogate your sources.
And last but not least...
That Circumcision Fetishists Sites Are Not A Credible Source!
So Don't Use Them!
Update [2007-4-28 14:46:22 by kraant]: There's some very interesting stuff in the commentary below, but also a hella lotta pee-pee jokes. You may also want to follow the discussion at NION where the focus is going to be on fact-checking, disinfo and investigation etc.